Terri Shaivo case

[noodle]

Perhaps most of you, like me, are a bit weary of the 24/7 coverage of the Schaivo case. I am wondering what your thoughts might be on her death this morning, and the right-to-lifers who have threatened her husband and the judges who didn't allow the case to be again brought before the federal court system.

I, for one, am grateful for her passing. I admire her husband for following through with her wishes, despite the threats and pressure from her family, the right-to-lifers, etc.

I am offended that a special session was held - that members of congress and the president flew back from Easter vacation to interfere in this very private family matter. Where is the same emotion for such pressing issues like THE WAR! How about those in the US and all over the world who are starving? How about the biggest deficit ever?

I am offended by Tom DeLay and his threatening remarks, and I am offended by the priest who calls Michael Shaivo "heartless."

If these right-to-lifers think things are so wonderful in the hereafter, why is dying such a bad thing? Isn't she in a "better place?"

mamajama

[dogzilla]

Mamajama, the last two sentences of your post was almost exactly what I was thinking as I got out of the car after lunch today... and then "I wonder if there will be a thread on the post-mo boards about this."

You read my mind. Are you some kind of prophet or something?

Seriously, and I am desperately trying NOT to get too political here (and these are only opinions, people, feel free not to agree):

• I'm so very relieved she's finally passed. Now, she can come back to haunt her family for allowing footage of herself to be aired globally... in hospice clothes, with that horrible haircut that looks eerily similar to her mother's haircut. Believe you me, I'd be so much more angry about the lack of consideration and sensitivity for my private medical records and dignity than about the pull-the-tube debate. I have no kind words for anyone who chose to air those stills and video. That was garish and despicable on the part of the media (ratings whores).
• I believe the Schindlers' hearts may have been in the right place at one time, but at some point, their inability to let go became pathological. Knowing as we do that Mrs. Shiavo was bulimic, I can only hazard a guess that, because bulimia and anorexia often stem from parental control issues (if not abuse), the Schindlers' recent horrifying behavior is the result of parental guilt. Perhaps their control-freakishness is what caused Mrs. Shiavo's condition in the first place. And 15 years after her inital collapse... they still want to fight for control over her food and drink. Here's a good place for the pukey smiley, but that would be in bad taste considering the topic.
• For all the conservative right wing politicking over the sanctity of marriage... that sure went out the window when one husband's gut-wrenching, court-supported decision flew in the face of what these media-whore parents wanted. Since when do your parents still have "parental rights" long after you're married? They want Congress and the Bushes to, what, violate the sanctity of the marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Shiavo. Huh? Adam marrying Steve would be more destructive to the institution of marriage than the freaking Supreme Court and Jeb Bush overriding the court order to remove the tube in what way? I'm all ears on that one.
• I am offended by all the misinformation, inflammatory language used by supposed people of God, the hipocrasy from the religious and legislative leaders, and all the political grandstanding. May Michael Shiavo's name and reputation be restored someday, and may any of the gods bless his heart for doing the right thing against unbelieveable adversity. That's a stand-up guy, right there.
• In my not-so-humble opinion, no legislative, nor executive, nor judicial body of government belongs in this debate. This is a private matter. Period. I would advocate merciful euthanasia as is legal in the Netherlands, and as we so much more humanely treat our own dogs and cats (people deserve at least as much mercy and dignity).
• To all those who think that Mrs. Shiavo would never have chosen to starve herself to death: Um. Hello? Just what do you think bulimia and anorexia are? Healthy dietary plans? :rolleyes:
• I've ordered the forms for my Living Will, and plan to complete a will in general and finally stop procrastinating. I could be in a horrible car crash on my way home from work today, so if that happens before I get all the papers signed, please... anyone who reads this message board, DO NOT allow me to "live" like that. Plug the plug on my ass, thankyouverymuch. At the very least, this terrible incident has helped thousands of others like me make our decisions official, on the record, and well publicized.

Thank you for that, Terri, may you finally rest in peace.

[noodle]

Mamajama, the last two sentences of your post was almost exactly what I was thinking as I got out of the car after lunch today... and then "I wonder if there will be a thread on the post-mo boards about this."

You read my mind. Are you some kind of prophet or something?

Seriously, and I am desperately trying NOT to get too political here (and these are only opinions, people, feel free not to agree):

• I'm so very relieved she's finally passed. Now, she can come back to haunt her family for allowing footage of herself to be aired globally... in hospice clothes, with that horrible haircut that looks eerily similar to her mother's haircut. Believe you me, I'd be so much more angry about the lack of consideration and sensitivity for my private medical records and dignity than about the pull-the-tube debate. I have no kind words for anyone who chose to air those stills and video. That was garish and despicable on the part of the media (ratings whores).
• I believe the Schindlers' hearts may have been in the right place at one time, but at some point, their inability to let go became pathological. Knowing as we do that Mrs. Shiavo was bulimic, I can only hazard a guess that, because bulimia and anorexia often stem from parental control issues (if not abuse), the Schindlers' recent horrifying behavior is the result of parental guilt. Perhaps their control-freakishness is what caused Mrs. Shiavo's condition in the first place. And 15 years after her inital collapse... they still want to fight for control over her food and drink. Here's a good place for the pukey smiley, but that would be in bad taste considering the topic.
• For all the conservative right wing politicking over the sanctity of marriage... that sure went out the window when one husband's gut-wrenching, court-supported decision flew in the face of what these media-whore parents wanted. Since when do your parents still have "parental rights" long after you're married? They want Congress and the Bushes to, what, violate the sanctity of the marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Shiavo. Huh? Adam marrying Steve would be more destructive to the institution of marriage than the freaking Supreme Court and Jeb Bush overriding the court order to remove the tube in what way? I'm all ears on that one.
• I am offended by all the misinformation, inflammatory language used by supposed people of God, the hipocrasy from the religious and legislative leaders, and all the political grandstanding. May Michael Shiavo's name and reputation be restored someday, and may any of the gods bless his heart for doing the right thing against unbelieveable adversity. That's a stand-up guy, right there.
• In my not-so-humble opinion, no legislative, nor executive, nor judicial body of government belongs in this debate. This is a private matter. Period. I would advocate merciful euthanasia as is legal in the Netherlands, and as we so much more humanely treat our own dogs and cats (people deserve at least as much mercy and dignity).
• To all those who think that Mrs. Shiavo would never have chosen to starve herself to death: Um. Hello? Just what do you think bulimia and anorexia are? Healthy dietary plans? :rolleyes:
• I've ordered the forms for my Living Will, and plan to complete a will in general and finally stop procrastinating. I could be in a horrible car crash on my way home from work today, so if that happens before I get all the papers signed, please... anyone who reads this message board, DO NOT allow me to "live" like that. Plug the plug on my ass, thankyouverymuch. At the very least, this terrible incident has helped thousands of others like me make our decisions official, on the record, and well publicized.

Thank you for that, Terri, may you finally rest in peace.

Whoa...you are so incredibly eloquent, Dogzilla, and I couldn't agree with you more. I always love your posts. My husband and I finally pulled together our wills and medical directives about 8 years ago, after years of procrastination. Maybe we should post that link where folks can fill out advanced directives? Would that be appropriate for this site, and does anybody know it? I've seen it on TV several times. Anyway, I was glad to re-read my parents' directives, and to see that they have asked for no intervention if they are in a persistent vegetative state. Even my Bush-loving, Fox Channel-watching, Rush Limbaugh-loving mother-in-law has shaken her head over the Shiavo case. She is disgusted with the government involvement and has been supportive of Michael Shiavo discontinuing the feeding tube.

mamajama

[peter_mary]

I am wondering what your thoughts might be on her death this morning?

I, for one, am grateful for her passing.
If these right-to-lifers think things are so wonderful in the hereafter, why is dying such a bad thing? Isn't she in a "better place?"

mamajama

mamajama,

Now I know why you and I had the same scores on those silly religion test-thingys we did a while ago!

My most saliant thought on this issue is the same as your closing remark...if returning to the full embrace of God is the most beautiful hope you have in your life, then what is so damn frightening about death? Christianity in general has one of the most enticing and hope-filled visions (with the exception of all the judgement stuff...ick) of life after death, and yet they seem the most afraid of it. Let her go...it's okay.

I grieve for her family, who lost their daughter this morning. They've had 15 years of experiencing a dying daughter, something that no one asks for. But like you, I'm grateful that it's over now. I don't believe there even was a "Terri Shiavo" for the past 15 years, just the bio-mass that her mind and consciousness once participated with. The "person" died years ago. Her body was finally unplugged and allowed to cease on it's own.

I think the crime here is that as a country, it made more sense to let her slowly starve to death over the course of two weeks, rather than be honest about the fact that we are "causing" her death, and actually euthanize her. Is it somehow less "killing" if we kill her by NOT doing something than it is if we kill her by DOING something? I don't think so...

I'm grateful that her husband has a chance to move on with his life.

I'm grateful Congress and the Bushes can back to their jobs, instead of monkeying around in a politically loaded issue in which they had no legitimate business. I believe that this was in fact mostly about political wrangling, with the GOP trying to lay claim to being the party that "Values Every Life," and adding to the "moral mandate" they claim they received in the last election. It makes me sick to think that they would use this woman and her family to such a political end.

I'm grateful that our courts seemed to be in working order on this issue.

Most of all, I'm grateful that my own daughters are not on life support...

Peter_Mary

[dogzilla]

Maybe we should post that link where folks can fill out advanced directives? Would that be appropriate for this site, and does anybody know it?
mamajama

Thanks for your kind words. I'm not sure if I care too much about the appropriateness of posting the link. If Silverfox decides this is not cool, she's welcome to delete or edit this post.

I choose this venue because the organization is based here, in my town: http://www.agingwithdignity.org/

You can order the forms for $5. There are other ways to accomplish the same thing for free. You could get a tattoo on your chest, for example. "DNR"

For the record, I have discussed this issue with all of my family members. We are all in agreement -- and my mom is an RN in a nursing home -- that none of us would want extraordinary measures if there is no hope for recovery. Funny: My TBM dad claims to be too cheap to visit a lawyer. He's instructed me to just walk behind his hospital bed, should he ever be in the position, and trip over the power cord to the life support machines. :eek:

My dad cracks me up. But he knows I'll do it, if I'm sure that's what he wants.

(Of course now I can't because this post will be an exhibit at my murder trial.)

[bigeddy]

As I read this thread I was whisked back to my drive to work this morning. I heard something that was so typical of the type thinking that goes on. (the type that Paul referred to that would allow us to feel merciful by starving someone to death but make us look at ourselves as murderers if we euthanize someone. What incredible BS)

Anyway, a caller on a morning talk show states something very much like this:

"I am so angry that nothing could have been done to save Terri's life. But I am happy for her. She is much better off and can finally feel happy and free of a body that was no longer functioning."

I drove along with my mouth open. How stupid can people be and not see it?

Ed

[noodle]

Peter_Mary - I'm not surprized that we are thinking alike here... :D

Twelve years ago, my husband's brother was diagnosed with probable terminal cancer. He was quite debilitated at the time of diagnosis, having lost lots of weight. He agreed to having a feeding tube placed in hopes that his health could be boosted, and he could tolerate surgery. He moved in with us (his family too) while he underwent treatment. Both my husband and I are medical folks, so it made sense. He only lasted about 4 months. Interestingly, I would often find that he had turned the machine off that pumped in the liquid feeding. He said that he felt no hunger, and I believe that he was hastening what he knew to be the inevitable - his demise. I must say that his passing was not overwhelmingly sad. We grieved in the months prior to his passing. His death came as a relief. Of course it would have been wonderful if he could have lived and been the great friend, brother, husband, and father of four that he was. Unfortunately, we weren't given that choice. Talk about "vertical growth!" We all got a taste of that!

Anyway, I wish the Shiavos and Schindlers healing and comfort in this difficult time.

[nate]

Thanks for your kind words. I'm not sure if I care too much about the appropriateness of posting the link. If Silverfox decides this is not cool, she's welcome to delete or edit this post.

I choose this venue because the organization is based here, in my town: http://www.agingwithdignity.org/



This has also caused my wife and I to sit and talk about this and begin filling out the appropriate legal paperwork, especially after a recent discussion on the topic with my Mother-In-Law. She was going on and on about how Michael is a sleeze ball and how Teri is coherent, which is an opinion that she is entitled to (note "opinion", as all the facts in this case point to a different conclusion). I told her that if Micaela (my wife) were in that position, that I would definitely pull the plug/tube, as she would wish. My MIL's response frightened me: "Well, you better get put it in writing, cause I won't".

So...without further ado, if you are interested in starting the process, I would begin here, at the American Bar Association:

http://www.abanet.org/aging/toolkit/

Then take the next step and go here, the US Living Will Registry:

http://www.uslivingwillregistry.com/forms.shtm

May you all prevent a circus like this from happening with your families.
Nate

[elder_nomo]

i heard an interesting piece on the news this morning, talking about how this was not a strictly conservative vs liberal issue. some of the more "small-gov't states-rights" gop-ers were on the husband's side. and who could be to the left of jesse jackson, who was on the parents' side?

i am pretty much a lefty myself, and in favor of the right to die with dignity. but i found myself conflicted about ms. schaivo's case. the argument that troubled me most was that removing a ventilator, a machine, is one thing, while willfully withholding nourishment is something else.

in the end, though, i came to the conclusion that air is just as basic as food, and people should be allowed to decide whether they want either to be delivered artificially, no matter the mechanism.

[miss taken]

aargh, I think, having seen my pops die of cancer and my hubbies twin brother, that they had the right to fight.

What worries me about this case, is that there may have been some question (in our newspapers) that the husband may have had something to do with her accident in the first place. As a parent, this would utterly plague me.

I worked a lot with severely mentally handicapped children, and have heard many a person say that they serve no useful purpose in life. I think that what makes us human is that we care for those who animals would reject.

In the UK at the moment they are talking now of aborting a baby if it has a cleft lip. I find this deeply disturbing.

From the UK papers, this case was not all black and white. Who are we to judge a quality of life? I dunno.
I would have been happier had they given her the right to life, but then I am sure I do not have all the facts, so difficult to judge.

Mary

[dogzilla]

i heard an interesting piece on the news this morning, talking about how this was not a strictly conservative vs liberal issue. some of the more "small-gov't states-rights" gop-ers were on the husband's side. and who could be to the left of jesse jackson, who was on the parents' side?

i am pretty much a lefty myself, and in favor of the right to die with dignity. but i found myself conflicted about ms. schaivo's case. the argument that troubled me most was that removing a ventilator, a machine, is one thing, while willfully withholding nourishment is something else.

in the end, though, i came to the conclusion that air is just as basic as food, and people should be allowed to decide whether they want either to be delivered artificially, no matter the mechanism.


Mrs. Shiavo DID choose, sweetie. She was bulimic. She was willfully witholding nourishment from herself in the first place. She also made it quite well known among her friends and husband that she would not want extraordinary measures taken to prolong her life.

I would like one of the medical folks to come back and let us know, medically, what is the difference between removing the feeding tube and removing a vent? My non-doctor opinion is that the difference is only in the speed of the results.

I would also make the point that this woman had virtually no cerebral cortex left. Most of her higher-functioning brain had been reabsorbed by her body and replaced with spinal fluid. She was unable to see, feel pain or discomfort, speak or communicate. Since the body cannot re-grow brain cells, there was never any hope of successful therapy. I think those with concerns could stand to educate themselves about the medicine in this case. Could really be enlightening.

[miss taken]

Mrs. Shiavo DID choose, sweetie. She was bulimic. She was willfully witholding nourishment from herself in the first place. She also made it quite well known among her friends and husband that she would not want extraordinary measures taken to prolong her life.

I would like one of the medical folks to come back and let us know, medically, what is the difference between removing the feeding tube and removing a vent? My non-doctor opinion is that the difference is only in the speed of the results.

I would also make the point that this woman had virtually no cerebral cortex left. Most of her higher-functioning brain had been reabsorbed by her body and replaced with spinal fluid. She was unable to see, feel pain or discomfort, speak or communicate. Since the body cannot re-grow brain cells, there was never any hope of successful therapy. I think those with concerns could stand to educate themselves about the medicine in this case. Could really be enlightening.


But who judges? Who judges whether someone has enough quality of life to allow them to live. The mentally handicapped children I worked with do not have OUR quality of life, some could neither see, nor hear, nor speak, so should they die??? They will certainly never be able to contribute to society.

I am not saying that the decision in this case was right or wrong, it is just not one that I would have liked to have made.

[elder_nomo]

Mrs. Shiavo DID choose, sweetie.
dogzilla - yes, exactly. that was what i was trying to say. i agree with you!
whether it's food or air or a machine or a tube, it is the same. the patient should decide. not the politicians. not the media. in mrs. schaivo's case, it seems that she made her wishes known and her husband did all he could to carry them out. i admire him for that.

[Born Free]

The following is an extract:

"Is there a point where science and medical technology cease expanding life and begin only to postpone death? Can that point be identified and accepted? Is it not true that this debate would never have arisen a century ago because the choices we can make today were not options for our grandparents? Patients, now kept alive by extraordinary means, would have simply died in the past. When the evangelical minister on CNN said that we should not interfere with 'the natural course of life,' he did not recognize that modern medicine is designed to do just that. If we let nature take its course, the average life expectancy would still be 30 or so years. One cannot have it both ways with any rational consistency. I rejoice in expanded life. I grieve when medicine is used only to postpone death. I do not believe that a breathing cadaver is a living self."

This picks up a theme I was exploring just last night with an ExMo friend, which several have commented upon on this site.

When we cease holding onto 'life' in fear(which much religion encourages), and start embracing that we may only have '3 score years and 10', we can open up the the preciousness of what we have, the gift of good friends and passionate lovers, and be more fully available for living.

To confuse a pulse with life is a travesty.

Daryl

[nate]

But who judges? Who judges whether someone has enough quality of life to allow them to live.

I think that this question is why so many people are conflicted about this case. The problem is, the media is diverting our attention away from the real issue here.

Who judges? That's already an established rule: First, the person in question. Plain and simple. Michael showed the courts that she had, while able, judged for herself and decided that she would not want an artificial life. Since Michael is her husband, through the sanctity of marraige, he spoke her words for her. Unless someone can prove otherwise, the case is closed. The family could not prove otherwise, so the many different judges in many different courts sided with Michael over and over and over and over again.

Now, if the person in question never talks about it, then it's up to the next closest person to think of what they would've wanted. If married, the spouse. If underage, the legal guardian. If a single adult, then the family (and in that case only, if family members disagreed, I could see the justification for a battle in court).

The question of whether it should be up to Michael or the parents is already answered, and that answer is used EVERY SINGLE DAY. The parents simply would not accept that they had no say, and unfortunately, politicians used that to start a completely unnecessary politically driven media circus!

I feel that the main issue is this: does the Legistlative Branch have the constitutional right to step over the Judicial Branch and reach their slimy hands into a family's private business?

[tf_s_id]

[QUOTE=mamajama]I, for one, am grateful for her passing. I admire her husband for following through with her wishes, despite the threats and pressure from her family, the right-to-lifers, etc.

Michael Schiavo isn't one to be admired; he is a greedy / disgusting prick!

"The Assault on Terri Schiavo Continues
Michael Schiavo won his fight to have his wife killed by dehydration. Now he won't even allow her parents to sit by her side.
by Wesley J. Smith
04/30/2004 9:00:00 AM

WHAT LITTLE Terri Schiavo has left in this life, is being cruelly stripped away. Not only has a judge ordered her to die slowly by dehydration via having her tube-supplied food and water removed, but now, her (estranged) husband and legal guardian Michael Schiavo has completely isolated her from her family. Ever since mysterious "puncture wounds" were supposedly detected on Terri's arm, he has refused to allow Bob and Mary Schindler, Terri's parents, to visit her.

For those who may not recall the controversy, Terri is the profoundly cognitively disabled woman who is the subject of a bitter right-to-live case in Clearwater, Florida. Michael remains in dictatorial charge of her care, even though he long ago abandoned his marriage by living with another woman and siring two children by her. He wants Terri dead (he says that is what she would want), while her parents only want to care for her properly for the rest of their lives.

Michael's behavior toward Terri has been utterly despicable for the last decade. After she collapsed in 1990, he sued for medical malpractice on her behalf. During the trial, he presented himself to the jury as a dedicated and loving husband--even though he had been romancing other women since shortly after the time of Terri's collapse and brain injury. He told the jury he would care for Terri for the rest of her life, which an expert testified would be a normal life span, and that as part of this loving devotion, he would provide
her with regular medical tests and appropriate rehabilitation with the money the jury awarded.

Terri received about $750,000 in early 1993, and Michael about $300,000 for loss of her companionship. As soon as Terri's money was safely in the bank, Michael put her two cats to sleep. He then melted down her wedding and engagement rings to make a ring for himself. Medical records indicate that Terri went for years without having her teeth cleaned, as an apparent consequence of which, she recently had five teeth extracted.

And, he wanted his wife dead. Within a year of the verdict, he refused to allow doctors to treat her with antibiotics to treat a serious infection, claiming that Terri would not want to live in her disabled condition--a point he somehow forgot to mention to the malpractice jury. Not coincidentally, had she died, he would have inherited her $700,000. Terri's parents sued to mandate care, and their relationship with Michael was forever poisoned.

Thereafter, medical records indicate, Terri had none of the medical testing Michael told the malpractice jury he would provide her, and apparently she received no rehabilitation. Indeed, nurses who cared for her in the mid-1990s filed sworn affidavits claiming that Michael repeatedly refused doctor recommendations that Terri be provided therapy.

As bad as Michael has been, in many ways, the performance of Judge George W. Greer of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, the jurist who oversees Terri's case, has been even worse. Over the years Greer has repeatedly allowed Michael to shirk his legal mandate as guardian to file annual prospective "guardianship plans," specifying his proposal for providing for Terri's medical and social needs for the coming year.

The Florida legislature considered annual court approval of the guardianship plan so crucial to the proper protection of the incapacitated, that the law explicitly states that the "court must review" a new plan each year to ensure that it "meets the needs of the ward." Moreover--and this is key--the law states, "the [court] approved report constitutes authority for the guardian to act in the forthcoming year. The powers of the guardian are limited by the terms of the report." [emphasis added] In other words, without an approved plan, the guardian is without legal power to act on behalf of the ward.

Yet there has been no court-approved plan for Terri's care in effect since July 1, 2001. Under the law, Greer should have hauled Michael into court to explain why he has failed to file a plan for court approval. Instead, Greer granted each of Michael's repeated (and often tardy) requests for extra time to file his plans. Meaning Judge Greer has permitted Michael to act as guardian of Terri for nearly three years without a guardianship plan in effect, even though under Florida law, this means that Michael has no legal authority over her.

The Schindler's attorney, Pat Anderson, frustrated by the many legal irregularities in the case, has now filed a crucial motion challenging Michael's authority to isolate Terri from her parents, based on his lack of legal authority in light of the absence of a court approved guardianship plan. This should be a slam-dunk. Unfortunately, Greer--the very judge who has
repeatedly permitted Michael to shirk his legal duty--will decide the matter. It is hard to believe he will sanction Michael for failing to take legally mandatory actions that he gave permission to skip.

Judge Greer's performance has been so deficient that he should be removed from the case forthwith, if not impeached. Michael Schiavo should be given a size-14 boot out as Terri's legal guardian. And, since no one has any current legal authority to make decisions for Terri under Florida law, Governor Jeb Bush should direct Florida's protective services to step in, take custody, and sort the entire mess out.

This entire travesty must come to an end. Not only is the life of a helpless human being at stake, but so too are the rule of law and the application of ordered justice."

[peter_mary]

In the spirit of "stories" that flotsam talked about in the thread on Martha Beck's book, it occurs to me that the Shiavo case is exactly the kind of story that he was speaking about. This last post by ts_f_id is exactly the kind of thing we were talking about over there. The writer of this column is clearly seeing the situation from a radically different perspective, one that is informed (perhaps) in ways that are different from me, and thus revealing different things about the teller of this story than what I would reveal about myself if I told the story.

ts_f_id, what I would be interested in hearing is how this story affects you. How does this inform your life? It sounds like you might have strong feelings about it, and there's something that resonates differently for you than for others of us...which is great! What is it about Terri Shiavo, or Michael, or her parents, or the whole thing, that makes YOU animated?

You know, if you want to...

Peter_Mary

[miss taken]

[QUOTE=mamajama]I, for one, am grateful for her passing. I admire her husband for following through with her wishes, despite the threats and pressure from her family, the right-to-lifers, etc.

Michael Schiavo isn't one to be admired; he is a greedy / disgusting prick!

"The Assault on Terri Schiavo Continues
Michael Schiavo won his fight to have his wife killed by dehydration. Now he won't even allow her parents to sit by her side.
by Wesley J. Smith
04/30/2004 9:00:00 AM

WHAT LITTLE Terri Schiavo has left in this life, is being cruelly stripped away. Not only has a judge ordered her to die slowly by dehydration via having her tube-supplied food and water removed, but now, her (estranged) husband and legal guardian Michael Schiavo has completely isolated her from her family. Ever since mysterious "puncture wounds" were supposedly detected on Terri's arm, he has refused to allow Bob and Mary Schindler, Terri's parents, to visit her.

For those who may not recall the controversy, Terri is the profoundly cognitively disabled woman who is the subject of a bitter right-to-live case in Clearwater, Florida. Michael remains in dictatorial charge of her care, even though he long ago abandoned his marriage by living with another woman and siring two children by her. He wants Terri dead (he says that is what she would want), while her parents only want to care for her properly for the rest of their lives.

Michael's behavior toward Terri has been utterly despicable for the last decade. After she collapsed in 1990, he sued for medical malpractice on her behalf. During the trial, he presented himself to the jury as a dedicated and loving husband--even though he had been romancing other women since shortly after the time of Terri's collapse and brain injury. He told the jury he would care for Terri for the rest of her life, which an expert testified would be a normal life span, and that as part of this loving devotion, he would provide
her with regular medical tests and appropriate rehabilitation with the money the jury awarded.

Terri received about $750,000 in early 1993, and Michael about $300,000 for loss of her companionship. As soon as Terri's money was safely in the bank, Michael put her two cats to sleep. He then melted down her wedding and engagement rings to make a ring for himself. Medical records indicate that Terri went for years without having her teeth cleaned, as an apparent consequence of which, she recently had five teeth extracted.

And, he wanted his wife dead. Within a year of the verdict, he refused to allow doctors to treat her with antibiotics to treat a serious infection, claiming that Terri would not want to live in her disabled condition--a point he somehow forgot to mention to the malpractice jury. Not coincidentally, had she died, he would have inherited her $700,000. Terri's parents sued to mandate care, and their relationship with Michael was forever poisoned.

Thereafter, medical records indicate, Terri had none of the medical testing Michael told the malpractice jury he would provide her, and apparently she received no rehabilitation. Indeed, nurses who cared for her in the mid-1990s filed sworn affidavits claiming that Michael repeatedly refused doctor recommendations that Terri be provided therapy.

As bad as Michael has been, in many ways, the performance of Judge George W. Greer of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, the jurist who oversees Terri's case, has been even worse. Over the years Greer has repeatedly allowed Michael to shirk his legal mandate as guardian to file annual prospective "guardianship plans," specifying his proposal for providing for Terri's medical and social needs for the coming year.

The Florida legislature considered annual court approval of the guardianship plan so crucial to the proper protection of the incapacitated, that the law explicitly states that the "court must review" a new plan each year to ensure that it "meets the needs of the ward." Moreover--and this is key--the law states, "the [court] approved report constitutes authority for the guardian to act in the forthcoming year. The powers of the guardian are limited by the terms of the report." [emphasis added] In other words, without an approved plan, the guardian is without legal power to act on behalf of the ward.

Yet there has been no court-approved plan for Terri's care in effect since July 1, 2001. Under the law, Greer should have hauled Michael into court to explain why he has failed to file a plan for court approval. Instead, Greer granted each of Michael's repeated (and often tardy) requests for extra time to file his plans. Meaning Judge Greer has permitted Michael to act as guardian of Terri for nearly three years without a guardianship plan in effect, even though under Florida law, this means that Michael has no legal authority over her.

The Schindler's attorney, Pat Anderson, frustrated by the many legal irregularities in the case, has now filed a crucial motion challenging Michael's authority to isolate Terri from her parents, based on his lack of legal authority in light of the absence of a court approved guardianship plan. This should be a slam-dunk. Unfortunately, Greer--the very judge who has
repeatedly permitted Michael to shirk his legal duty--will decide the matter. It is hard to believe he will sanction Michael for failing to take legally mandatory actions that he gave permission to skip.

Judge Greer's performance has been so deficient that he should be removed from the case forthwith, if not impeached. Michael Schiavo should be given a size-14 boot out as Terri's legal guardian. And, since no one has any current legal authority to make decisions for Terri under Florida law, Governor Jeb Bush should direct Florida's protective services to step in, take custody, and sort the entire mess out.

This entire travesty must come to an end. Not only is the life of a helpless human being at stake, but so too are the rule of law and the application of ordered justice."


This is the picture of the husband that we have been getting over here in the UK.

I think the issue is (maybe) that the decision should be made by someone that truly loves her, not a judge, but someone who really loves her, I think the difficulty in this case is that there is an issue about whether the husband is making a decision (which may well be the right one anyway) based on his altruistic love for her, or based on a desire to profit financially, (and I have seen instances of greed in my own neighbourhood to know it is an extremely powerful force) I think that is why this case makes me ill, whether the decision to let her die is right or wrong.

That's all. No other motives. (no hidden religious agenda)
Mary

[silverfox]

I have mixed emotions regarding this case. On one hand absolutely she should be allowed to die. Legally -absolutely it was her husband's choice. On a legal basis I get it.

I did have issues with her being starved to death. I don't understand why her parting could not have been more humane. I understand they gave her morphine for the pain. But we will never know what she really was capable of feeling. I am not a doctor so I keep my emotions regarding this in check because I don't have all the facts and knowledge regarding her situation.

I also don't understand why her husband didn't make this choice immediately after she was declared brain dead 14 years ago. Why it wasn't until 7 years afterward that it was even mentioned. This may have sparked the high level of emotions with her parents.

But I don't know - I don't know all the facts and I don't want to know. I don't think we are in a position where we CAN know.

I would NOT have wanted to live that way. It wouldn't matter if I could hear or know what was going on - I would be of no use to anyone. I would be pissed if my husband allowed me to live like that for SEVEN years and THEN decided enough was enough. And then I would be pissed at my parents (if I had any) for dragging it through court like that. Either way, I hope Teri gives them all hell if there is a life after this.

But that's me. Not her. I send best wishes to her family and her husband. Either way, it must be very emotional and challenging.

[dogzilla]

I'm really starting to dislike the drive-by posters who post something inflammatory and then don't come back to debate or support their positions.

I, too, was unconvinced of Michael Shiavo's motives until I read the blogs on this site: http://abstractappeal.com/.

And then I realized this guy went way above and beyond the call of husbandly duty about 10 years ago and he's never given up. And the fact that Terri lived 15 years after her initial collapse speaks to the outstanding care he made sure she got. There's no money left from the medical malpractice suit and anyone who thinks there's a fortune to be had hasn't hired an attorney lately AND doesn't know how hospice care works. The man has been painted as a demon and just from what I've read in the court records (abstracts found in the link above) it's obvious he loves her. Present tense.

People, please educate yourselves and if you're going to post unsubstantiated glurge, at least give us the source references so we can corroborate or dispute your information intelligently.

[miss taken]

I'm really starting to dislike the drive-by posters who post something inflammatory and then don't come back to debate or support their positions.

I, too, was unconvinced of Michael Shiavo's motives until I read the blogs on this site: http://abstractappeal.com/.

And then I realized this guy went way above and beyond the call of husbandly duty about 10 years ago and he's never given up. And the fact that Terri lived 15 years after her initial collapse speaks to the outstanding care he made sure she got. There's no money left from the medical malpractice suit and anyone who thinks there's a fortune to be had hasn't hired an attorney lately AND doesn't know how hospice care works. The man has been painted as a demon and just from what I've read in the court records (abstracts found in the link above) it's obvious he loves her. Present tense.

People, please educate yourselves and if you're going to post unsubstantiated glurge, at least give us the source references so we can corroborate or dispute your information intelligently.

Good link Dogzilla. Thanks
Mary

[jmkm]

I think it is so ironic that the people who are so vehemently against a persons right to choose, are the least likely to want to spend additional tax dollars to help disabled people. Is the conservative right wing out adopting aids infected crack babies, or donating their time and money to places to care for the mentally disabled? Wouldn’t their time be better spent volunteering like that instead of weeping on the lawn of that hospice? The picture on the front of our newspaper this morning disgusted me. I can’t believe I voted for BUSH. What was I thinking? I’m disgusted with myself! I am a conservative person, but this is pushing me over the edge. My son said, “They’re starving her to death? Why don’t they just put her to sleep?” I agree.

[formermormon]

I think there is an amazing amount of misinformation in this case. I wanted to point a few things out:

1. Many, many courts (with judges appointed by Repubs and Dems) have reviewed this case - with all of the medical and legal evidence. Every time, with all of that information, they have come down on the side of the husband.

2. According to medical experts, withdrawing food and water are actually relatively painless ways to die - quite peaceful even for people who do have a functioning brain.

3. Terry Shaivo was essentially brain dead. Her brain waves were absolutely flat. All of the sites of higher functioning - memory, emotion, thinking - were completely gone and essentially replaced with fluid. Therefore, she could never have recovered and she couldn't feel any pain, even if there would have been any.


OK, here's the opinion part: Terri essentially died 15 years ago. Keeping her body functioning wasn't about her - it was about the needs of the people around her.

If people truly believe in God's will - maybe God called her home 15 years ago, and her parents were obstructing his intention all this time.

Oh, and did you all read about how Terri's parents actually sold the list of donors to her "cause" to a conservative direct mail marketer? They made money off of this thing - making the deal just a few days before her death! Talk about ick factor!

This whole thing is sad - it should be private, but if there is a conflict about custody, then the courts are the place for the decision. It violates the most basic of our constitutional principles to try and circumvent that. It's just naked political opportunism. And here Tom Delay actually decided to let his father go after he suffered serious injury. The hypocricy!

[nikki]

I am no Michael Schavio defender.

I had the occassion to have bit of a converstaion with Author Caplan, who wrote an article stating, because the argument against gay marriage was due to 'sanctity of marriage' between man and woman, Terri should die not because he believed feeding tubes should be removed from people, but because Michael wanted her to die, being her husband and all.

In our converstation Mr. Caplan described Michael as an 'unwilling adulter". Forgive me for laughing, but no one is a 'unwlling adulter' for as long as Michael has been. :rolleyes:

This case is about money. Michael stopped all and any medical rehabilitative treatment for Terri as soon as he collected over 750,000. dollars for Terri and over 300, 000 dollars for himself due to the lost of use of his wife. Michael also in the early days of Terri being move to the hospice began a relationship with the head nurse there. His current attorney was on the board of the hospice, but stepped down a few years later, to advoid people knowing of his conflict.

Michael is employed as a nurse at the county jail, in the same county as Judge Greer. By the way, there was female nurse who worked there who was stabbed to death by her husband, when Judge Greer refused her a protective order. Sheriff Rice (same county) refused to investigate Michael for abuse.

As it has been brought up by others, Terri was in a hospice for how many years? 12 or 15 years. Hospices are for terminal illness for about a 6 month stay.

There are issues in this case. It has nothing to do with gay marriage, or arguments against it, or anything to do with the sanctity of marriage. It has to do with conflict of interest with guardianship. IMHO

When money is involved people have away of not minding who they hurt or take advantage of. It is all justified in their minds. Or, they could just be amoral and not care about anyone but them.

Michael and his attorney have a book to be published. Oh, those books, and what people are willing to do to others.

Since Terri was in the hospice Michael had a PPO issued against him from a former girl friend. There are alot of questions to him.

Let's be honest about people, for many money is eveything, people are to be used and exploited for it some think. I would say these are amoral people, but they may think it right.

Now for euthanasia, yes there is a movement for euthanasia a foot. Maybe one should learn a little history again. In the 19th century there was a movement called eugentics. It was a common thought thoughout the medical and scientific field in the 1900's . Anyone who lived in that era who was educated, a thinker of their times would have leaned toward eugentic thought. Eugentics was the forerunner of the holocost, it laid the foundation for horrible human treatment which followed in the 30' and 40's. Began on the German people, but it moved to other expendable groups.

For Terri, this case is very sad, and just another explotation of woman who has not been able to defend herself. Hope Michael chokes on his money. I won't be buying his book, and from what I hear alot of other's won't be either.

The public doesn't ususally like it when they learn someone was allowed to be abused so someone else could profit.

In my most humble opinion.

Anger is the first step towards recovery. The first step towards stopping people from abusing. There are many angry about this issue. Any counselor worth their salt, knows people must have the ability to be angry to remove themselve from an abusive explotative relationship.

[cactus jack]

Hmmm. I have worked with people that have a variety of disabilities among them head injuries. So reflecting on both my experieneces and what I know about Terri's case I have to say it was murder.

1. She had a medical injury that doctors diagnosed as malnutrition (lakck of pottassium, IIRC) but had no medical tests to validate that.

2. She had a head injury because of this, but no tests were done to verify the extent of the damage done.

3. Starvation cannot in any way be considered an ethical OR moral way to die. ->If so then explain how a rancher IN FLORIDA is being charged with cruelty to animals when he didn't feed them. Why are they different? Because they're animals? If so, then why was Terry given morphine?

4. How can a jusge that doesn't have the authority to give a capital criminal the death penalty give it to an innocent woman?

Toomuch of this sounds so much like the stuff Hitler did. he killed off the cripples. Then the retarded. Then this group and then that group.

There is so much here that's just plain wrong.

I'm happy for her that she's no longer suffereing. But I strongly feel that she was not as bad off as her husbands friends said.

[dogzilla]

Hmmm. I have worked with people that have a variety of disabilities among them head injuries. So reflecting on both my experieneces and what I know about Terri's case I have to say it was murder.

1. She had a medical injury that doctors diagnosed as malnutrition (lakck of pottassium, IIRC) but had no medical tests to validate that.
Prove it. Do you have her medical records on hand to verify what tests she had? Any blood work would reveal her potassium levels.

2. She had a head injury because of this, but no tests were done to verify the extent of the damage done.
What the hell are you talking about? Even I saw her CT on CNN: she had no cerebral cortex. It was replaced with spinal fluid years ago. The cerebral cortex controls the ability to think, speak, feel emotion, feel pain, communicate, understand language -- all the things that make humans human.
Furthermore, you still ignored my link on the previous page which explains in great detail exactly what medical procedures were done, what test results concluded and so forth. You obviously didn't read any of it.

3. Starvation cannot in any way be considered an ethical OR moral way to die. ->If so then explain how a rancher IN FLORIDA is being charged with cruelty to animals when he didn't feed them. Why are they different? Because they're animals? If so, then why was Terry given morphine?
The hospice doctor stated this very clearly: it's a comfort measure, designed to comfort the family moreso than the patient. Terry felt no pain because she was in a persistent vegetative state. The pain centers in her brain no longer existed. Morphine administration is a standard of care practiced in hospice for the sole purpose of making sure the family KNOWS the patient is not in any pain at all.

4. How can a jusge that doesn't have the authority to give a capital criminal the death penalty give it to an innocent woman?
You have no idea what you're talking about. Please see the link on page one of this thread, read the blogs thoroughly, and then come back and criticize the judge's decisions with a fully informed point of view.

Toomuch of this sounds so much like the stuff Hitler did. he killed off the cripples. Then the retarded. Then this group and then that group.

Now, that's just plain ridiculous.

There is so much here that's just plain wrong.

I'm happy for her that she's no longer suffereing. But I strongly feel that she was not as bad off as her husbands friends said.

Again, you don't trust doctors, as you've said in another post, you have not attended medical school and I realize you probably could not read a CT if it was placed right in front of you. So I don't expect you to understand the implications inherent in "she had no cerebral cortex left." You're just going to have to choose to remain uninformed and ignorant of the facts of the case. I feel sorry for you if you have the facts available to you, links have been posted for your benefit and you refuse to read the information and inform yourself. No wonder you got conned into joining the church: clearly, you'll believe anything without substantiation.

[cactus jack]

Dogzilla, all I did is state my opinion. I never said you had to agree.

If you disagree, that's just fine. But I see no reason for you to go on attack mode. Maybe you don't see what you said as an attack, but it sure seems like it to me.

[miss taken]

I don't know why, but other than when Tom posted, this issue brought out some of the strongest emotions I would say on the board. Difficult issue. I erred and still do on the side of caution (having worked with severely and moderately mentally handicapped children).

Mary

[cactus jack]

Mary and Dog, remember that DUI I told you guys of in my "Hiya" post? For a week I was where Terri was. My Glasgow coma score was a 5 for several days. When I saw that happen to Terri, I saw it happen to myself. It could have, but it didn't.

[miss taken]

Mary and Dog, remember that DUI I told you guys of in my "Hiya" post? For a week I was where Terri was. My Glasgow coma score was a 5 for several days. When I saw that happen to Terri, I saw it happen to myself. It could have, but it didn't.

Cactus Jack, I havn't come across your hiya post, will go look now..

...

Sorry to hear about your mum. Is she okay now. My hubbies twin had a glio blastoma stage 4. Probably slow growing for years. It did affect everything, cognitive abilities, reasoning, memory, movement.

Were they able to help your mum???

What is a Glasgow Coma score?? I have never heard of it???
Mary

[noodle]

Just as we saw in Florida, this is an extremely heated issue, even here on PM. The brain is an extremely complex organ. One type of brain injury is not equal to another. A coma is very different from a persistent vegetative state. I'm sure that in the early stages of her illness - particularly when she was hospitalized - she had blood work completed numerous times. This would have included checks of her potassium levels, which is standard in a routine chemistry panel. You can be sure that if you've ever had blood drawn, your potassium level was measured.

Bottom line for me was this: I truly believe (my opinion) that she was not having her wishes met by being kept alive via feeding tube. To me, that is incredibly cruel. And I resented the fact that congress and Bush got involved. It was not their place. It's funny how they dropped it like a hot potato when public sentiment came out against them. That, to me, beautifully illustrated the hypocrisy of the current administration.

In my job, I deal with these end-of-life questions each week. Since the Terri Schaivo case, I have NOT ONCE (and this is here in Utard), had somebody bash the decision to pull her feeding tube. Most have been angry at the government's involvement, and most have declared that their family had better not keep them alive in such a state. I've reminded them to get it in writing, for what it's worth.

mamajama

[dogzilla]

Sorry, I didn't meant to go into attack mode. I get a little annoyed when I've gone to the trouble to search out and post a link that contains corroborated, true facts and then someone doesn't bother to inform their own opinion and posts assumptions that are based on misinformation or outright lies.

It's the reporter in me: I want you all to have the truth in your hands... even if I have to CRAM IT DOWN YOUR THROAT!

LOL.

I'll back off now. We don't have to agree at all. But I'd still like to politely and nicely request, with all due respect, that you check out the link I posted on page 1, read the blogs and then come back and let me know if any of that information changed any of your opinions. I will keep in mind that you do not trust doctors and, therefore, you probably don't believe a word they say after 10 years of education and however many years of experience in medicine.

[Born Free]

Sorry, I didn't meant to go into attack mode. I get a little annoyed when I've gone to the trouble to search out and post a link that contains corroborated, true facts and then someone doesn't bother to inform their own opinion and posts assumptions that are based on misinformation or outright lies.

It's the reporter in me: I want you all to have the truth in your hands... even if I have to CRAM IT DOWN YOUR THROAT!

LOL.

I will keep in mind that you do not trust doctors and, therefore, you probably don't believe a word they say after 10 years of education and however many years of experience in medicine.

One of the things that fascinated me about this case, was all the people who sudddenly became medical experts. Now I am the first to believe that no one should fall about in uncritical awe of every word that is uttered by the medical establishment, but, in matters as serious as this case, who else should make the decisions?

Car mechanics?
Pastry cooks?
Librarians, or check-out chicks?
Politicians, maybe?

As I saw this public discourse in the US, the most vocal critic showed by his unbridled attacks on the legal system that he did not even understand the separations between the political and legal processes - presumably an area that should have been in his expertise, so why did he figure he was entitled or competent to make the outrageous statements or judgement calls he did regarding medical expertise.

As Spong remarked in one of his columns, 50 years ago, or certainly 100, this woman would have died long ago from natural causes. Her bodily life was prolonged by medical intervention, not by God. So by what logic does one conclude that the withdrawal of a process that is intervening with natures course (ie to death), is murderous? To my mind there is a chasm a mile wide separating eugenics (active culling) from making a quality-of-life decision regarding withdrawing medical resources that by all expert opinion appeared to be about keeping blood circulating through a body, with no possibility of recovery.

What have I missed in the evolution of this line of reasoning? Or is this just unbridled, emotional processing, in which an attempt to adhere to logic is seen as a encumberance?

Daryl

[noodle]

As Spong remarked in one of his columns, 50 years ago, or certainly 100, this woman would have died long ago from natural causes. Her bodily life was prolonged by medical intervention, not by God. So by what logic does one conclude that the withdrawal of a process that is intervening with natures course (ie to death), is murderous?

Daryl

Amen, Bro Daryl. And I would like to restate the comment that I made at the beginning of this thread:

If the right-to-lifers think things are so wonderful in the hereafter, why is dying such a bad thing? Isn't she in a "better place?"

[dogzilla]

What have I missed in the evolution of this line of reasoning? Or is this just unbridled, emotional processing, in which an attempt to adhere to logic is seen as a encumberance?

Daryl

I'll take door number two, Monty!

(I hope there isn't a goat back there...)





Seriously, if some of the posters just in this thread would have armed themselves with facts, we wouldn't be having a debate at all. IMHO