Posted on 08/27/2003 10:33:14 AM PDT by NYer
God is not keeping her fed, God let her die years ago. The State is keeping her alive now. I too trust God over the State to decide when people die.
He is NOT her husband, he gave up that role when he started living with another woman. He has been living with another women since at lease 1994. In most states he would be considered this women's common law husband. In most states his live in is actually considered his legal wife and is entitled to insurance and alimony. So I ask you how is that Michael is allowed to be married to two women? He should have lost his ability to be Terri's guardian the day he started a life with another woman. His claim of being Terri's husband is a complete charade. He is only interested in the money. He is complete evil.
How do YOU? Who are you to claim to know what she wants, or what is in her best interests. I do not presume to know what her intentions are, I do know that I will not second guess her husband and guardian. Honestly, would you want her parents to have the decision if it was her husband who wanted her fed and her parents who wanted the tube pulled? Or are you just in favor of whomever would chose life? Does it matter to you that she may have told her husband she did not want to be kept alive this way? Or are you only interested in what your beliefs tell you she should do? Do you want the state to be involved with your personal medical decisions?
You have no idea what is in his heart or his motives, so I don't really care what you think of him.
I happened to live next to the creep for a few years so I do know what his motives are.
Then I am sure your affidavit was given to the proper people, so your direct knowledge was presented to the Court. Otherwise, you are just yammering about what you claim to know.
I know that people like you are blind to the truth. Any one with half a brain can figure out what motivates this man. Just read all the information about what he has done and has not done for Terri. The way he has treated her family. It really makes one wonder how anyone with any logical thinking powers can believe his motives are sincere. At least my analysis of the situation does not result in the murder of an innocent women. I said I lived near him I did not say I knew him personnaly. And it really does not matter what I think or what you think the fact of the matter is that this woman has a family that loves her and wants to see her get treatment. Her husband has only been trying to have her killed. She deserves to have her fmily who loves her be her guardian, not a man who only wants her dead.
Like I said, you are just yammering and pretending that you knew his motives because you lived 'next' to him. Would you want her parents to make the decision if it were her husband who wanted her fed, and they who wanted her off the feeding tube?
No. No one has the right to remove her feeding tube or refuse to give her the treatment she was supposed to get. The money was given for the purpose of helping her recover. So far not a dime of that money has been spent to help her. Why was she awarded the money in the first place? So that the husband could have a nice life of luxury? How come he did not make it known to the original plaintifs that his intent was to have her killed?
She is not a dog or a horse to just be put out of her so called "misery". Use to be a law against kiling someone.
Who is to say what medical break through could occur in the next ten years that would give this women back some mobility. As long as she is alive there is hope for a recovery. If she is killed all hope is gone and her life is over. No one has the right to make that decision for her. She was awarded money to be able to get treatment. From what I have read she has not been given any treatment. So who is to say what her quality of life really could be if M. Schiavo was not denying her medical treatment. There is more to this than what meets the eye.
I guess according to you these parents should have killed Lorenzo when he became ill. Fortunately they did not. See: http://www.myelin.org/aboutlorenzo.htm
I say you better have those wishes witnessed by a LEGAL witness. Otherwise a husband or a spouse could say they "told them so" and this could be abused like it is in this case. It would be more ethical to error on the side of life, than to error on the side of money. We don't even know how far we can rehabilitate her, because NO ONE has tried!! She could have a full functioning life, if someone would give her a try!! This young precious woman is being thrown away.. and is even going to be allowed to suffer!!
Freepers call to action re. Terri Schindler-Schiavo. Make a complaint against Judge Greer:
To give you an idea how far some people go to try to preserve biological, but not cognative life, consider the case of some children around the country.
These children were born hydrocephalic. That means that their brain never develpped due to excessive celerbial fluid retention in utero. Not to be overly graphic, but they literally do not have brains, or often, even the craniums to hold a brain. Often their skulls curve down to the vertical about 2 or 3 inches aft of the eye socket line. This can be treated in some children in utero but once they are born, especially to druggie mothers with no prenatal care, there is no hope.
They have no brain, but unfornately, they do have a brain stem. They can breathe. They can have a hartbeat, but that's about it. Again, sorry to be graphic, but what else can you expect from a child with a face but no skull behind it. There physically is no brain, only a brain stem.
Years ago, these children died within 12 hours of birth. Now, in some states, they are kept alive for 20 to 30 years! They are even sent to school under the mainstreaming provisions! (Their heads are kept covered so as to not alarm the other students.) They require 24/365, texpayer-paid-for care. They never do anything but respirate. Luckilly, they feel no pain. That takes a brain.
There is a time to let go of people who do not have any reasonable change of recovery. To go after some judge because he makes a decision you do not agree with is wrong.
There are two sides to this story, and if we just concentrate on the one, we miss the opportunity to learn, and to learn how to be effective when we need to argue a case we have a hope of winning.
Terri has a brain, had a life and no one yes not even a judge who thinks he is God has the right to take it away from her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.