in a hospice care center in Florida.  This is a woman who smiles, blinks, swallows liquids, looks around and interacts with others.  This is a woman whom educated physicians have certified as unviable because her condition will not improve.

I don't know enough about this ordeal, but what I see is another ethical and medical quagmire  AND a horrific nightmare for her parents who are fighting to try to keep her caregivers from killing her.  

Does the fact that they are going to deny her nourishment until she starves to death or she dies from dehydration make the attending physicians less culpable in her preventable death?

 If this plays out with her coordinated demise, who will be the next "unviable" person that the state or attending physician will decide is better of dead?  How long will it be before there is criteria established that sets forth what "quality life" is and what isn't?  How long will it be before undesirable people will be euthanized without their consent?

this is even being debated.

The left sheds real tears over some assholes towel hat being replaced by Fruit of the Looms, but stand up for a defenseless invalid?  No, not now, not ever!

They will stand up and fight Capital Punishment for the most horrendous murderers, but stand up to keep a powerless woman from being executed, are you fucking kidding me, not a chance!  I hear 48 to 52 percent in this country.  Recent numbers on Terri are 72% are on her parent’s side.  Who represents the minority?  Democrats!  Liberal Democrats!  

Its not money, that has been pledged, an endowment over 3 Million has been promised.  Why do you suppose she is wanted dead so badly by so many?  And why so many, if not all, are Democrats?

One again on the wrong side of an important issue and sliding into the abyss!

the press mostly refuses to report what you stated and phrases the situation as "Life support is what is being removed".

What I can't fathom is the court order prohibits anyone (e.g. her parents) from even trying to feed her normally by mouth.

The Right to Die, should be just as vitally important and respected as the Right to Live.
But we are talking about a human being who has been pronounced in a permanent vegetative state not just by her husband, but by thecourt appoiinted physicians who have examined her time and time again and pronounced her condition permanent.
A law was rammed through Florida's legislative body specifically about Terry Schiavo. It was pronounced UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Every legal challenge had been met and the courts were satisfied that their decisions were the correct ones.
But still we have those who would use their powers of governmental authority to intervene in an inappropriate manner, using quick fix legislation that would NEVER pass muster as constitutionally viable.

As one who has had to authorize the doctors to "pull the plug", I truly feel for Ms. Schiavo's parents, who have undoubtedly suffered tremendously over the years. But I also understand the pain of the husband.

And, lets face facts here. It's been over 15 years, and there have been no indications from anyone outside of her parents who has documented or claimed any ... ANY sense of independent thought or action coming from her.
Doubly tragic is the obstinance involved on the part of many with their own political agendas who fail to acknowledge that were she given the Right to Die, there are ways to avoid the horrible method of starvation that currently is the only option available. You may think of Kevorkian as a murderer, but I see him as being far more compassionate than any of the politicians who have taken up the "cause" of keeping Terry Schiavo alive.

Sometimes, you just have to let go, as hard as that is to take.

And by the way, snafu, undesireable people are already being "euthanized" without their consent. Its called Execution.
Or do you think anyone on Death Row would willingly go to their deaths if they had a choice?

PT the Fotophreak

From Bribite (Below)

"Your hearts go out to the BVD wearing prisoners at Abu Ghraib or any murderer on death row!  But at the same time you either support Terri Schiavo’s killing or completely ignore the killing of a truly innocent woman."

Zin's answer:

Bribite, for you I'll clarify what you find to be the conundrum to liberal thinking.  The prisoners at Abu Ghraib and a murderer on death row are **real and living persons**-- the kind of people for which the constitution was written and for which we recognize rights.  Innocent or guilty: "All men are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights."  

Please explain what part of that do you disagree with Bribite?    It doesn't say the innocent have rights, but the suspected or even the guilty have none.      

Now I will say the bluntest, harshest things about this:  Terri Schiavo, from the best I've been able to ascertain-- died 15 years ago.  I heard the story, I heard what the doctors said years ago, and I thought: "she's dead."  A corpse has no rights.  Neither does the early term fetus.  No capability of episodic consciousness ***means no person;*** no person-- no rights.  Period.  People are fighting now over a corpse-- one that's more active than usual.  They are literally fighting over how active it should be kept.    

Harsh blunt words, but with a caveat: it's possible that the doctors who originally made evaluation ruling pulled the wool over our eyes trying to "help" the husband.  I'm not going to listen to anything the doctors say now.  If anything, we should look at what the examinations said in the initial months following her stabilization. Now we're in the same position as a man with the house full of clocks never knowing what time it is.   If I were called as a juror and informed of facts-- you couldn't know how I would vote once I saw them. I don't know how I would vote without them.    

Now, I hear there's even been a Randall Terry sighting.  The man who carried a dead fetus with him to show that "it's really a baby!"  Now claims to have heard Terry Schiavo cry out "I want to live!"  Somehow it doesn't suprise me.  

I suggest having Randall Terry around to interpret her speech when she asks for eggs and orange juice now that the feeding tube is removed.  That should settle things right there.

To you, Snafu, I will respond that the husband could have "divorced" her years ago and walked away from her freed of the burden, but he chose not to.  I don't believe there's any insincerity on his part here.  He does believe Terry Schiavo is dead.  

Unviable person: I would say a "non-conscious" human, a human who will never gain or regain consciousness.  To be a person with rights human life has to be capable of gaining consciousness.  Truth is, Snaf, we could keep the corpse "alive" pretty much as long as we want.   After we can't keep it as a whole, we could rescue the individual cells and tissue colonies, all in hope that we would have in the future the technology to "restore viability" to the person.  It's an idiot's mission to argue from viability.  Or to think that I'm talking about nonviability.  

Do you know how many people, real and living people, are starving right now Snaf?  Why do you want to pull our heartstrings and play the violin about this woman, long dead?  You're ready to write an opera, when her real life, the one she lived 15 years ago, is completely forgotten, and the principle is a corpse!

"This is a woman who smiles, blinks, swallows liquids, looks around and interacts with others . . . I don't know enough about this ordeal . . ."

Well if she's cognizant it's wrong. Are you confident she's aware? After 15 years her husband and the courts think otherwise. If she's a vegetable/perpetually and unalterably unaware let her move on. There's no shortage of people you can assist.

It's nauseating watching this become a political game. After 15 years, on the day the feeding tube is to be removed, congress decides to call her as a witness? Impressive.








-- Modified on 3/18/2005 11:01:33 PM

MYTH: Terri is PVS (Persistent vegetative state)
FACT: The definition of PVS in Florida Statue 765.101:
Persistent vegetative state means a permanent and irreversible condition of unconsciousness in which there is:

(a) The absence of voluntary action or cognitive behavior of ANY kind.
(b) An inability to communicate or interact purposefully with the environment.

Terri's behavior does not meet the medical or statutory definition of persistent vegetative state. Terri responds to stimuli, tries to communicate verbally, follows limited commands, laughs or cries in interaction with loved ones, physically distances herself from irritating or painful stimulation and watches loved ones as they move around her. None of these behaviors are simple reflexes and are, instead, voluntary and cognitive. Though Terri has limitations, she does interact purposefully with her environment.

MYTH: Many doctors have said that there is no hope for her.
FACT: Dr. Victor Gambone testified that he visits Terri 3 times a year. His visits last for approximately 10 minutes. He also testified, after viewing the court videotapes at Terri’s recent trial, that he was surprised to see Terri’s level of awareness. This doctor is part of a team hand-picked by her husband, Michael Schiavo, shortly before he filed to have Terri’s feeding removed. Contrary to Schiavo’s team, 14 independent medical professionals (6 of them neurologists) have given either statements or testimony that Terri is NOT in a Persistent Vegetative State. Additionally, there has never been any medical dispute of Terri’s ability to swallow. Even with this compelling evidence, Terri’s husband, Michael Schiavo, has denied any form of therapy for her for over 10 years.

Dr. Melvin Greer, appointed by Schiavo, testified that a doctor need not examine a patient to know the appropriate medical treatment. He spent approximately 45 minutes with Terri. Dr. Peter Bambakidis, appointed by Judge Greer, spent approximately 30 minutes with Terri. Dr. Ronald Cranford, also appointed by Schiavo and who has publicly labeled himself “Dr. Death”, spent less than 45 minutes examining and interacting with Terri.

The poll they published said 87% were in favor of having their own feeding tube removed if they themselves were in a persistent vegetative state.

They THEN added this result...

82% of CONSERVATIVE evangelical Protestants were ALSO in favor of removing a feeding tube in the same scenario.

It seems the Bush thralls are the ones this time out of step with America and what is moral.

The minority this time are those opposing the right to die.

And BTW executions are done against the will of the executed. It has been determined over and over by state and federal courts that Terry Schiavo  would not want to remian in the persistant vegetative state she is in. So she isn't being executed.

Can anybody really imagine the hell this woman is going through, if she truly is "aware'. Her parents want to cling to the slighest hope, that their daughter will come back to them. That is a real pain, that I hope to never truly understand, and my heart goes out to them.

I truly hope that Terry Schiavo died fifteen years ago, for if there is really a living, aware woman inside that body, can you imagine the hell she is going through. Trapped in your own body for fifteen years, unable to live unable to die, that is a hell a would not wish on anyone. Most of the people in support of keeping her body alive believe in some kind of an after life heaven, or the equivalent. Isn't that better than the hell on earth she must be going through if she is indeed aware.

If Terry Schiavo did truly die fifteen years ago, and all that is left is a shell of a body, than there is no harm in letting that empty shell go. If on the other hand, Terry is indeed alive in there somewhere, we owe it to here to stop this living nightmare, for I can imagine no greater hell than what she must be going through. You so called, compassionate christians, show some compassion let this poor woman go, and let the healing begin.

Thanks Ed, that some more info to consider.  I don't have the time right now to check the link but I will this afternoon.

The cruelty of those who want to keep her alive is beyond belief.

I also hope she is not aware for that would be like living w/ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease) where certain nerve cells are damaged thereby restricting muscle movement, but it also spares most parts of the brain, including the cortical neurons that underlie alertness and conscious thought, which is like having a front row seat at your own demise......

I think most people would want to be let go if they were in a persistant vegatative state....Her husband has said she did not want to be kept alive if she was in a terminal condition.....Compassion would be to let her go, she has suffered way too long......

The person who has the right is neither the parents nor the husband , it is Terry herself.  Parents often have a sense of "entitlement" over their children's lives that is excessive, and unhealthy for both the parent and the child.

The courts who have examined this case in detail have ruled over and over that they agree with Michael Schiavo's contention that Terry would not have wanted to continue in this state.  Terry's parents may even agree with this deep down inside, but it is their sense of parental "entitlement" that is getting in the way.

But I agree that there is probably a better way to let Terry go than through dehydration.  That is why well-written assisted suicide laws are something that I think are needed.

If Terri Schiavo had signed a Living Will before this ordeal had begun, this would not be an issue.

When there is no hope of any form of meaningful life, why spend more medical dollars to artificially keep a brain dead patient alive when the resources could be spent for the care of the uninsured and underinsured?

Cut out the shit about morality, if you really believed it, you would not be here. The issue is purely about a person's politics. I do not care about what is the liberal or conservative (your) viewpoint, both are massively flawed. The issue to me is whether a state has the primary responsibility over this case. The state of Florida has carried out a long battle over the case of Terri Schiavo, a decision has finally been made by the government branches of that state. That decision should be respected by the federal government because it was arrived at via a legal, public process. This case is about whether a man can carryout a wish that he claims his wife indicated that she wanted. Even if he is lying, he is her legal guardian at this point in time.
If the case does get into the federal courts as many so called conservatives wish, the result will be that the tube will ultimately be removed for a final time, after a large amount of national strife.
If all of us begin to seek redress against decisions that we do not like, the courts will end up incapacitated by cases that should have been dispatched quickly. Ultimately the gridlock will incapacitate all branches of govrnment and lead to people facing each other in the street to settle differences.

One thing that is increasingly turning me against some politicians is that they cry out about the sancity of life but do not hesitate to cut programs that assist those that cannot assist themselves. I wonder how many of the sanctimonious politicians would gladly provide the government funding needed to support Terri Schiavo if her husband had chosen to go against what he said was her wishes and allowed her to live on life assist in an incapacitated state for as long as she lived. Remember, we are talking about the same politicians that are not making a honest effort to support our incapacitated troops that can no longer serve the country and need assistance to live comfortably as civilians. The courts are far closer to making the right decision in this case.

It doesn't matter what her wishes were, because people are not even in agreement about the basic facts.

She's vegetative.  

No she's not.  

She shows only reflexes that have no higher function.

No, she recognizes and interacts every day with people.

The husband's doctors concur that she is vegetative.

Because the husband's doctors are corrupt and incompetent.

The courts have reviewed this and ruled.

Because the judges are corrupt and incompetent.


...and so it goes on.  How anybody not directly involved in this could pretend to draw any facts from this now is beyond me.      

Let me just say: I can't imagine a self-seeking criminal motive for a husband attempting for 10 years at great personal cost to  let her die.  Now perhaps there is one, but I can't imagine it.        Any suggestions?

...that you really believe you don't have to answer any questions or marshall any arguments for your position.  Is that your idea of fighting for right then, Bribite?  Completely resting your brain?  No thought needed; just crop the moral outrage when the questions get tough, and when you're opponent has an answer to everything you say, and always declare with some poll that the biggest mob is on your side.  

"It says a lot... that this is even being debated."

Why shouldn't it be debated Bribite?  It says a lot, but you don't tell us what it says.  In fact, you say none of it.  You just know you're terribly enlightened because you know there's a lot of words somewhere about this.    

While serving up this nothing, you bemoan the inaccuracy of the country's "moral compass."  I think your moral compass belongs in the same junk heap as your expanding pie.  If it's so accurate, patent it and build a prototype please, but otherwise, stop referring to it as though you're guided by something real.  Your endless citation of polls to check the popularity of your latest POV tells me that at best, a moral compass tells a herd how to wander aimlessly.      

And then the innuendo: $3 million being pledged.  That proves a conspiracy wants to kill her, and they're mostly democrats.  So now you've joined the "grassy knoll" club, too, Bribite.  The vast ridiculous consiracy that explains already understandible human actions.  





-- Modified on 3/20/2005 12:06:07 AM

...direct euthenasia or assisted suicide is considered so wrong and is illegal.  

So, the only agreed alternative where nobody is "guilty" would be removing the feeding tube.  The entire purpose is the same though.    

It's a cowardly way to euthenize a person because our society has decided to punish all the braver ways.  Call it unintended consequences.  

If it helps, I don't think she'll suffer.  The dead don't.

The lesson is, choose your spouse wisely.  You don't want the wrong person deciding this for you in the future.  

If any of it is true.  I can't tell.  And I can't tell if, for example, Doctor Cranford spend 30 minutes with her because that's all her husband could afford, or how much longer or shorter that was than any of the more "caring" doctors.  How do I know they weren't sent in by the remnants of Operation Rescue and wrote their reports on the way to the examination?  

As for the Florida law, it's written badly.  No EEG?  No PET scan?  No CAT scans?  No neuro-oxygen consumption?  So one doctor could say: "this is voluntary," another doctor could say "No it's a reflex!"    

"Interacting purposefully with the environment" this might include urinating, which is a very meaningful interaction.  Communicate?  That's also in the ear of the person who receives it.  Maybe these are guidelines for a law, but the final law shouldn't be written like this.  This is as bad as Florida's election scandal.  

And then there's the question, if she communicates, what has she been saying?  

If Michael Schiavo has fought for 10 years to do this, at great sacrifice of resources to doctors and lawyers, then I have to believe there's some conviction to him.  Otherwise, if he were nearly as bad as people are saying, I'm thinking he might have just pulled a Newt Gingrich and divorced her.

Thank you for your POV, I was hoping one of the ladies might chime in with their .02

So you would classify a woman who responds to stimuli, attempts to smile, follows another person with her eyes and shows emotion to be in a persistant vegetative state?

I watched video footage of her doing these things last night.  I saw her eyes go from one person  to another, then smile slightly.  This may not be what is considered quality life, but this is sure as hell not a vegetative state.  This is not far away from where Christopher Reeves condition.  He couldn't feed or take care of himself in any form.

She has no living will. So you have absolutley NO idea what she wants. Her husband says one thing, her parents another. Quit projecting what makes YOU feel good onto others.

If everyone had quit bring Christopher Reeves food, then he would have died also.

Do you also want to KILL ALS patients? At what stage in their illness.

What gives us the right to judge the required level of communication and interaction ability to be deemed worthy of living?

The left sheds real tears over some assholes towel hat being replaced by Fruit of the Looms, but stand up for a defenseless invalid?  No, not now, not ever!

(There are Democrats who supported this Congressional invasion of privacy in to the Schiavo's life. Tom Harkin, the Senator from Iowa, and a true lefty was up on the podium with other Republican Senators the other day at a news conference supporting it)

They will stand up and fight Capital Punishment for the most horrendous murderers, but stand up to keep a powerless woman from being executed, are you fucking kidding me, not a chance!  I hear 48 to 52 percent in this country.  Recent numbers on Terri are 72% are on her parent’s side.  Who represents the minority?  Democrats!  Liberal Democrats!

(Why quote polling data? If her husband says her wishes were not to be kept alive artificially who are you, or your alleged 72%, or the US Congress(both parties) to say otherwise? Do you personally know the Schiavos? Were you somehow privy to their private conversations, the kind that only married couples can have?)  

Its not money, that has been pledged, an endowment over 3 Million has been promised.  Why do you suppose she is wanted dead so badly by so many?  And why so many, if not all, are Democrats?

(Care to provide some facts here about this alleged endowment? Who stands to gain from this? Michael Schiavo has aready been rewarded over a million dollars in a malpractice lawsuit. Again there are Democrats who have supported this. I would suggest you do a Congressional search and find out who actually came back from easter recess to debate/vote this issue and examine who voted and how)

One again on the wrong side of an important issue and sliding into the abyss!

(Yea whatever, another gloom and doom forecast from the political right.......any chance I can peek in to that same crystal ball you seem to be peering in? Last, why is it that you want the US federal government trampling all over state's rights and personal rights? Any chance the political right might be targeting a particular Florida Sentaor whose up for reelection next year, in the person of Democrat Bill Nelson?) MfSD>>>>

Yes, we are paying the bills.  Shiavo's care is being paid by Medicaid.  While he was campaiging to have Congress grant special federal court jurisdiction and standing to the parents, Tom Delay was also leading the House plan to cut $20 billion from Medicaid.
There's your compassionate conservatism in action.

Better yet, say what your really mean.  ***He's a genocidal, spree killing maniac responsible for killing whole nations.***  It was wishy-washy guys like him who caused things like Congo and Rwanda.  He was secretly bankrolling Pol Pot.  Hell, he's the next decade's Hitler!  Kill him now before it's too late!  

Don't confuse contrary opinions from people uninvolved with events with criminal intent.  Keep this in perspective, please.  

All that's needed for evil to win if for good people to start doing evil things.  Your accusation comes close...  

-- Modified on 3/22/2005 1:17:57 AM

How the hell do you make the comparison between Terri & Chris Reeve....They were 2 absolute different cases, zero similarities, & zero basis for comparison......

I think YOU are the one projecting what makes you feel good onto others, since you didn't like what I said, you twisted my statements into something that I neither said nor implied....

Please grow up, if you want to have a CIVIL disagreement fine, but quit with the insane comments.....


-- Modified on 3/22/2005 5:00:41 AM

And I thought his twisted, stupid, and insane remarks were directed at me.  No matter, ditto on the response.

The problem is that she is no more in a terminal state than you or I are!

She requires food and water to survive, just like every living thing on this planet!

This is an outright killing, and a horrible one at that.  The court order disallows anyone for feeding her by mouth or giving her any liquids by mouth!

Why not just allow that slimeball Michael to just go in and put a pillow over her face?

This whole thing is beyond human understanding!  It's just plain evil and the courts are enabling it.

While I understand how some can say Michael should just walk away as her parents and the hospice are caring for her, there are others who believe him when he says his wife would not want to be kept alive if in a vegative state.....And without a will and/or living will, then you have the incrediably difficult situation as it is now.....

There was a guy in CA (story attached) who offered Michael 1M to just walk away......

I know this situation arose from Terri's heart attack 15 years ago, but was that result of another condition/illness, I mean, 26 is awfully young to have a heart attack?......

But in reality it is just like taking someone off a respirator and when they continue to breath, putting a pillow over their face and suffocating them to death!

Forget the fact that food and water being "Life Support" is just lunacy, they will not allow her to have anything by mouth!  This is a slow execution!  If this was being done to a Scotch Terrier or a Siamese Cat, well Nicole, just think that through!  

I fail to see much difference between Michael Schiavo and Scott Peterson, except the courts are assisting Schiavo!

I maintain that this is evil.