You are utterly guessing about what Davis was saying. Do you honestly think he would be making mocking comments about her before the press conference and get away with it? A judicial bench out of control? They have to follow what the husband says as her caregiver. This thing has been through a LOT of courts, and you can't tell me these judges are all insane. They are following the law as closely as they can, and so far most have come to the same conclusion. If it does get overturned or a law made, it will be strictly on emotion, and probably not law, which is too bad. That being said, it's fine with me if she stays alive. If you think she wants to be in a "persistent vegetative state" for another 20 or 30 years, fine, maybe she will get to live *that* dream, but DO NOT pretend that you know that this is what she wants.
"Do you honestly think he would be making mocking comments about her before the press conference and get away with it?"
Unfortunately, yes. Sadly enough, it wouldn't surprise me at all.
However, we don't know what he said, so it's not even worth getting into... UNLESS it comes out.
Other than that, I'm still not getting involved in this one.
(PS - Sparkly, the picture is still in process... proving somewhat more difficult than I thought)
It's also possible that Davis is an intelligent man who has real concerns about the bill. I often notice that conservatives who talk states rights immediately change their tune when things don't go their way.
What if a state judge ruled that a 16yo girl couldn't have an abortion without parental consent, & Congressional Democrats tried to pass a bill steering that ruling to a federal judge? Wouldn't you call that interference & a dangerous precedent?
To be fair, perhaps you should mention the Republican memo that was circulated encouraging using Schiavo as a political point-scorer.
Don't get me wrong - I think a lot of Democrats are all about votes too, but the Republicans certainly aren't Jesus walkin' on the water.
Erik, no I don't think he was making mocking comments about her. I am sure he was making mocking comments about the Republicans. I just didn't like how it was funny funny right before talking about a serious and tragic event. It just wasn't the time to be joking around about ANYTHING.
I certainly don't think all Republicans are angels either, this just ticked me off.
Jeff, it isn't about state rights to me. It is about the right to live. Not to starve someone. How many times must I say it? When there is doubt, we should come down on the side of life. Sometime it is correct for the govt to intervene.
Once again, I am sure if her parents are allowed to take care of her she will probably die soon anyway, but at least in the loving arms of her parents and NOT STARVING. A decision being made by a man who has a life with another woman and children by her. More like an ex-husband than a real one.
This seems like a real tough question. It's easy to put ourselves in just about everybody's position here.
Like a lot of tough questions, this one probably can only be handled by those closest. The rest of us should probably just watch and learn. One rule just doesn't seem to be big enough to fit all the situations. Some day, that could be us.... in either of their positions.
I do believe he was probably making mocking comments about this situation. It brings to mind when Bill Clinton was leaving Ron Brown's funeral and laughing as he left the church and then all of the sudden put a frowny face on when he saw the camera.
This situation has gotten completely out of control. Why will the people that want her dead just put a gun in her mouth and pull the trigger? It would be alot more sensitive than letting her starve to death.
Ironically, just down the road from where Terri is, a man was charged last week with failing to feed his cattle. People
(cont) People
Sparkle, regarding states rights and 'life support - it looks like in Texas it is pretty easy to 'pull the plug'. They just took the breathing tube off and killed this baby:
Houston Chronicle story - baby dies (click here) . . .
The U.S. moves from pre-born death to life-less-than-current-normalacy death. Who's next?
president signs bill into law. Potentially Extremely great news for terri against a terrible judge in florida, but kind of interferes in states rights. but terris life without food would end far before an impeachmet hearing would be be finished.
Liberals are angry as ghenna, as this woman can live and be given medical treatment and possibly recover.
Eric, the babie's situation was completely different though. He was being kept alive by machines. He died almost immediately.
I am not for keeping someone alive by artificial means. But that is not the case with Terri. Food and Water are not artificial or extraordinary.
This whole thing has really taken me by surprise. I am amazed that Congress stepped in, even most of the democrats!
I just saw an 2003 interview with Terri's husband on Larry King Live. I know my feelings about this are coloring my view, but he came across to me as insincere.
Erik, emotion and not law? There was time when it was LAW that blacks were property. Emotions set things in motion to change that law.
So don't knock emotions.
http://snipurl.com/dkay
Yes, it's kinda tasteless (particularly that center square), but a lot of people feel this way...
sadly true.
I have been following Teri's case for awhile. And not only have questions about Teri's "husband", whom may I add has another woman he lives with.
But also the lawyer that is supporting the husband at this time. He is also a board member of the hospice that Teri is in now. As well as a card carrying member of groups like the Hemlock society.
There is more to this case then what most of the media is showing. AS I was a nursing aide, and people like Teri are in tons of nursing homes at this time. If Teri was on life support she would be on more machines then just a feeding tude. As well as there is testamony in which PT therpy has been withheld from her. And people have stated that Teri can swallow jello and some fluids as well.
So I pray that the federal goverment uncovers more of the unanswered questions that are there behind the surface in this case.
At this point, they just need to decide already. Now that I have my own, blog, see link, I think I laid it all out there in as much detail as I can. *sigh*
-Erik
Obviously the American public (religious and non-religious alike) are not fooled by all of the disinformation about this case that is out there perpetuated by the media and left and right wing websites. This abc news poll is fairly comprehensive in figuring out what the public actually feels about this:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/P...d=599622&
page=1
Not surprisingly, no matter which group you look at, the majority of people are in support of removal of the feeding tube. Of course, everyone seems to want to express their opinion on this, even though the only person's opinion who should matter on this is Judge Greer's who has adjudicated this matter for the last decade or so.
It's also odd that Republicans who cry about activist judges that attempt to legislate from the bench are now extremely guilty of doing the opposite... adjudicating from the legislature. And no one seems at all fooled at the reason any of this is happening... political posturing.
Now that IS interesting! I was all for just giving in to the right on this one, assuming that the public backed it, which apparently it does not! Very interesting! No, having a solid majority does not automatically mean the majority is right, but the law is certainly influenced by public opinion.
Also, the Supreme Court has refused this case twice. What more do you want? This more and more seems to be about social conservatives testing their muscle.
Interesting update, listening to O'Reilly, and he is saying that both sides are botching this, and that the doctors should be deciding this, and this coming from a generally conservative Catholic! He says that if her mind is gone and not coming back after 15 years according to all doctors, that keeping her alive is hard to justify. He also implied that the whole "she'll get better with therapy" idea is wishful thinking based on the opinion of every doctor that has evaluated her.
-Erik
Erik, from what I have read, Michael has not let Most of the tests normally done, be done. I haven't even read which doctor diagnosed her. I agree, let several non biased doctors evaluate her. Michael wouldn't let the parents have doctors do that.
I don't care what the majority says or even a doctor. WE DON'T STARVE SOMEONE!!!!!!
I saw a video of her where her mom tells her to look at her and she does and then she tells her to look at another object and Terri turns and looks. That is obvious she hears what her mother says and does it. There is no way to know how much Terri understands. Come on yall. This is just wrong. Even the democrats are on board.
I would say to give her the therapy she was denied and see what happens before making any decisions.
I truly hope that everyone on both sides is willing to stand up for aggressive research to improve her quality of life after she is saved. Embryonic stem cell research? Not necessarily, but definitely some neural stem cells to try and repopulate her brain and give her a better shot at becoming independent.
Quite frankly, having been in a similar situation with my mother, I can understand exactly what Terri's parents and her husband feel about the situation. And everyone who is talking about starving someone has absolutely no idea what this case is actually about. The decision that my family had to face was a private matter, and I don't want to discuss the final outcome, but I will say that if you haven't been through this, you really have no right characterizing the motivations of either side in this case.
Unfortunately, there are an increasing number of people in this country who are having to experience the decisions that this family has had to face. And no one who has had to go through this would wish the national attention or protracted court battle on anyone. That, more than anything is what is to be pitied in this case.
This is a private issue between the family members, and it as been repeatedly resolved in the court system. Anyone who has gone through this understands that federal legislation is the last thing that any family in this position needs.
anonymous--
She's brain dead. She will not recover. There is no treatment for that. Duh.
I guess the sanctity of marriage for you people is arbitrary. Michael Schiavo stated that she would not want to be kept alive under these circumstances. (And do you honestly believe she would?? Would you? Her parents are doing her a disservice here, however well-intentioned they may be.) Whether you believe him or not is moot. The law as it stands now gives him legal authority to speak for her.
I think you are projecting yourself as someone whose brain is working quite well, and imagining how you would feel being starved. This isn't the case here. Her brain activity is not anywhere near normal, nervous function too. A week or two of starving and being unaware of it, or decades of drooling in an irreversible haze. Following an object with your eyes is something that the average insect can do. This is not the stuff of cognition. I wish it wasn't true.
Also, msheathen has a point as well, and while I don't necessarily agree with her belligerence, I think she's right, legally speaking. The Supreme Court even refused to hear this case, TWICE. What more do you want? Now the Republicans bring it up as a partisan issue to try to beat up the Dems with, but guess what, the poll out today indicates that the American public apparently agrees with the Dems. You want to override the current law based on your gut feeling about a person you have never even met before. That is not the basis for sound law.
Ms. Heathen, even her husband and the democrats are not claiming she is brain dead. She is most certainly NOT brain dead.
Like I said Erik, we have had many laws that were unjust. We changed it because of our "gut feeling" that it was wrong.
You have no idea what she would feel starving,nor do you or anyone else know what she can understand. She obviously understands to look where her mother asks her too. For all we know she could understand most of what is being said to her. No doctor has said that is not possible.
Oh, and Ms. Heathen, the sanctity of marriage ends when the husband takes a girlfriend and lives with her and has 2 children by her.
Erik, the vast majority of the democrats were on board with this. So I don't think the public is with them either.
I think the public knows little about this case and thinks, like Ms. Heathen , that she is brain dead. Of course they would say that. We have no problem with pulling the plug on those brain dead. They are indeed dead. They die immediately.
Sanctity of marriage would also mean Michael Schiavo would be celibut--and not schtooping another woman while euthanizing his wife's cats.
Oh, but that's where "sanctity of marriage" not only ends, it never started with most who would suddenly find one of God's ordinances to be oddly holy and noteworthy, when time comes to smother the gimpy wife in the basement.
Tonight on Hannity and Colmes they will have Terri's father and the doctor they had that tested her for 10 hours before Michael threw him out. Let's hear his side and see.
Wow, MsHeathen's back, and as rude and caustic as ever! How refreshing to see that some things never change.
I'm going to dip my webbed foot into this one just slightly. After giving it some thought, I think two things need to happen.
1) They need to put the feeding tube back in at least long enough to...
2) ...test her brain, to see if she IS in a vegetative state, or if there's 'someone home' in there.
If the tests come back negative, well... that answers a lot of questions, doesn't it? If the tests DO come back positive, though, there's absolutly no reason to disconnect her, other than the husband wanting her to expire. The more I read, the more he comes off as just a slimebag... and while I've seen my share of people in Ms. Shavio's condition (18 years of Hospice work'll do that), I've never EVER seen a family member so emphatic that the person must die as him.
Something stinks here, and it ain't my webbed feet.
I noticed that Mort Kondrack, who recently lost his wife to MS was for stopping the feeding tube, but after hearing some of the facts and realizing that she didn't have some necessary tests done to actually see what brain activity is there, he changed his mind and says that should be determined.
Nonetheless, I haven't seen an argument yet against her parents taking her home and caring for her.
I haven't seen an argument yet against her parents taking her home and caring for her.
Apparently you've not listened to the other side ... the courts found Terri herself didn't want to live in this condition.
As to a couple of other points ... she was fully examined by doctors appointed by the courts. These are like special masters who do not work for any of the parties and have no ax to grind, unlike the goofs the parents have brought forth who, much like heart specialist Frist, think they can render diagnoses from a few snippets of video.
BTW --- the courts viewed the entire footage and not a few snippets; a person in a persistent vegetative state has some spontaneous movements such as eyes occasionally responding to external stimuli, but they have no cognitive neurological function or higher cerebral powers. The bill signed into law by Bush in Texas would allow the hospital to pull the plug here regardless what the spouse or parents want.
As to the starving, it is my understanding that patients whose feeding tubes are removed are given intraveneous pain killers. Even if the higher brain functions were intact, there would be no hunger pain.
Erik please do not encourage the people on this comments section to write more. If you want to know what they think, go download the Republican talking points on any issue:
http://rnc.org
Save your time.
RWSparkle- your site still sucks and your commentary is about as insightful and informed as the average FoxNews viewer. Keep up the good work.
By the way, your site looks like a giant cotton candy terd.
Macswain, Come on. The courts based that on the heresay of her husband who didn't mention this particular conversation until 7 YEARS LATER. Now, if he had said that at first, or even a year later, then I might believe him. But since he said it at the time he recieved his settlement AND had a falling out with her parents, I don't believe him. I would hope that mine or your fate would not be decided by what someone "says" you said with no written document.
Curly, you really ought to learn how to spell what you are.
This is the thing. The doctor who examined her for 10 hours was on Hannity tonight and he says the opposite of what you say McSwain. The truth is I don't think any of us know for sure what EXACTLY Terri's condition is or how much she understands. Hannity also had on a patient who was in a similar condition and recovered and she talked about how she could understand everything being said around her even though she couldn't communicate in anyway.
It seems clear to me that tests were not done that should have been. Perhaps they can be done if the judge rules in her favor and she lives. But I really don't care about the different views, I just know that starving a living person is just not right. Period.
Judge Sparkle,
The trial court heard all the evidence including testimony from not just Michael Schiavo but from other of Terri's friends and family regarding Terri's thoughts on the dying process. The Schindlers were also allowed to present all the evidence they felt pertinent. The court - unlike you - was able to judge these witnesses, their credibility and motives first hand. The court held by clear and convincing evidence - the highest standard in most civil cases - that Terri would not have wanted to live in this condition. It is important to note that Michael, to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, divested his guardianship responsibilities regarding this painful decision to the court itself.
A three judge panel at Florida's Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's findings.
Or maybe its Dr. Sparkle ... given your long distance psychoanalysis of Michael Schiavo.
Oddly inconsistent with your smear job of him, the court, in 2001, stated this about Michael: "Many patients in this condition would have been abandoned by friends and family within the first year. Michael has continued to care for her and to visit her all these years. He has never divorced her. He has become a professional respiratory therapist and works in a nearby hospital. As a guardian, he has always attempted to provide optimum treatment for his wife. He has been a diligent watch guard of Theresa's care, never hesitating to annoy the nursing staff in order to assure that she receives the proper treatment."
Oh I see ... your later post suggests that we replace trials by independent fact finders with episodes of Hannity & Colmes. What a brilliant idea!!!
Here's what the Court of Appeals in 2001 noted about Terri's brain condition based on the actual evidence given at trial: "Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid-1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this state for many years."
The Schindlers have been allowed numerous opportunities to present "newly discovered medical evidence" all of which the various courts have found unconvincing.
Of course, we can always just believe that the numerous judges - appointed by Republicans and Democrats - have entered into a massive conspiracy to off Terri.
Well I would hardly call my opinion of Michael "a smear job." I think about the worst thing I said about him was that he seemed insincere and had clearly moved on with his life regarding the woman he lives with and their 2 children.
We could go back and forth on this forever. Her own parents, sister and brother...the people who knew her the best all say she WOULD have wanted to live and they give a very different account of his behavior.
But as I keep saying, it doesn't matter what I think of Michael or what the court thinks. It is wrong imo to starve a living human being. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Sparkle, I saw that same info that MacSwain posted in his last comment. Her cerebral cortex has been largely REPLACED with spinal fluid. There is no "therapy" for this.
Oh, and this doctor, did a little research on him. He seems to be a guy that the right is trotting out to rebut the more than a dozen doctors that have already looked at her and said it is irreversible. "God leaves no one behind" is the mission statement on his site, www.hnionline.com, which is *fine*, but makes me wonder about his *objectivity*. He seems to be the one doctor that believes that liquid can be turned back into brain.
This whole thing is beginning to irritate me more and more. Congress and sanctimonious religious right people trying to keep a vegetative woman alive to prove a political point, and try to insinuate that she is a somewhat cognitive person trapped in a non-functioning body. Medicine doesn't support you, no court has supported you, the law does not support you, the US people don't support you. Stop pretending you know what's best.
Erik, come on. What political point? How does this help Republicans politically. As you said, all the polls show that most Americans seem to think she should die, so I don't think this is a "popular" decision. Please don't give me this "catering to the religious right." Do you think that if congress had not stepped in then we would have NOT voted Republican next time? PLEASE!!!!! If they wanted to cater to us believe me there are other issues they could get us all excited about to work on.
I don't know if this has occurred to you, but maybe they just honestly believe this is wrong and is trying to stop it. Even with politicians that sometimes happens.
How can the right be trotting out this doctor? He examined her years ago with the request of the parents. I hardly think he is poltical. Careful, your starting to sound like a Kos conspirator. (he is the top left wing blogger)
I read that the tests that needed to be done to know about the "fluid" were NOT done. This doctor the Shavio's used is a highly respected neurologist and researcher who has won awards in his field.
Just like us on the right Erik, you need not believe everything you read from the left.
The courts have followed the law which simply says the guardian gets to decide. That is why it goes Michael's way.
As I have proven before, sometimes the law is wrong.
It is still starvation Erik. It bothers me deeply that that does not bother you.
The courts have followed the law which simply says the guardian gets to decide. That is why it goes Michael's way.
That is completely untrue. Michael turned over any right he may have had as guardian regarding this decision to the trial court. Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers were both allowed to present evidence as to Terri's condition and as to what Terri would have wanted. The trial court then decided - based on a clear and convincing evidence standard - that Terri's persistent vegetative state was not reversible and that she would not have wanted to live in this condition.
speak for yourself eric if u had a clue u would know the medical community is divided and that also a doctor who won the nobel prize on this very subject says that she can be helped u go without food for ten days buddy we dont even do that to convicted murderers adn the only persons saying she didnt want to live like t his is her so called hubby and his brother not one of her friends or blood relatives feels that way in ny if u starve a cat u get arrested and i guess u didnt hear the nurse on the news today that said her hubby didnt want help helped at all never did anything to help her they even suspected him of giving her insulin to put her in shock what the next step eric starve every person who is not like u we dont even do that to murderers like scott peterson answer me this why starve her to death why not a quick overdose of drugs i dare u to go without food and water for three days see how it feels then tell us that u would want to die like that she had no pain test to see if she could feels so noone knows what is going on inside her doctors have been wrong before they told me my son would never talk or walk guess what he is 15 and he talks and walks if i had listen to the so called doctors who knows what they would done
RWS, the first reaction is of course "Oh my god she's starving!" Sure, it sounds inhumane until you look deeper at the details. If doctors (all but one), that have seen her are saying that she is feeling no pain, then it *is* just like removing a comatose person from life support. Yes, to us it feels like days. To her? If the doctors are to be believed, it feels like nothing. Does it bother me? Yes, but for different reasons that I have already explained in my own blog.
Putting a person with cognition in her shoes as "ny annie" is doing is not at all a valid argument. That's called projection. Good debaters will not rely on it. By the way, are you allergic to punctuation and spelling out "you"?
As for this other doctor, he did not win a prize for anything as far as I can tell. It says on his site that he was nominated for the Nobel Prize. I could have told you from reading his site how he would feel about Terri. I'm not sure that's a good thing. Kos? I've heard of it, but almost never go there. I try to make my own decisions.
Erik,
I was actually most intrigued by the lack of a "shift" button on ny annie's keyboard.
I would add that my understanding is that Terri is being provided pain killers intravenuously during this process. Thus, even a person with higher brain functions would not feel any pain.
It also seems to me that Sparkle's starvation argument would be more credible if she then supported physician-assisted euthanasia here instead of forcing Terri to live in a condition in which she did not want to live.
I think Annie was upset and just wanted to type out what she thought as fast as she could. Her point about doctors not always being right is a valid one.
I don't want to force Terri to live. I just want her to die naturally. As a person would have 100yrs ago, before medical technology. With loved ones giving her as much sustance as they can.
Why the hell do yall have a problem with that????
Agreed Macswain.
Also, RWS, I know many of these people "genuinely believe", and that's fine. The political points are largely secondary, and they are not aimed at moderates anyway. It's for the "base", as you alluded to. I put another post on my blog about it, but like I said, I'm fast burning out on this topic. It's looking like it will be all over soon. I don't think the Supreme Court is going to touch it, so the only chance for an overturn is in the Appellate Court.
WE have a problem with it because it isn't and shouldn't be the least bit about what YOU want, RWS! It's about how the law reads, and the medical facts. If the federal court overturns it, that's fine, but at least it might have something to do with the law.
There is nothing more that the parents can do to help Terri.....
And having our Government involved is a wholefully wrong direction!! The Gov't. should never be involved in our personal lives...!!
My heart grieves for this family and Terri. It is time for all of us to think about our own lives, and the "what if?" issues.... Please be sure to express and make documentation of your dying wishes, so that your family will not go thru this horrendous heart-break!!!
Right or wrong, Terri is going to die in a few days.....this is so heart-wrentching!!!
Personally... I think her husband Mike, may have been the cause of her current condition!!
Unfortunately, modern medicine and science is " Playing God " with us!! They don't know everything, ( Human Arrogrants!)
It's better to just stop trying to force us to live longer,....with medical proficiency.."Tell the egotisical doctors to stop trying to save hopeless lives, ... to fatten their wallets!!.
I think that her parents should have the final say even though by law her husband does, its not right to kill a women for no reason. They need to give Terri her feeding tube and let her drink. She wouldnt be so ill if sdhe was being feed.If their not going to give her, her feeding tube then they need to go ahead and let her die but not SUFFER like she is doing now!!! If she dies then look at it from the positive side, she want be suffering and she would be in a better place smiling down on everyone. I think she likes everyone being concern about her but she also knows that everyone wants the best for her. But the husband appears to only want the money and then he will be on with a new life. But maybe he does care.......no one will never know but him and God. But if terri is meant to live she will live and if it meant for her to pass then she will, but not because of her parents, herhusband, or the courts, but because it was GODS WILL!(no matter what anyone tries to do or even what they want when it all comes down GOD has the final say)
Commenting by HaloScan
