Skip to comments.Terri Schiavo's former husband marries
Posted on 01/22/2006 11:35:40 AM PST by LouAvul
SAFETY HARBOR, Florida (AP) -- Terri Schiavo's former husband has married his longtime girlfriend, friends and family members say.
Michael Schiavo and his longtime girlfriend, Jodi Centonze, were wed Saturday at a church in Florida. The bride's brother says it was a very emotional ceremony.
Schiavo's former wife, Terri, had suffered severe brain damage more than a decade ago and died last March after her feeding tube was removed.
Michael Schiavo had argued his wife was in a vegetative state, and would not want to be kept alive artificially.
The newlyweds first met in a dentist's office and began a relationship after Terri Schiavo was already in a nursing home. They have two young children.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Yep. She was transferred right after Judge Greer ordered the feeding tube removed. Did you expect her to live without the surgically implanted feeding tube?
"So Felos arranged to transfer the cost of caring for Terri to the taxpayers."
The hospice provided Terri's care for free.
Actually, Judge Greer ruled that he was presented with "clear and convincing" evidence as to Terri's wishes, your opinion to the contrary.
"I did use the word "kill", which is literally true: he sought, and won, a court order to terminate her life."
Incorrect. He sought a court hearing to determine Terri's wishes. The court, not Michael, made that determination. Terr's wishes were then honored by the court, and artificial life support was removed, allowing her to die, not killing her.
Hey, if you insist on using incorrect and inflammatory words like "kill", you should just go all the way and say "murder". What the heck.
Sweetheart, you deliberately ignored my points regarding Michael and Terri. People like the Schindlers don't go around raiding their disabled child's medical trust funds. Unfortunately I personally know those kind of people. The Schindlers do not fit that profile. They used their last available cash to help Terri and also their son in law Michael.
Keep reading Robert, and hopefully you will become enlightened. Btw, have you read about Scott Thomas, and Haleigh Poutre? Just come on down to the Terri dailies for January. Where there is life, there is hope : )
If it is via a surgically implanted feeding tube because the patient is unable to swallow, yes.
Correct. And just as we can discuss the weight of Mr. Schiavo's testimony, in light of conflicting testimony--including some given under oath by Mr. Schiavo himself, so also we have the privilege of discussing Judge Greer's reasoning and conduct of this trial, and his record on past trials. The result does not inspire confidence in his ruling.
Incorrect. He sought a court hearing to determine Terri's wishes.
He did not. He made a claim concerning her wishes, in support of a motion to withhold food and water from his wife. The motion was to kill Terri, not to try and find out her wishes--which he claimed to know already.
Hey, if you insist on using incorrect and inflammatory words like "kill",
Kill. Verb. Cause to die. If simple, accurate language causes you pain, you should re-examine your position.
No, anyone saying that they are "acting in his wife's best interest" while living with another women is a lowlife. Anyone who goes to court to get his wife starved to death is a lowlife.
And, of course, the order forbidding any attempt to provide nourishment P.O. was also about withholding "medical" measures?
Oh please, so feeding someone who is unconscious but very much alive is life support? Sorry, that is letting them starve to death!
Geez. And I understand there's some guy from Kansas who said he saw a flying saucer. So?
They may indeed believe what they saw. But do you believe they saw what they saw? If not, then what's your point? If so, then why? Because you want to believe them?
We know she couldn't swallow. We know she couldn't "enjoy" squat -- not without a cerebral cortex. So why do you believe them?
Self serving? How was Scott Schiavo's testimony self-serving? How was Joan Schiavo's testimony self-serving?
Wait! I got it! They were all in it together for the life insurance policy worth millions. Uh ... the hidden gold! The stocks! Yes, the millions in stocks!
In 1994, Michael had his $300K. The rest went into a trust fund for Terri's care. He had all the money he was ever going to get. Terri's parents offered to care for her. He could have walked. He didn't.
Instead, he conspired with his brother and his sister-in-law, risking perjury and jail, to do ... what? And why? And what's in it for them? Or for Michael, for that matter?
(Before you answer, let me go get my tin-foil hat.)
I know that the swallow tests were negative in 1991, 1992, and 1993. Beyond that I don't know, except that she could swallow her own saliva. She didn't drool.
I tried to explain to you about the emerging from vegetative state to full consciousness. It goes on and off for a while. I believe that Terri was minimally conscious. If you don't, that's fine. Your opinion.
Nope. I can swallow my saliva whenever I want to. She couldn't. Three different tests in three different years proved that.
Here's your last post.
Nice bumper sticker slogans you got going on here. So are you finished debating because you can't produce facts or are you just being a raving Troll?
You claim to be posting facts from the autopsy report, the posted financial records of Terri Schiavo's estate, and evidence presented to the court in relation to Terri's advance directive. You admonished me for not posting links to your sources.
That is a very good question. If you drill down and really try to answer this question you may come to the truth. But first you must remove your adoration state of mind towards MS, and consider that he did not go through the 10 plus years of fighting Terri's parents out of love for Terri. Jodi would never have put up with that crap from him.
You have this prejudice against blind people? That they're just not good enough?
If not, then you better come up with a DAMN good reason why Judge Greer's vision is even an issue in this case.
Oh, I'm sure they wouldn't use a term like "raiding". But they would have been entitled to every penny of it, in that they intended to care for her in their home.
"Just come on down to the Terri dailies"
Ask me to eat ground glass. It would be easier.
Judge Greer admitted, in the court record, that he gave less weight to Michael's testimony. You're not breaking any new ground here.
"The motion was to kill Terri"
According to the testimony from the other side, I thought the motion was to keep Terri alive.
"Kill. Verb. Cause to die."
Mercy. Noun. Allow to die.
Yes. Terri could swallow her own saliva. Involuntarily. I have never denied that.
What she could not do was swallow voluntarily. If you gave her a glass of water she would drown. If you gave her food she would choke.
She was incapable of voluntary swallowing.
"I believe that Terri was minimally conscious."
Based ... on ... what?
Why would you want to provide nourishment P.O. to a patient who cannot swallow voluntarily?
Hey. Save me some drillin' time and tell me the truth. I'd really like to hear your version.
Hah! That's your logic, not mine. I never said anything about "removing" life support -- I merely defined it.
I'm thinking about snail mailing them. But I don't want to be in tattle-tale, sore-loser, or whine mode. Maybe I will just to get it off my chest.
Sadly, my honest opinion is that the Vatican has bigger fish to fry now and won't want to make any waves, knowing it will all die down and return to business as usual. You can tell that is a thriving and probably growing parish.
They don't seem to practice what they preach (some do to set good examples), in the way of enforcing any kind of meaningful discipline, so we're on our own. Too many people don't care what the pope says. One post I read on the net said they didn't do anything to prolong his life like a kidney transplant, etc., just let him die because it was his time to go. He could have given up himself long before that, but struggled to keep going to show that life at the end still has worth.
Why bother with moral absolutes, especially when suffering is involved, even though we have an arsenal of painkillers we didn't have before?
A sampling of usenet posts was about 10 to 1 in favor of the latest news. The world loves a happy ending. Christians, especially Republican Christians, are mean and hate-filled. And the Schindlers were demonized over and over. That bothers me a lot, but there's nothing I can do about it.
In more normal times in our recent history, they wouldn't have had to fight like they did. Women and sometimes men sat by bedsides and tried to coax the last bit of nourishment in their hopeless cases, simply because it was the right thing to do.
The world wants to dump their sick, infirm, and hopeless cases so it won't impact their "quality of life" or prolong their suffering.
Instant gratification and relief is the order of the day. It's foolish to honorably play the hand you've been dealt to the bitter end. Up is down and white is black now.
I've really agonized over this. What does God really think about it all? Is he there? It really rocks your faith, especially when you are considered dumb for believing those old silly fairy tales.
Hello, Pat Greer, your husband MURDERED A DISABLED WOMAN. Wasn't that picking on someone's disability?????
I never said she couldn't swallow. She could. It's in the doctor's reports. I said she couldn't swallow voluntarily.
"Testimony from multiple nursing home aides"
Uh-huh. I got testimony from a guy who saw a flying saucer. Think maybe he saw what he wanted to see? Maybe?
And, Judge Greer tampered with witness testimony to CHANGE TERRI'S AGE so that he could say that she wasn't old enough to decide if she meant to say "Where there's life there's hope." GREER TAMPERED WITH THAT WITNESS TESTIMONY and after he did so, he had the dates all wrong based upon Karen Quinlan's case.
Greer was a ZONING COMMISSIONER before he became a probate judge. There are articles on line where Greer admits that he was going to "play it by ear". Well, he certainly has.
How many people have died because of Judge Greer or lost their life savings? PLENTY I'D SAY. Federal Prison for life. He can take walks and reflect. TERRI WAS MURDERED AND JUDGE GREER IS RESPONSIBLE. www.judgegeorgegreer.com (some republican he is).
my sister and i talk, i had to just inform her our brother died. shes is 10 years older then i am and has a drinking problem. she was denied guardianship of my dad because she makes so many problems out of everything. i love her but its better we stay far apart and have a phone relationship. i've taken her in when shes been depressed, she suffers from huge depression but i just refuse to deal with someone who drinks and will not help themsleves. its no powerplay on my part ...i'm just mad and sad my mom didnt get her wishes.
It's hard to believe that a bunch of people could be so hate filled as we see here on this thread (Mikey's bottom dwellers).
I told you, Jodi would have never put up with MS for 10 years standing in the wings waiting for MS to fight a battle with another woman's parents, to carry out another woman's wishes, especially if it was all out of love for the other woman. The motive therefore can not be love for Terri. So what is left? Something that had to be mutually beneficial to both Michael and Jodi. No one knows but Michael and Jodi and the family that surrounds them.
But note: the only way that one could justify what MS did is if he really truly did it out of love for Terri. Since that is not possible given that there was another love of his life in the picture - the motive becomes a selfish one, based on his needs and his desires.
He didn't see any of the visual evidence, and for many years the only side that knew that was the side petitioning to kill Terri.
Does that mean you were opposed to the starvation/dehydration death of Terri Schiavo? You have a funny way of showing it.
She was incapable of voluntary swallowing.
If one believes that the tests that were performed on Terri in her early years of recovery were all that were necessary to make a decision one way or the other, then one might come to the conclusion just as you did.
"I believe that Terri was minimally conscious."
Based ... on ... what?
Based on what I have learned about the vegetative state and how often it is misdiagnosed. Based on research that describes the minimally conscious state. Like I keep saying, this is my opinion. You are entitled to yours. I'm only answering your questions, but your responses have been getting a little harassing. I don't care if you are convinced in what you think or not. You could be right. I could be right. We'll never know because the tests for the minimally conscious state weren't performed.
You keep mentioning to me and other posters about the flying saucer thing. Well, that description would fit you as well as anyone else here. You might be believing what you want to see just as well as me. Go ahead and believe what you want to believe, and I will continue to do the same.
Terri's gone from this life. Leave her alone. Wasn't her death good enough for you?
You may think you know all that there is to know about this case, and maybe you know more than me, but you seem to be trying very hard to get me to change my mind. I won't.
Not very polite posting to someone you asked not to post to you anymore. I am forgiven I suppose? Just because I called two people in one thread a Troll doesn't surmount to anything. I see how many times Freepers get called DUmmies over and over for not waving their Bush PomPoms all the time. So, your point?
Oh. Here I thought you knew.
No, it means that it's illogical to assume that I wish to remove the artificial feeding tube from everyone who has one.
I notice that you didn't ask, "How was Michael Shiavo's testimony self-serving?" That shows at least a glimmer of hope for you. You realize that Mr. Schiavo's testimony is a priori self-serving, because as the plaintiff he would be expected to give testimony supportive of his suit.
Your question above, however, is a bit dumb. One would usually be expected to give testimony supportive of his family member. This is well documented even in cases where you might expect otherwise; for example, mothers are notably prone to testify on behalf of their spouses against their own children in child abuse cases. Mothers testify favorably to their children, even when their children are guilty of serious crimes. Most persons are motivated to be supportive of their close relatives and friends.
Thus, when a man testifies that he "din't do nuthin'," this is suspect because he would be expected to testify in his own interest. And when his mother, brother, uncle, cousin and girlfriend all testify, "Tha's ri'! He din't do nuthin'!" their testimony is also suspect, because they would be expected to testify on his behalf.
This is quite well known. It's why, in criminal trials, an alibi from a close relative, friend of significant other is not given much credence without supportive evidence.
Right. We shouldn't assume that you want what you've supported all this time.
Jodi had best watch her back.
The only supportive evidence was his testimony and that of his brother and sister. So apparently he devalued Mr. Schiavo's testimony, but found it utterly persuasive that his brother and sister backed him up. That takes a moron.
Mercy. Noun. Allow to die.
"Allow" to die by withholding nourishment and water. You need to buy an English dictionary; the rest of us don't know Newspeak.
I said "any attempt." As in, "Go ahead and attempt it, you grieving relatives. Since she's utterly incapable of swallowing, she'll die anyway--so what harm would it do for you to try? Feel free, if it makes you feel better."
Was that brought up on appeal? Was it significant to the case? How did that affect his ruling?
And in a normal world, accountable for every damn penny of it. In order to spare myself unending grief, I bought my mom's toiletries out of my own pocket. Her clothing were holiday presents from myself and the kids, out of our own pockets. My mom was not cared for in the home, either. If she had fallen and I had tried to pick her up, we would have both been in deep doodoo. As for money, I would have been under even more closer scrutiny had I personally cared for her in her own home.
All I'm asking is that you read the articles posted on those threads, not to eat broken glass. Robert, for some reason my gut tells me that you are a decent person, and so I will hold out hope for you.
I can relate to dealing with drinking problems. It's endemic in my family, and I can't deal with it any more. So I don't. They are on their own in that department.
To get to the truth in this case one need only know that he did not do it out of love for Terry. What else is there to have to know? All other reason's are about him and his needs and therefore not acceptable.
Jodi and MS are cohorts. They are both cut from the same mold, each of them need to watch their backs. Jodi is and never was an innocent bystander.
Thank you for that post. I think a lot of us feel that way whenever an issue like this comes up. They got their happy ending at last, and they are eating it up.
We'll get to that. I was most interested in the second half of your, "My point is that there is nothing corroborating self-serving testimony except other self-serving testimony."
But now you've changed it to "their testimony is also suspect". Suspect? What happened to "self-serving"?
Second request. How was Scott Schiavo's testimony self-serving? How was Joan Schiavo's testimony self-serving?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.