Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - Comatose Woman's Parents Hope for Legal Help

- Tilted Politics (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/)

- - Comatose Woman's Parents Hope for Legal Help (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/31938-comatose-womans-parents-hope-legal-help.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

the moral thing would be to allow her own flesh and blood to care for her.

where are you getting this morally absolute statement from? You can not prove that this is morally what he should have done. You are making this shit up

"the moral thing to do"?

underneath this repulsive display of television-bourne sanctimoniousness from conservatives is a sequence of incoherent claims.

as usual, one premise comes from character assassination of the husband. republican hatchet men apparently feel that they are in a better position to render judgements about this case than he is. [for the record, i neither know nor care about the details of this guy's life--i dont see how they are relevant to anything beyond buttressing an incoherent collective froth in which the foxnews variant of conservative spins)

the usage of the term morality here makes it clear that for the right, it is a term without content, which they can fill as they like since they have convinced their followers that they control the entire discourse of morality.

but if you do not accept the assumption that the right can declare for itself what is and its not moral, and you look at the arguments, such as they are, it is pretty clear that the morality claims make no sense whatsoever. particularly not from a population that a few months ago was rapidly behind the war in iraq, which has no problem accepting the rationalization of torture, which is mobilized efficiently across the transmission belt system of right ideology to support any and all bushworld initiatives, no matter how insane they might be, no matter their consequences for folk living and yet to be living.

so if the morality argument is basically worth less than the energy it just took to type the phrase "the morality argument" then what is really going on here?

is this whole thing about a symbolic fight in favor of inherited privilege over legal relations?

how can the right on the one hand blab endlessly about the centrality of marriage and then on the other seek to usurp the legal priroity of the relation husband-wife and replace with with parents/children?

is the real argument about the image of the community--one based on hierarchies rooted in birth, in succession, all of which operate in a wholly private domain, as over against legal relations?

in which case, this is not about terry schiavo at all, but is rather some sick theater of republican delusions about the nature of Authority (always either divinely rooted or rooted in birth lines--both private, both not open to question).

it cannot be about health care, really, because the right has nothing coherent to say about it beyond cheerleading for the existing system no matter how incoherent.

it cannot be about "life" because from what i can tell, life is not an issue for terry schiavo.

maybe it is about the possibility of miracles. usually, with such things, the best strategy is to divert attention from real time and write a story about what happened after the fact--that way there are no camera watching and you can say as you like. miracles are easiest to find through ex post facto stories that work the claim to miracle into a starting assumption.

but it appears that after 13 years or so, the rationale of waiting for a miracle has worn pretty thin.

so the question changes:
how long can those who might not or do not believe be kept in a state of suspended pseudo-animation, their desires subordinated to the articles of faith of the christian right?

is that what this is about then? the subordination of legal channels, legal relations, to fantasies rooted in a particular religious position which has the quirk the tendency to claim for itself a monopoly on the term christian?

what does the right really hope to accomplish here? as much as i would love to see the entire edifice fall in on itself, i am not so naieve as to thing this a simple fuck up on the part of the aisle-rove axis--it must be understood as tactically functional at some level. but that functionality is so bizarre....

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

then what is really going on here?

rb

the best i can come up with is that if you add the term american christian to the "right to life" bit, and combine it with the (mis?)conceptions of the faction of the gop base that considers itself to be extremely conservative christian, and allow for the fact that faction's beliefs will bleed over towards the more moderate parts of the spectrum, then that is what is going on. It's the one thing that ties the objection to stem cell research, objection to abortion, and this objection to self-chosen life termination, as long as you don't look at the issues on a particularly robust scale. Moral myopia is apparently contagious.

after 10-15 years or whatever it is.....there is no hope of her condition getting better. She is middle aged, and the body deterioates naturally.....therefore it cannot heal as well as it could've...say 10 years prior. Her parents need to just accept this and let her go.....

Denied AGAIN. The latest from CNN:

Quote:

(CNN) -- Hours after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected pleas to intervene in the case of Terri Schiavo on Thursday, her parents again asked a federal judge in Florida to order the brain-damaged woman's feeding tube restored.

A hearing before U.S. District Judge James Whittemore in Tampa ended after nearly four hours Thursday night with no decision announced. Earlier this week, Whittemore turned down a request for an injunction to keep Schiavo alive.

Anti-abortion-rights activist Randall Terry, who is acting as a spokesman for Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, said the new motion raises "evidentiary issues that were ignored in the first crack at federal court."

After the Supreme Court rejection, a Florida judge denied three other legal requests from Schiavo's parents.

Schiavo has been without food or water since Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge George Greer ordered her feeding tube removed March 18.

Thursday, Greer denied a petition of the state Department of Children and Families and Gov. Jeb Bush to take Schiavo into state custody. (Full story)

He also denied a petition from the DCF to investigate allegations that Terri Schiavo's husband, Michael, abused her. Such allegations have been considered and dismissed several times in the past, most recently last week in the Florida Supreme Court.

Greer also rejected an affidavit, submitted by Florida authorities, from a Florida doctor who argued that the brain-damaged woman was not in a persistent vegetative state.

Thursday evening, the state Supreme Court rejected an appeal of Greer's rulings.

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene after the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals twice turned down a plea from the parents that would have allowed for a feeding tube to be reinserted Wednesday. (Full story)

Referring to the high court decision, George Felos, an attorney for Michael Schiavo, said: "All of us are very grateful for the order of the United States Supreme Court this morning. We hope that that order will effectively end the litigation effort in this case.

"We believe it's time for that to stop ... and that Mrs. Schiavo be able to die in peace."

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is responsible for emergency appeals from the 11th Circuit, signed the Supreme Court ruling.

The 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, Georgia, includes Florida, where Terri Schiavo lives in a hospice in Pinellas Park. Protesters have gathered outside the hospice for days.

It was the fifth time the case has been presented to the Supreme Court, which has consistently refused to hear it.

Parents' hope 'dimming'
Thursday afternoon, the Schindlers visited their daughter at her hospice. Terry said Mary Schindler became "physically ill" during the visit and had to leave the hospital room.

Terry warned Republicans there would be "hell to pay" if Schiavo dies.

"It appears every legal option has just been exhausted," the Rev. Patrick Mahoney, spokesman for the Schindlers, said after Thursday's Supreme Court decision. "Governor Bush is now the only practical hope here for Terri Schiavo. We plead with Governor Bush."

He told CNN: "If it results in a constitutional crisis for the state, then so be it."

But the governor told Florida's Capitol News Service that he "cannot go beyond what my powers are."

"It is still my hope that we will have a chance to provide hydration for Terri Schiavo," he said. "But if there is an injunction by the courts in this case, that does not make it possible."

Paul O'Donnell, a spiritual adviser for the Schindlers, said, "their hope is dimming."

"They're very disappointed," he said. "They're in shock. They can't believe this is happening. They hope the governor is going to do something, but this is a severe blow when Terri's life hangs in the balance."

In Texas, President Bush was described by aides as disappointed Thursday at the Supreme Court's decision.

Aides in Washington said there are no plans to consider any additional federal intervention in the case.

Schiavo's parents and her husband have been at odds over the woman's care, and the battle has drawn in religious conservatives on the side of the Schindlers to fight Michael Schiavo's efforts to let his wife die, as he says she wanted.

More than 20 state and federal court rulings have sided with Michael Schiavo. The courts have ruled that evidence shows Terri Schiavo expressed her wishes, although she did not have a written living will.

"It saddens me that we have to run to court and get court orders to protect Terri Schiavo from the abuse of the state of Florida," Felos said Thursday. "The conduct of the executive branch of the state of Florida has been reprehensible."

Legal maneuvers
Early Monday, President Bush signed a bill passed by Congress moving the Schiavo case from state to federal courts. (Full story)

A day later, Whittemore refused to grant a temporary restraining order that would have allowed reinsertion of the woman's feeding tube. (Full story)

Thursday night, law enforcement officials were investigating a suspicious knapsack found leaning against the federal courthouse in Tampa. They cleared about a two-block perimeter as a precaution.

Terri Schiavo suffered profound brain damage in 1990, when her heart stopped temporarily, perhaps because of an eating disorder. Since then, she has received around-the-clock care.

In 1998, her husband petitioned to have her feeding tube removed. After court rulings, the tube was removed for two days in 2001 and six days in 2003.

In 2003, the Florida Legislature passed a bill that allowed Jeb Bush to order doctors to restore Schiavo's feeding tube six days after it had been removed. The law was later declared unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court.

Since last Friday, Michael Schiavo has been at Terri Schiavo's bedside, Felos has said.

It's a three ring circus, and it's fucking disgusting. The conservatives have had their photo shoot; the little children have had their fun, but it's time for them to go back to their homes and act like adults, like human beings.

Oh, and in other less important news :rolleyes: :

Quote:

Kyrgyz opposition grab power.
Protesters in the central Asian nation of Kyrgyzstan have seized the seat of government and forced the long-time president to flee his office, political observers tell CNN.

and

Quote:

Death toll in refinery blast rises to 15

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

what does the right really hope to accomplish here? as much as i would love to see the entire edifice fall in on itself, i am not so naieve as to thing this a simple fuck up on the part of the aisle-rove axis--it must be understood as tactically functional at some level. but that functionality is so bizarre....

Some of the things I consider when I attempt to unravel the functionality of these events is the mobilizing currency this issue is presenting to a highly agitable base. At the most basic level, the right positions itself in a win-win scenario, at least to its most activated members right now.

They do something and obtain results, win
They try and are rebuffed by the court system, they martyr, they win

Both of those positions are easily frameable as oppositional to a judicial system gone awry, at least to this particular group of members.

In the long run: this position appears to fit very well in opposition to the left's long battle over personal rights to death with dignity. As we look over the horizon, we might wonder what looms in terms of the most divisive issue driving vocal minorities to the voting polls--abortion. That issue is on the wane, whether it be settled in their favor via a reconstituted court, or through the political process. Either way, it's mobalizing power is beginning to slip. On to greener, and newly created politically divisive issues, it appears.

Perhaps of interest: I read about this earlier this morning.

Center for American Progress

Quote:

The political manipulation of a personal life-and-death issue by right-wing leaders is shameful and morally repugnant. Make no mistake about it: President Bush, Tom DeLay and Bill Frist are no friends of the Schiavos. DeLay's unprecedented attack on Terri Schiavo's husband, Michael, was designed solely for political gain and represents a new low for the ethically challenged House leader. A memo distributed by Senate leadership to right-wing members called Schiavo "a great political issue" and urged Senators to talk about her because "the pro-life base will be excited." The presence of anti-abortion extremist Randall Terry with Ms. Schiavo's parents yesterday, confirms the worst suspicions about the right's motivations in this matter.

Perhaps you feel the source is biased, so we'll try this one:

cnn.com

Quote:

Political calculation surfaced in the Senate, as well, in the form of an unsigned one-page memo circulated to Republicans. "This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats," it said.

And if that is too biased:

foxnews.com

Quote:

"(They) declare it is about principles," Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said on the House floor before the bill was passed. "Then why did the majority party declare that this is a great political issue?"

Conyers' allegation was referring to a weekend "talking points" memo purportedly circulated by Republicans that claimed congressional involvement in the Schiavo case would excite the right-to-life base. The memo called the case a "great political issue" that could bolster support for Republicans in the 2006 elections.

The authenticity of the memo, which appeared publicly on a Web log and had Terri Schiavo's first name misspelled, was quickly denied by Republicans.

"I have not seen these talking points," House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (search), R-Texas, said on Sunday. "My question is, have [the memos] been assigned and who put them out? If anyone on my staff put them out they would be immediately dismissed. This is not a political issue."

"I have never seen the memo and reaffirm that the interest in this case by myself, and the many members of the Senate on both sides of the aisle, is to assure that Mrs. Schiavo has another chance at life," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (search), a strong supporter of granting the case a new hearing under federal review, said in a statement.

Believe who you want to believe, but it is an interesting item, in my opinion.

parallel argument to the above, run out at greater length, from today's ny times.

source:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/ar...721740&ei=5070

Quote:

The God Racket, From DeMille to DeLay

Published: March 27, 2005
Frank Rich

Congress and the president scurried to play God in the lives of Terri Schiavo and her family last weekend, ABC kicked off Holy Week with its perennial ritual: a rebroadcast of the 1956 Hollywood blockbuster, "The Ten Commandments."

Cecil B. DeMille's epic is known for the parting of its Technicolor Red Sea, for the religiosity of its dialogue (Anne Baxter's Nefretiri to Charlton Heston's Moses: "You can worship any God you like as long as I can worship you.") and for a Golden Calf scene that DeMille himself described as "an orgy Sunday-school children can watch." But this year the lovable old war horse has a relevance that transcends camp. At a time when government, culture, science, medicine and the rule of law are all under threat from an emboldened religious minority out to remake America according to its dogma, the half-forgotten show business history of "The Ten Commandments" provides a telling back story.

As DeMille readied his costly Paramount production for release a half-century ago, he seized on an ingenious publicity scheme. In partnership with the Fraternal Order of Eagles, a nationwide association of civic-minded clubs founded by theater owners, he sponsored the construction of several thousand Ten Commandments monuments throughout the country to hype his product. The Pharaoh himself - that would be Yul Brynner - participated in the gala unveiling of the Milwaukee slab. Heston did the same in North Dakota. Bizarrely enough, all these years later, it is another of these DeMille-inspired granite monuments, on the grounds of the Texas Capitol in Austin, that is a focus of the Ten Commandments case that the United States Supreme Court heard this month.

We must wait for the court's ruling on whether the relics of a Hollywood relic breach the separation of church and state. Either way, it's clear that one principle, so firmly upheld by DeMille, has remained inviolate no matter what the courts have to say: American moguls, snake-oil salesmen and politicians looking to score riches or power will stop at little if they feel it is in their interests to exploit God to achieve those ends. While sometimes God racketeers are guilty of the relatively minor sin of bad taste - witness the crucifixion-nail jewelry licensed by Mel Gibson - sometimes we get the demagoguery of Father Coughlin or the big-time cons of Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker.

The religio-hucksterism surrounding the Schiavo case makes DeMille's Hollywood crusades look like amateur night. This circus is the latest and most egregious in a series of cultural shocks that have followed Election Day 2004, when a fateful exit poll question on "moral values" ignited a take-no-prisoners political grab by moral zealots. During the commercial interruptions on "The Ten Commandments" last weekend, viewers could surf over to the cable news networks and find a Bible-thumping show as only Washington could conceive it. Congress was floating such scenarios as staging a meeting in Ms. Schiavo's hospital room or, alternatively, subpoenaing her, her husband and her doctors to a hearing in Washington. All in the name of faith.

Like many Americans, I suspect, I tried to picture how I would have reacted if a bunch of smarmy, camera-seeking politicians came anywhere near a hospital room where my own relative was hooked up to life support. I imagined summoning the Clint Eastwood of "Dirty Harry," not "Million Dollar Baby." But before my fantasy could get very far, star politicians with the most to gain from playing the God card started hatching stunts whose extravagant shamelessness could upstage any humble reverie of my own.

Senator Bill Frist, the Harvard-educated heart surgeon with presidential aspirations, announced that watching videos of Ms. Schiavo had persuaded him that her doctors in Florida were mistaken about her vegetative state - a remarkable diagnosis given that he had not only failed to examine the patient ostensibly under his care but has no expertise in the medical specialty, neurology, relevant to her case. No less audacious was Tom DeLay, last seen on "60 Minutes" a few weeks ago deflecting Lesley Stahl's questions about his proximity to allegedly criminal fund-raising by saying he would talk only about children stranded by the tsunami. Those kids were quickly forgotten as he hitched his own political rehabilitation to a brain-damaged patient's feeding tube. Adopting a prayerful tone, the former exterminator from Sugar Land, Tex., took it upon himself to instruct "millions of people praying around the world this Palm Sunday weekend" to "not be afraid."

The president was not about to be outpreached by these saps. The same Mr. Bush who couldn't be bothered to interrupt his vacation during the darkening summer of 2001, not even when he received a briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," flew from his Crawford ranch to Washington to sign Congress's Schiavo bill into law. The bill could have been flown to him in Texas, but his ceremonial arrival and departure by helicopter on the White House lawn allowed him to showboat as if he had just landed on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Within hours he turned Ms. Schiavo into a slick applause line at a Social Security rally. "It is wise to always err on the side of life," he said, wisdom that apparently had not occurred to him in 1999, when he mocked the failed pleas for clemency of Karla Faye Tucker, the born-again Texas death-row inmate, in a magazine interview with Tucker Carlson.

These theatrics were foretold. Culture is often a more reliable prophecy than religion of where the country is going, and our culture has been screaming its theocratic inclinations for months now. The anti-indecency campaign, already a roaring success, has just yielded a new chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Kevin J. Martin, who had been endorsed by the Parents Television Council and other avatars of the religious right. The push for the sanctity of marriage (or all marriages except Terri and Michael Schiavo's) has led to the banishment of lesbian moms on public television. The Armageddon-fueled worldview of the "Left Behind" books extends its spell by the day, soon to surface in a new NBC prime-time mini-series, "Revelations," being sold with the slogan "The End is Near."

All this is happening while polls consistently show that at most a fifth of the country subscribes to the religious views of those in the Republican base whom even George Will, speaking last Sunday on ABC's "This Week," acknowledged may be considered "extremists." In that famous Election Day exit poll, "moral values" voters amounted to only 22 percent. Similarly, an ABC News survey last weekend found that only 27 percent of Americans thought it was "appropriate" for Congress to "get involved" in the Schiavo case and only 16 percent said it would want to be kept alive in her condition. But a majority of American colonists didn't believe in witches during the Salem trials either - any more than the Taliban reflected the views of a majority of Afghans. At a certain point - and we seem to be at that point - fear takes over, allowing a mob to bully the majority over the short term. (Of course, if you believe the end is near, there is no long term.)

That bullying, stoked by politicians in power, has become omnipresent, leading television stations to practice self-censorship and high school teachers to avoid mentioning "the E word," evolution, in their classrooms, lest they arouse fundamentalist rancor. The president is on record as saying that the jury is still out on evolution, so perhaps it's no surprise that The Los Angeles Times has uncovered a three-year-old "religious rights" unit in the Justice Department that investigated a biology professor at Texas Tech because he refused to write letters of recommendation for students who do not accept evolution as "the central, unifying principle of biology." Cornelia Dean of The New York Times broke the story last weekend that some Imax theaters, even those in science centers, are now refusing to show documentaries like "Galápagos" or "Volcanoes of the Deep Sea" because their references to Darwin and the Big Bang theory might antagonize some audiences. Soon such films will disappear along with biology textbooks that don't give equal time to creationism.

James Cameron, producer of "Volcanoes" (and, more famously, the director of "Titanic"), called this development "obviously symptomatic of our shift away from empiricism in science to faith-based science." Faith-based science has in turn begat faith-based medicine that impedes stem-cell research, not to mention faith-based abstinence-only health policy that impedes the prevention of unwanted pregnancies and diseases like AIDS.

Faith-based news is not far behind. Ashley Smith, the 26-year-old woman who was held hostage by Brian Nichols, the accused Atlanta courthouse killer, has been canonized by virtually every American news organization as God's messenger because she inspired Mr. Nichols to surrender by talking about her faith and reading him a chapter from Rick Warren's best seller, "The Purpose-Driven Life." But if she's speaking for God, what does that make Dennis Rader, the church council president arrested in Wichita's B.T.K. serial killer case? Was God instructing Terry Ratzmann, the devoted member of the Living Church of God who this month murdered his pastor, an elderly man, two teenagers and two others before killing himself at a weekly church service in Wisconsin? The religious elements of these stories, including the role played by the end-of-times fatalism of Mr. Ratzmann's church, are left largely unexamined by the same news outlets that serve up Ashley Smith's tale as an inspirational parable for profit.

Next to what's happening now, official displays of DeMille's old Ten Commandments monuments seem an innocuous encroachment of religion into public life. It is a full-scale jihad that our government signed onto last weekend, and what's most scary about it is how little was heard from the political opposition. The Harvard Law School constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe pointed out this week that even Joe McCarthy did not go so far as this Congress and president did in conspiring to "try to undo the processes of a state court." But faced with McCarthyism in God's name, most Democratic leaders went into hiding and stayed silent. Prayers are no more likely to revive their spines than poor Terri Schiavo's brain.

Im confused on something.....can somebody please explain to me why the people on the side of the parents dont get why gov bush cant do anything about this? Am I missing something? Am I the only one that thinks it totally ridiculous that these people expect him to go against the court rulings?

These are the same people that think that the courts have taken too much power. They think that, as governor, Jeb should do what needs be done. They sort of have a point, is a republican majority house going to impeach him for breaking the law?

Quote:

The reason is that these people are religious extremists who believe that their absolute morality should triumph over the American system of government.

One thing you can say about the Schiavo circus: it caught the religious right with its pants down.

Regardless of where one stands on this issue, in light of the fact that there is a lack of concensus in the medical community on whether Terri's condition is or will ever be reversible, I think the following is a compelling example of what she could be going through (from someone who has been there - declared to be in a persistent vegitative state and had her feeding tube removed.) Granted, 3 months is not quite equivilant to 15 years, but it is food for thought.....

Quote:

Kate Adamson is the mother of two who suffered a double brain stem stroke and was in a coma for 70 days. She was completely unresponsive to stimuli and was diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state. Doctors finally pulled her feeding tube and, for eight days, she lay dying. Instead of being unconscious as the doctors believed she was aware of everything.
During an interview on the O'Reilly Factor in 2003 she recounted the dehydration experience:

O'REILLY: When they took the feeding tube out, what went through your mind?

ADAMSON: When the feeding tube was turned off for eight days, I thought I was going insane. I was screaming out in my mind, "Don't you know I need to eat?" And even up until that point, I had been having a bagful of Ensure as my nourishment that was going through the feeding tube. At that point, it sounded pretty good. I just wanted something. The fact that I had nothing, the hunger pains overrode every thought I had.

Bob & Mary Schindler have invited Kate Adamson to address the Florida State House Committee on the Judiciary and share her remarkable story. Adamson, author of "Kate's Journey" and a renowned disability rights activist, hopes her story will change the way Terri is being perceived by those who hold her life in their hands.

Due to a catastrophic brain stem stroke, Kate was dependent on a feeding tube for all her nourishment and had the tube turned off for over a week. She, unlike most others, can understand what Terri is going through. Doctors had given up hope that Kate would ever recover, but she is now fully functional except for some paralysis on the left side of her body.

"I have a unique understanding of what Terri is feeling. I could feel everything that the doctors did to me, and I could do nothing. I was at the complete mercy of others, and they couldn't hear me. I have been given the opportunity to speak on behalf of one that has been robbed of her voice. We are praying that God will move on the hearts of Governor Bush and the Florida Legislature to stand up and protect the right of Terri not to be starved to death."

http://dutch-ess.blogspot.com/2005/0...-has-been.html

I watched that episode.
In light of the evidence that portions of Mrs. Shiavo's brain are no longer intact, I didn't find her analogy between the two sitations compelling.

There is no lack of consensus among the medical community, except among the people who haven't directly diagnosed Mrs. Shiavo.

Perhaps. But according to Kate Adamson, her doctors' prognoses for her were just as bleak. "Doctors had given up hope that Kate would ever recover."

It's a tough call, to be sure.

ok, Im confused again...she's comparing a brain stem stroke to the cerebrum being replaced with spinal fluid? Am I reading that right? From what I understand that is nothing wrong with Terri's brain stem....so how are the two things related?

I think prognosis is the common theme in these two cases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerDick

I think prognosis is the common theme in these two cases.

True, but the analogy fails because the diagnoses were radically different.

If prognosis becomes the basis for comparison, we open the debate to every bad prediction made by any doctor; or maybe we'll limit it to inaccurate predictions in regards to recovery from brain disorders.

My wife spoke with her father last night, who has in the past expressed a desire to not have life-sustaining measures taken in the event of a catastrophe, to see whether he would contradict his past expressions on the matter to retain what is evidently becoming a party line.

His response to this apparent contradiction was that he is opposed to being hooked up to a breathing apparatus, whereas Mrs. Shiavo is able to breath on her own. There must be other details in his living will, because that seems to be an extremely arbitrary disctinction on the face of it.

Now, the idea that someone without a functioning, indeed with liquified portions, brain who can breath on her own is disctinct from, and a more highly valued life, than a person with a functioning brain but who's lungs aren't working is bizarre to me.

I think that opinion really brings to light the notion that to, at least some, members of the christian coalition the body/soul is a mystical object that can not be and is not understood by modern scientists.

This disdain of science among such members percolates into every aspect of the secular world and becomes oppositional to major scientific understandings of humanity: spanning (pro)creation to death.

This latest story, where you accurately depicted the critical difference between 3 months and 15 years, is an attempt to ramp up emotional appeal that doctors are fallable. Therefore, according to this logic, the doctors could be fallable and one ought to "error on the side of life." Unless I'm using this incorrectly, I think it's a non-sequitar. The diagnoses might appear to have been similar, which isn't surprising since the symptoms appear the same--but the causes for the symptom are radically different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerDick

i don't hold a lot of faith in what she has to say. i've heard about her speaking out on this issue, and both she and the people who parrot her can never seem to get the story straight. check out her website, http://www.katesjourney.com/ and look in the articles area. the bio area doesn't tell a whole lot about what happened.

for example at http://www.katesjourney.com/southbayhealth.html

[quote = http://www.katesjourney.com/southbayhealth.html]
Adamson’s recovery began in the blink of an eye. As she lay in the intensive care unit, connected to breathing tubes and intravenous feeding lines, Adamson could do nothing but think and pray. Without the ability to move, she had no way to communicate with the outside world, no way to tell her doctors or her husband that she was awake and aware.

Then her husband, desperate to reach her and grasping at straws, asked her to blink her eyes if she could understand him. It took all her energy to make it happen, but somehow Adamson found the strength to do it — she blinked.
[/quote]

hmm... feeding tube unhooked? not according to this article. while i haven't looked very deep into the articles yet, i have yet to see it mentioned as her being in a PVS. she's described multiple times (by herself in her bio even) as having 'locked-in syndrome.' quite a different thing.

i take anything she has to say regarding this situatin with a grain of salt.

Michael Schaivo announced this morning there will be an autopsy to definitively determine the extent of brain damage. The parents have pushed for one already.

They have just announced on the radio that Terri has passed away

rest in peace Terri....you've earned it

RIP Terri.

And btw, hubby of the year refused her brother to see Terri last night and this morning. Nice.

I am thankful she was released from her suffering. Her passing came much too late in my estimation. Maybe now the people involved can get on with their lives!

You mean this debacle is over? We can get back to our lives again? Congress can resume their oh-so-important baseball investigation, and worry about pending legislature on ANWR, Healthcare, etc? Jeb's gotta be sad to see his TV time drop so suddenly.

I'm just waiting for the minister I saw on TV shouting "There will be Hell to pay if Terri dies!" to come crawling back out of the woodwork.

Err on the side of life my friends, and now that this circus is over, where will that line of rhetoric take us regarding the death penality, war, health care, and affirming the quality of life for..you know...those of us with a life to live?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourtyrulz

Well, expect to her about this crap for the next week, then it should die off. Thank god.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourtyrulz

Err on the side of life my friends, and now that this circus is over, where will that line of rhetoric take us regarding the death penality, war, health care, and affirming the quality of life for..you know...those of us with a life to live?

lol, they just want to make sure you have that baby. Once the baby is out they don't give a fuck.

Apparently the person who was wouldn't feel any pain was prescribed morphine. I thought morphine was to control pain?

http://www.kasa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3145889

Quote:

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. So just what would happen if Terri Schiavo's (SHY'-vohz) feeding tube were to be put back in now?

Two doctors say it's hard to predict. One in New York who hasn't treated Schiavo say reinserting the tube could kill her -- by supplying her body with fluids it can no longer get rid of. Doctor Sean Morrison says the fluid buildup could essentially choke her.

But a doctor speaking on behalf of Schiavo's parents says it's worth trying. Doctor Jay Carpenter says even if it doesn't work and Schiavo dies, at least the effort was made.

Carpenter also disagrees with the characterization that Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state. He says the doctors who've said that are "known pro-euthanasia doctors." And he questions why Schiavo has been given morphine -- since people in that vegetative state can't feel pain.

Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Quote:

So just what would happen if Terri Schiavo's feeding tube were to be put back in now?

I think it this point we can move past opinionated speculation about the "what if's". She is dead, why can't it just end there?

The morphine issue has been raised and cut down many times in this thread alone. It is normal for Hospice patients of her sort to recieve painkillers, mostly for the comfort of relatives and family to ensure at least a less painful death.

I saw this on CNN's main page and thought it was pretty funny - "Bush: Millions saddened by Schiavo's death"... painting this picture as if there are a ton of people actually sad by this as opposed to being pissed off that she was kept alive (well, body kept alive, everything inside dead) for 15 years.

Sure, bud... why don't ya just go ahead and speak for everyone without any actual credentials to back it up ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

It is very possible and reasonable to be saddened by her death and what her family has gone through while still being disgusted at the political circus the right has made it into.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

Sure, bud... why don't ya just go ahead and speak for everyone without any actual credentials to back it up ;)

I'm sure that there are more than 20M people on the 'err on the side of life' camp. But there is more than 100M that disagreed with them. It's a big country.

I think if I were the husband, under these circumstances, I'd go to court and let them take back legal responsibility for her and her medical bills and see if they still feel the way they are acting like they do now

rather than make a new thread about this...I thought I'd just post the autopsy results in the original thread

Quote:

LARGO, Florida (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 ago 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 Schiavo's death March 31 ended an internationally watched right-to-die battle between her husband and parents that engulfed the courts, Congress and the White House and divided the country.

Thogmartin also 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.

She died from dehydration, Thogmartin said.

He said 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."

Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, had fought their son-in-law, Michael Schiavo, in court for seven years over her fate.

Thogmartin said that Schiavo's brain was about half of its expected size when she died 13 days after her feeding tube was removed.

"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."

He said a review of hospital records of her 1990 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.

The cause of her collapse has never been definitely proven, but testimony in a 1992 civil trial indicated that she probably was suffering from an eating disorder that led to a severe chemical imbalance.

The Schindlers, though, don't believe she had an eating disorder and have accused Michael Schiavo of abusing his wife, a charge he vehemently denied.

Speaking before the report was issued, Michael Schiavo's attorney, George 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."

Bill Pellan, chief investigator for the medical examiner's office, said Tuesday that Thogmartin reviewed police reports, medical records and other documents in trying to determine the cause of her brain damage.

During the long legal battle, numerous abuse complaints made to state social workers were ruled unfounded.

Michael Schiavo convinced the courts his wife would not want to be kept alive artificially with no hope of recovery, contending that she made statements to that effect before her collapse.

Her parents doubt she had any such end-of-life wishes and also disputed that she was in a persistent vegetative state. They believed she could get better with therapy.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/06/15....ap/index.html

I think this part

Quote:

He also said she was blind, because the "vision centers of her brain were dead."

pretty much blows some of her parents statements out of the water

Quote:

Originally Posted by Food Eater Lad

Then write it down, she didnt.

exactly. lesson for everybody. I have. even if i didn't write it down, i would expect society to be humane, and do me in.

Ah yes, so Terry was blind. Flashback time, kiddies! Remember mean old mister Frist, worst doctor ever?

Quote:

Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a renowned heart surgeon before becoming Senate majority leader, went to the floor late Thursday night for the second time in 12 hours to argue that Florida doctors had erred in saying Terri Schiavo is in a “persistent vegetative state.”

“I question it based on a review of the video footage which I spent an hour or so looking at last night in my office,” he said in a lengthy speech in which he quoted medical texts and standards. “She certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli.”

Wow. The Senate majority leader made bullshit medical diagnoses on a patient he only saw on years-old video tapes for crass political reasons and whaddayaknow? He was wrong. What an ass.

Well, I'm sure we can look forward to Tom Delay and Bill Frist apologizing to Michael Schiavo for the hell they put him through tonight at 11.

" He also said she was blind, because the "vision centers of her brain were dead."

Being that autopsy's are more often than not post-mortem, wouldn't everything in her brain be dead?

In all seriousness guy44 this: "She certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli" is not a medical diagnosis, it's an opinion, a professional one at that. One which many shared based on the videos shows and because of Terri's controlling behavior, is all anyone had to go on. This does not make him an ass or the worst doctor ever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew330

his opinion was based on seeing her eyes reflexively follow the light and putting his wishes onto her. and he then tried to use her for political gain. that's why he was an ass. so what if other people made an opinion based on seeing a video? he was a doctor, he should have known better. i'm not sure how you can even say it was a professional opinion. for him to give a professional opinion, he would need to read her chart, her health history, and examine her himself (if possible). but he didn't do any of that. he just saw a video. one made by her parents that showed only what they wanted it to. hell, i could show you a video of me turning water into wine... that doesn't make me jesus.

and of course autopsies are post-mortem. but you differentiate healthy tissue from diseased and dead tissue. you keep the corpse nice and cold so it doesn't start decomposing until after you're done with the autopsy. the fact that the brain was about half the weight of a healthy one shows that areas of it no longer existed, and they can look at the tissue of the various areas of the brain to see where damage had been done.

As soon as I saw this story elsewhere, I knew this thread was going to get the bump. What I find most annoying, is the fact that the parents' lawyer is already talking about "unspecified legal action" (civil court?) based on review by other medical experts. It's one thing for them to *think* they can buy / solicit testimony that will corroborate some sort of "wrongful death" suit, but I find it annoying for them to basically say it publicly.

I'll tell ya this: I used to be pro-choice, but I am so, like, pro-life now. Because "they" killed a brain-dead woman in Florida.

I suspect that many are of the opinion that medical science is "only a theory" and much of it's body of knowledge, including the practice of pathology, "cannot be proven".

Many medical outcomes, seem to some to be beyond the realm of the expertise of practitioners, since they could not, left to themselves, achieve such a high level of proficiency just 6000 years after the lord created the heavens and the earth.

Face it, people, when you post autopsy results as vindication, you are preaching only to the choir. Ten effing pages of this B.S. thread, a distraction from all of the pressing problems related to our lives, and here I am, feeding it, too.
Sheesh!!

I dont call it preaching to the choir, there was quite a debate going a few months ago....whats wrong with updating people on the end? No matter the outcome I would have posted it so it had nothing to do with "vindication".

Its sad that you thought it was BS, but that doesnt mean that everyone with an opinion on it thought that.