So after all the hoopla and smear tactics and political manipulation by everyone from Terry Schiavo's parents to the Christian propaganda machine to the Bush political manipulators, it turns out Michael Schiavo was correct all along.
Although I sincerely doubt there will be anything remotely resembling an acknowledgement or apology from anyone who insisted she be kept alive, perhaps this will serve as a wake up call for all of you who kept ranting and railing and smearing Micheal Schiavo and turning this into the circus it should never have been.
To all of you who kept referring to Michael Shiavo as a wicked evil person, I hope you will all, now, finally shut the fuck up.
Just think, in the end, the reality of it is that it was her parents by their selfish actions who were actually prolonging her pain. I hope this will prove to be the pin that bursts the balloon of the hypocrites of the right wing. Here is the article:

LARGO, Fla. (AP) - An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused.

But what caused her collapse 15 years earlier remained a mystery. The autopsy and post-mortem investigation found no proof that she had an eating disorder, as was suspected at the time, Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin said.

Autopsy results on the 41-year-old brain-damaged woman were made public Wednesday, more than two months after her death March 31 ended a right-to-die battle between her husband and parents that engulfed the courts, Congress and the White House and divided the country.

She died from dehydration, Thogmartin said. He said she did not appear to have suffered a heart attack and there was no evidence that she was given harmful drugs or other substances prior to her death.

He said that after her feeding tube was removed, she would not have been able to eat or drink if she had been given food by mouth, as her parents' requested.

"Removal of her feeding tube would have resulted in her death whether she was fed or hydrated by mouth or not," Thogmartin told reporters.

He also said she was blind, because the "vision centers of her brain were dead," and that her brain was about half of its expected size when she died 13 days following the feeding tube's removal.

Michael Schiavo said his wife never would have wanted to be kept alive in what court-appointed doctors concluded was a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery. The Schindlers, however, doubted she had any such end-of-life wishes and disputed that she was in a vegetative state.

The medical examiner's conclusions countered a videotape released by the Schindlers of Terri Schiavo in her hospice bed. The video showed Schiavo appearing to turn toward her mother's voice and smile, moaning and laughing. Her head moved up and down and she seemed to follow the progress of a brightly colored Mickey Mouse balloon.

They believed her condition could improve with therapy.

However, doctors said her reactions were automatic responses and not evidence of thought or consciousness, and Thogmartin's report went farther.

"The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain," he said. "This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."

Thogmartin said the autopsy report was based on 274 external and internal body images, and an exhaustive review of Terri Schiavo's medical records, police reports and social services agency records.

He said hospital records of her 1990 collapse showed she had a diminished potassium level in her blood. But he said that did not prove she had an eating disorder, because the emergency treatment she received at the time could have affected the potassium level.

Testimony in a 1992 civil trial indicated that she probably was suffering from an eating disorder that led to a severe chemical imbalance.

Over the years, the Schindlers had sought independent investigation of their daughter's condition and what caused it. Abuse complaints to state social workers were ruled unfounded and the Pinellas state attorney's office did not turn up evidence of abuse.

Calls seeking comments Wednesday from the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, were not immediately returned.

Speaking before the report was issued, Felos, said the Schindlers continue to engage in a "smear campaign against Michael to deflect the real issues in the case, which were Terri's wishes and her medical condition."

During the seven-year legal battle, federal and state courts repeatedly rejected extraordinary attempts at intervention by Florida lawmakers, Gov. Jeb Bush, Congress and President Bush on behalf of her parents.

Supporters of the Schindlers harshly criticized the courts. Many religious groups, including the Roman Catholic Church, said the removal of sustenance violated fundamental religious tenets.

About 40 judges in six courts were involved in the case at one point or another. Six times, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene. As Schiavo's life ebbed away following the final removal of her feeding tube, Congress rushed through a bill to allow the federal courts to take up the case, and President Bush signed it March 21, but federal courts refused to step in.

What a disgrace these wacked-out extreme right wingers are. They just repeadedly are proven to be completely full of bull crap.

Vindication was the term used by Michael's lawyer and himself, no one else.

The autopsy "proved" very little. Yes, there was massive brain damage. Her family never disputed that, they just wanted the right to care for her.

One half of it's normal weight, in 2005. What matters is what was it's condition in 1992 when her husband withdrew therapy. It could have suffered much of it's degeneration in the past 13 years of neglect. We will never know.

No Bulimia. No heart attack. OK, So what DID her in? NO ONE KNOWS.

No evidence of strangulation. I'm not advocating this strongly, without evidence, but biological traces of strangulation or suffocation (not addressed in the autopsy) could have healed.

Permanent Vegetive State? Autopsy read "brain's state was not inconsistent with PVS". That type of verbage affirms nothing.

Your claim that  "they just wanted the right to take care of her" is wrong. They made several claims her husband AND hospitals had abused her, which was was proven 100% wrong by this autopsy. there was no abuse.

Your mischaracterization in that respect thus is also 100% wrong.

the autopsy also said she was irrevesible brain damaged from the say of her seizure. That she was blind from that day forward.

The other part you were wrong on is that evidence of strangulation or suffocation could have healed. Wrong again, those internal cerebral scars will be forever on the brain.

The courts determined Terri Schiavo didn't want to live in this state. The conservatives continued their asserttion of abuse and other things in order to get the state to be able to control her life.

The conservatives were so wrong on this case. Wrong in so many ways. But most of all, the conservatives in this case were morally bankrupt.

How quickly you selectively forget recent history.

Did you forget the littany of conservative voices saying she could be rehabilited, that she was NOT in a vegitative state, that she could respond to stimuli, that she could feel pain, that she was aware, yada, yada, yada, yada....ALL OF IT PROVEN WRONG!

Just like the WMDs and all those things we were told about nuclear weapons being a 1/2 hr away, unmanned ariel vehicles, aluminum centrafuges, yellow cake, harboring terrorists, yada, yada, yada .....ALL OF IT PROVEN WRONG!

It is becoming more and more obvious how many neo-conservatives are simply challenged by the recognition of REALITY. It is just amazing.

What does it take?

You guys on the right are a real crack-up.

You wonder why scientists don't agree with your agendas, yet whenever there's a choice between fact-based science and faith-based opinion on keys issues (e.g., global warming, HIV transmission, failure to adequately test the missile defense system, Terry Schiavo's persistent vegetative state, etc.), the right goes with religious zealotry every time.

From time immemorial (at least since 1950's sci-fi movies), there's been an implicit compact between government and scientists: government won't rewrite the scientific reports saying there's a monster coming, and in turn scientists won't declare martial law.

And, as we all know from watching those B movies, serious consequences ensue when government ignores scientists for too long.

QUOTE - “Your claim that  "they just wanted the right to take care of her" is wrong. They made several claims her husband AND hospitals had abused her, which was was proven 100% wrong by this autopsy. there was no abuse.”

RESPONSE - The two claims are NOT mutually exclusive. I am not claiming abuse, but the autopsy did NOT say there was never any abuse. It simply said it did not find any evidence. It also said that 15 years was plenty of time for certain abuse to have healed.

QUOTE - ”the autopsy also said she was irreversible (sic) brain damaged from the say (sic) of her seizure. That she was blind from that day forward.”

RESPONSE – Please site your page and paragraph reference for this claim. I cannot find it. I do not believe it exists.

QUOTE – “The other part you were wrong on is that evidence of strangulation or suffocation could have healed. Wrong again, those internal cerebral scars will be forever on the brain.”

RESPONSE – The cerebral scars are caused by hypoxia (loss of oxygen). It can be caused from lack of circulatory function (blood flow) or pulmonary function (breathing dysfunction). The autopsy also specifically states in Page 4 paragraph d. “Autopsy examination of her neck structures 15 years after her initial collapse did not detect any signs of remote trauma, but, with such a delay, the exam was unlikely to show any residual neck findings. Even bony anomalies would have likely resolved.”

QUOTE – “The courts determined Terri Schiavo didn't want to live in this state. The conservatives continued their asserttion (sic) of abuse and other things in order to get the state to be able to control her life. “

RESPONSE – It was impossible for the courts to determine anything about what she wanted, since she left no documented desires. What it did determine was that her husband, not her parents, was in charge.

QUOTE – “The conservatives were so wrong on this case. Wrong in so many ways. But most of all, the conservatives in this case were morally bankrupt.”

RESPONSE – I have no desire to re-debate these issues. I was merely trying to keep people intellectually honest about recent claims raised on the autopsy.

QUOTE – “How quickly you selectively forget recent history……..It is becoming more and more obvious how many neo-conservatives are simply challenged by the recognition of REALITY. It is just amazing.”

RESPONSE –I didn’t know that I was a neo-conservative. Interesting. I am carrying no one’s water. Quit believing everything you hear and read. See above. The parents and their allies were obviously wrong about the true rehabilitation prospects, but that still (imho) does not take away from their case of wishing to choose life over death. BTW the autopsy (but not the neurological report) is available at The Smoking Gun.

QUOTE – "What does it take?"

RESPONSE - What it takes is.... more facts available that we will ever have. By the autopsy's own findings.... "The manner of death is certified as "undetermined"?" I still say, ask the husband's live in Honey. I bet she knows what happened.

-- Modified on 6/16/2005 6:12:08 PM

Tell me Ed, are you one of those poor fools who believe Rush, O'Reilley and Coulter are real journalists? Surely you're not that weak in the brain, are you? Wake up and smell the stench coming from the leaders you so fervently espouse before you are plowed under by their political and religious excrement.
Vindication is a term *I* and many others are using, not just Michael Schiavo and his lawyers.
Or were you referring to Michael Jackson and HIS lawyers?

If the possibilities you suppose are true, wouldn't Michael Schiavo's best interest be served by Terri staying on life support?  Wouldn't he have strongly opposed an autopsy?

NOT doing is trying to suppose anything. I am merely trying to be intellectually honest about what the autopsy showed. Everyone, yes everyone, myself included, has a tendency to see what we want, shade the facts for the "truth" we seek, ignore those that do not support our opinions.

I have no idea what is in the mind or heart of Michael Schiavo.

I am not sure, but I do not believe that he had any standing to legally oppose an autopsy. I think it was required by law.

-- Modified on 6/17/2005 8:01:54 AM

Ed, here's some information regarding the autopsy:

The brain does not lose cells due to "neglect."  Thus, you've  hurled another mindless slander at Michael Schiavo.

"The autopsy proved very little."  The autopsy proved that she was blind-- didn't have a visual cortex-- meaning that she couldn't **conceive** of the sense of sight.  Her eyes weren't hooked up to anything.  The videos of her seemingly responding to sights were from random motor nerve firings-- not any stimulus going on in the room.  No therapy would make this better.  

Everything else about her cognitive ability was a similar illusion.  She had **no** learning power.  A brain that damaged and that fragged is also too disorganized to recover to any degree.  If your body took that much damage, losing half its cells, you would be dead.  In short order.  

"So what did her in?  NOBODY KNOWS!"  Another mindless innuendo hurled at Michael Schiavo?  I know, you'll deny this.  It's unknown so maybe he did it since he wanted so bad to kill her after a decade in a coma.  What better proof of motive?  Now all you need is means and modus.  I'd say your making a case out of one bottle.  

Obviously, your utterly right about the evidence of strangulation.  Obviously, any pathologist would have thought about that in the autopsy. So obviously, the examiner was talking about evidence of strangulation in 2005, not when she collapsed.

With 50 percent of her brain gone, the Examiner didn't need to send his point home with a kicker of a final sentence.  

Yes, the autopsy did indeed prove that her brain was in such a degenerated state that she could not see, could not do most anything, and would never recover. (BTW, I don’t remember ever advocating that she would recover.)

What it also showed was that the claims of bulimia and heart attack were also wrong. So what it did NOT prove is how she got into this state in the first place. There are more open questions now than before about how this happened. That is where my statement of no proof comes from. It was the autopsy’s OWN WORDS that states the cause of death was UNDETERMINED.  That pretty much means that nobody knows.

And about the strangulation...
The autopsy WAS referring to 15 years ago. Read it for yourself, or maybe you were being sarcastic. I couldn't tell.

First paragraph: I agree, you didn't "advocate" (I think the word you were looking for was "claim" or "declare") that she would make  a **complete** recovery.  You did lay the blame for the degeneration on Michael Schiavo stopping the therapy.  This implies that you still think a partial recovery was possible.  Again "Degenerate" is the wrong word here.  It didn't reach it's state from degeneration; it reached it through a single even that caused massive damage.  The fact is, she and her brain stayed largely in the same state since the catastrophe.

Second paragraph:  on this, you are absolutely right.  The question I have: are you then saying that the undetermined death leads to the conclusion that Michael Sciavo was behind it?  Many other things might have lead to this.  A cardiac infibrilation can happen to anyone, and unfortunately, at any age.  People will drop dead of it at any time.  Perhaps she wasnt' bulimic, perhaps she was trying to lose weight with ephedra, which was freely available at the time?  It's a useful drug, but you do have to watch your blood pressure and watch for signs of palpitations, because it can throw your heart out of time and cause an infibrilation.  An infarction would have been rare in a woman her age, but not unknown.

Third paragraph:  Do you have a link to an actual autopsy report?  I don't see that here.  I wasn't aware that strangulation would leave any evidence 15 years after the fact, nor that they would look for it with an idea of finding anything.  I thought it was well established that this was caused by some catastrophic event with the heart-- they just don't know what caused that.  Strangulation would have left evidence **at the time.**