I confess to being conflicted over this situation, but those who claim that we're letting her "go in peace" are, in the words of my dear, departed grandmother, talking like "a man with a paper asshole." Never was sure exactly what that means, but it seems to fit.
The woman is being STARVED and DEHYDRATED to death. We'd show more mercy to a dog being put down. Moreover, it's utterly clear that she's not enough of a turnip to not suffer. She's going through agony. Why? Mainly, it seems to me, because her so-called "husband" wouldn't just walk away, perhaps for vilely selfish reasons.
Whatever this is, it ain't "going in peace."
What "vilely selfish reasons," could her husband have? He was offered one million dollars to give up her rights to her parents which he turned down. I agree with the courts let her go.
I admit, her husband's refusal to take the money had me puzzled.
I did think, however, there is an alternative perspective.
For years, her husband and his "experts" have claimed that she was leading this essentially non-life. She could never improve beyond the situation she was in.
The opposing view, her family, claim that she responded to early therapy and her husband refused to continue with the therapy.
Consider the ramifications of this: she receives therapy and treatment that her family claim benefits her, and she DOES respond and improve. Her husband might well be liable for spousal abuse, negligence, attempted murder, and fiscal malfeasance (for squandering the money from the malpractice suit).
That is a pretty powerfull motivation for acting selfishly.
"Consider the ramifications of this: she receives therapy and treatment that her family claim benefits her, and she DOES respond and improve. Her husband might well be liable for spousal abuse, negligence, attempted murder, and fiscal malfeasance (for squandering the money from the malpractice suit)."
The Florida courts, using testimony and evidence supplied by neurologists are of the legal opinion that Terri is in a non-cognitive state and would never recover. Do you have proof that the malpractice money was "squandered". MfSD>>>>
that he used the money that she received for defending his pursuit of having her life terminated.
That money was supposed to be used to provide care for her.
One allegation was that if her husband had been initially successful in having her life ended, there would have been an estate worth close to a million.
I would say that spending the money on legal costs to kill her qualifies as squandering the money, although I can easily accept that people like you would claim otherwise.
that he used the money that she received for defending his pursuit of having her life terminated.
That money was supposed to be used to provide care for her.
(Do you have proof that none of the money was used to provide care for her or treatment?)
One allegation was that if her husband had been initially successful in having her life ended, there would have been an estate worth close to a million.
(Then why did he turn down a million dollars to cede his legal guardianship?)
I would say that spending the money on legal costs to kill her qualifies as squandering the money, although I can easily accept that people like you would claim otherwise.
(I'm not sure what you mean by "people like me" and frankly I don't care; your decision to go "personal" here is your problem. You would say.......that this particular action constitutes "squandering". Thanks for offering your opinion.) MfSD>>>>
As with much of the discussion around this issue the facts are irrelevant. The husaband spent his own money on the legal case. The original malpractice settlement consisted of a $750,000 trust fund to pay for medical care, and $300,000 to Michael Schivao for loss of companionship. If you bothered to read the court decision in 2000 that first allowed for the removal fo the feeding tubes you would see that it is the parents and not the husband who are the money grubbers in this case. Among the judges findings was that the reason for the split between the husband and the parent was that he turned them down when they asked for a split of the $300,000. Before that point they were 100% in agreement with the husband. Afterwards, they turned into his biggest enemy. This case has been all about money, at least from the parents' perspective.
"MYTH: This is just a family battle over money.
FACT: In 1992, Terri was awarded nearly one million dollars by a malpractice jury and an out-of-court malpractice settlement which was designated for future medical expenses. Of these funds, less than $50,000 remains today. The financial records revealing how Terri’s medical fund money is managed are SEALED from inspection. Court records, however, show that Judge Greer has approved the spending down of Terri’s medical fund on Schiavo’s attorney’s fees - though it was expressly awarded to Terri for her medical care. Schiavo’s primary attorney, George Felos, has received upwards of $400,000 dollars since Schiavo hired him. This same attorney, at the expense of Terri’s medical fund, publicly likened Terri to a “houseplant” and has used Terri’s case on national television to promote his newly published book."
http://www.terrisfight.org/myths.html
"Felos is quoted in the Post article as claiming that he had only received about $340,000 in legal fees, admitting that the fees had been paid from a medical malpractice settlement in the case.
Schaivo had been awarded nearly $2 million as a result of his medical malpractice claims and by court order, funds had been set aside to be used solely for Terri’s rehabilitation. However, once he received the money, he refused to allow any rehabilitative efforts and instead, engaged attorneys to cause her death. The funds that were ordered to be used for rehabilitation are instead being used to facilitate her death.
The trust fund set up for Terri Schiavo from proceeds from the malpractice settlements remained somewhat intact until 1997 when Schiavo engaged Felos and other attorneys in his quest to gain court approval to cause her death.
Sixth Judicial Circuit Judge George W. Greer of Pinellas and Pasco Counties, the probate court judge who has sat on the case since the outset, gave his approval for Schiavo to plunder the trust fund to pay legal fees. At the estranged husband’s request, Greer ordered that all financial billings be sealed. However, payments from the fund are public record."
http://journals.aol.com/justice1949/JUSTICEFORTERRISCHIAVO/entries/334
http://www.sweetliberty.org/bulletins/euda.htm
Do you have a link to the court records (or an objective news story reporting it) that shows the money went to Michael's legal fees? As for Felos' statement, that doesn't tell us anything since Michael was awarded money also. The article doesn't say that Felos claims it came from Terri's trust so one can't simply assume it did. It could have come from Michael's portion of the settlements and still be a true statement. Now that doesn't mean it didn't come from Terri's trust, but more evidence is needed to show it did.
getting kinda "defensive" and "sensitive" there.
Uhhh, a honey with whom he has two little bastards?
He is not a "husband" in any meaningful sense of the word. He could have and should have divorced her, and turned guardianship over to her parents.
...it has been apparent for years that removal of treatment meant exactly the removing of the feeding/hydration tubes. And only now is the inhumanity of that strikes you?
I know you somehow wouldn't consider it any less criminal to actively kill her. The difference here is, you'd then have a guilty party to prosecute and attempt to send to hell, and you'd cheer on that prosecution. Because people like you won't make that distinction, we're left with starving her to death.
I could still think of more heinous murders than this: not only think of them, but know of them. This is by far, not the worst crime on the planet right now.
I'll also add that because her cerebal cortex is gone, and because she has so few intact brain cells, I do believe the cells that remain will tend to probably go dormant very quickly with the lack of glucose; I don't believe she will suffer very much.
And they have her on liberal doses of morphine.
In all honesty, they should just give her a lethal dose of morphine -- it would be best fr her. But the religous zealots would freak out even more than they are now.
I say that is a whole lot better than living another 15 years as a vegetabe with a tube stuck in her mouth.
I've watched you and others post inane, clueless opnions about this case and I'm finally tired of sifting through the manure to try and find something with life.
You hvae no clue about her medical condition, you're just squawking the anti-prolife line.
One question for you Dr......if she can't FEEL anything, why are they pumping her full of morphine? HELLOooooo McFly........
I don't know whether she can feel anything, I don't know enough about the whole case to really make a choice. I've heard a lot of CRAP, much of it repeated by posters here who don't know their asses from holes in the ground about this case. Most of it is just regurgitated media pablum with some totally ludicrous opinions added.
I realize that you are incapable of accepting the intent of this message, but you really should think before you espouse affirmations about data you have no clue about.
Your quote:
"I don't know enough about the whole case to really make a choice"
If you did get informed about this case you would know what I am talking about. You are shooting from the hip and it is YOU who has no clue as usual.
FYI, they are giving morphine to mollify the nutcases who think she is alive and well inside that head.
You hvae no clue about her medical condition, you're just squawking the anti-prolife line.
One question for you Dr......if she can't FEEL anything, why are they pumping her full of morphine? HELLOooooo McFly........
(The medical journals that I looked at make the assertion that a person in Terri's state wouldn't feel any pain from being denied water and food. The areas in her brain that control those reflexes, according to the doctors that have examined her are not functioning.)
I don't know whether she can feel anything, I don't know enough about the whole case to really make a choice. I've heard a lot of CRAP, much of it repeated by posters here who don't know their asses from holes in the ground about this case. Most of it is just regurgitated media pablum with some totally ludicrous opinions added.
(IOW you're just as clueless as those you're railing against)
I realize that you are incapable of accepting the intent of this message, but you really should think before you espouse affirmations about data you have no clue about.
(I would submit that exchanges on this board don't give anyone any particular insight in to whose "capable" of what, and the amount of "thinking" that goes in to these posts probably varies greatly) MfSD>>>>
-- Modified on 3/25/2005 6:42:21 AM
How peculiar. I had thought those were **definitely** private. Sounds like it might have been leaked by Randall "Fetus Boy" Terry.
Assuming that your dubious account of her prescriptions could even be accurate, you show less credibility that "Dr. Stamina," but as usual, you try to dominate the argument with your high testosterone level, irritable tone, and strident name calling.
-- Modified on 3/25/2005 7:45:21 AM
It was Dr. Stamina who claimed they were pumping full of morphine.
You really do need to get some glasses Zin, or better yet, stop taking your estrogen.
It seems to me, that puts to rest *any* concern anybody can have now that this is inhumane. No way her remaining nerve cells are going to register any pain.
I thought you meant she was on morphine **before** they removed the feeding tube.
I'll confess, I have a tendency to skip over the body of stamina4hours posts. Usually, the heading says it all.
My pharmacopia doesn't include estrogen, BTW.
Up til now, I stayed out of the posting hysteria over this because I was troubled by all the crap flying from both sides of the aisle.
I think starvation is a horrible death, regardless of hwether you feel anything or not. I also believe that assisted suicide for those who are suffering is not unreasonable, provided they have made the decision in a rational thinking process and after speaking with professionals who can verify that the reasoning was logical and well founded.
In this case, there's so much bullshit being spouted by both sides, you can't be sure what's really accurate and what isn't. But stamnina's constant posts where he's spewing his medical "expertise" finally rubbed my last nerve too raw and I had to respond. I still don't know if letting her die is the correct decision or not, like everyone else who has spouted off, I just don't have enough information to make a decision.
From what little I have heard (most of which is biased, since the information came from local radio interviews with her brother) I do have questions about some timing issues. The right-to-life spinners do have an interesting slant and counter point to the "let her die with dignity" crowd.
...is the "inferred" living will. Somehow, I think this would have been contended divisively even if she had one.
But it was too damn hard to not get drawn into this.
If Terri had a living will/advance directive giving her wishes and stating that they were removal of ALL care, including a feeding tube and hydration, support from many (including me) for her parents' position would dissolve. I might still believe Michael a sleazebag --- then the issue would be more about his delay in acting upon her wishes --- I would have no dispute with his decision.
So let's not play this as another reason (as some have) to slander people who believe that the State has a primary duty to protect innocent life (ever read the Declaration of Independence?). It's not about "pro-lifers." It's about the State's duty in the absence of individual, personal decisionmaking.
And you know that she's going through agony from your advanced medical training and physical examination of the patient? You must have graduated from the same medical school as Bill Frist who was able to make a more accurate diagnosis than the attending doctors simply by watching a few minutes of a videotape.
The Economist Magazine says that if he had given that testimony in court rather than on the floor of the Senate, he would have been prosecuted.
starvation and dehydration are not merciful ways to go. Or should I quote your response the next time I'm begged for money for starving children in Africa?
As for Bill Frist, no, I did not receive the same medical training as he. He is, after all, a heart surgeon. And I don't know anyone who claims that he "was able to make a more accurate diagnosis than the attending doctors simply by watching a few minutes of a videotape." I don't. What I do say, and what anyone who watches that tape can conclude, is that Terri Schiavo is neither in a persistent vegetative state nor is she comatose, as so many of those who advocate her murder claim to justify their crime.
Closer to a turnip than to an Einstein? Certainly. Can't care for or feed herself? To be sure.
But by that standard we should shut down the Liberal welfare state and say to hell with federal and state aid programs which require me to pay exhorbitant taxes to feed and cloth the poor. Oh, but I forgot. That would require you Lefties and the government to give up power. Never mind.