Schiavo lawyers challenge 'Terri's Law'

AP | 10/29/03

[kattracks]

CLEARWATER, Fla. (AP) — A hastily passed state law that empowered Gov. Jeb Bush to keep a severely brain-damaged woman alive is unconstitutional, attorneys for the woman's husband claimed Wednesday.

In a court filing, attorneys for Michael Schiavo challenged what Florida lawmakers dubbed "Terri's Law," which gave Bush the authority to order Terri Schiavo's feeding tube be reinserted Oct. 21. They asked that the law be overturned.

The filing's major contentions are that the law violates Terri Schiavo's right to privacy under the Florida Constitution and the separation of power provisions of the state constitution.

Michael Schiavo has been battling in court for years to carry out what he says is his wife's wish to not be kept alive artificially.

His in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler, have fought him, saying their daughter had no such wishes and is not in a permanent vegetative state, as a probate judge has declared. They say she is responsive and could improve with therapy.

[UCANSEE2]

According to sworn testimony, which wasn't taken or released until recently, Michael wanted Terri to die from the start, and couldn't wait. It even appears he may have injected her with insulin to cause her to die. We have him admitting he refused her antibiotics, etc. hoping she would die.

That's why he trained to be a nurse. Find legal or undetectable ways to kill someone in a hospital.

I think I posted this on this thread already. If you want the link, I have it.

[Krodg]

"Terri's Law" did not fit the systemic problem in Florida, nor saved Terri's life indefinately, even if upheld by the highest court.

So true. The Legislature needs to take this time to totaly revamp the previous law that allows a guardian to kill someone on heresay evidence. Thank God that we have a system of checks and balances...

[UCANSEE2]

I agree with you except for the part where we let an attempted murderer who can't wait to finish the job get away with it.

[Theodore R.]

Yes, I am sure he wanted her to die from the time he got the "settlement." He did not want her dead before the settlement, that's for sure! He probably just wanted her out of existence early one. Now that he is a "celebrity" he will still stop at nothing to finish the task. That's what he told Larry King. I think there is money somehow in Terri's estate -- if nothing more than movie and book "rights."

I wonder why "Republican" George W. Greer turned a blind eye to all this chicanery and let evil proceed through his "court."

[cyn]

Oh, I know; I agree. This is atrocious! There are a lot of us doing the equivalent of shouting.

What impresses me as I've looked over past court filings trying to understand how on earth this has happened is how very, very many people -- how many law offices! -- have devoted themselves for days on end to try to get justice for Terri.

This link mentions those manhours, and concludes:

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1003264/posts -- # 18 The probate court system has blocked all attempts to rationally review this decision to sentence Terri Schiavo to death.

May we do better here and now, and finally end this nightmare for Terri and her family. And others.

RE: font size -- do your internet preferences allow you to increase it?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Good for him, this is not a state battle...he has legal gaurdianship....this is his family choice

Did I miss the terms of Terri's living will?

If not, what right does her "husband" have to order her death?

Actually, what right does ANYONE have to order her death?

[UCANSEE2]

I wonder why "Republican" George W. Greer turned a blind eye to all this chicanery and let evil proceed through his "court."

Best answer, ask him. I suspect that relatives and old friends on HOSPICE board, as well as FELOS offering a bribe, may have helped. It is possible that it was more simple and not so nasty. That Greer was 'influenced' by FELOS into believing Michael and distrusting her family. After all, the side with the lawyer wins. Her family and witnesses for her side had no one to protect or speak for them.

[jwin]

Why is he spending tons of money to make his wife die? Maybe he thinks that she might come to enough to talk!

[FR_addict]

Terri was planning to divorce Michael. He was abusive to her and in all likelihood caused her to collapse that night.

The suspected abuse is documented in the bone scan performed a year after the collapse.

I hope when you decide that your wife told you "not to feed her or let her have water" years after the fact, you are not living with another woman and having children by her and spending your wife's settlement fund, which you promised in open court to use for her rehabilitation.

[Dixielander]

Recently I viewed the video of the 1944 film "Gaslight" starring Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman, and Joseph Cotten.

Excerpts from the jacket blurb:

In the film, Bergman's character, a vulnerable young woman, marries the suave Boyer character, never suspecting that he's a murderer. She becomes his helpless victim as slowly, insidiously, he drives her to the brink of insanity.

I couldn't help but relate the characters to Michael's victimization of Terri, even as I watched the film.

[rdrunner]

As the mother of a brain damaged daughter who has survived a brain tumor for 6+ years, her husband wasted little time in dumping daughter back onto her parents even providing a lawyer(for her) when he announced he wanted a divorce. Fortunately we found her own lawyer as it finally all gets down to the money and control and I bet this is it also in Terri's case.

Wonderful son in law stated he needed emotional support and promptly moved in blonde with child. (One wonders what brainless twit would want such a callous man such as Terri's husband or son in law).

Son in law promptly proceeded to turn children against my daughter, who still cries out in the night calling for her husband and asks continually where her children are. She too suffers lots of brain damage and needs 24/7 care. What mother could turn her back on a child that still needs her regardless of their age?

When our daughter was in a coma for several weeks, she did not wake up and open her eyes and eventually could squeeze our hand. Today her life is very limited, but we continue to give her the best that we physically can as the doctors said that to try to keep her mentally stimulated and physically healthy and with all the new breakthroughs there might still be recovery not only from the cancer, but also there is talk of new insight into making repairs to the brain. At least they are now talking about it - six years ago, no one would even offer any hope.

I am sure it would be a lot cheaper to let people like Terri die, and I regret that we cannot give her a magic pill, but in this time and space, if at all possible financially to try to help it shows that human beings are trying to exist on a higher plain than animals when we try to care for those of our loved ones who can no longer care for themselves.

I regret that my daughter has so little of a normal life, but as long as she looks at me in the morning and smiles and says "I love you, Mom," I will do everything in my power to help.

Our first task was to separate her from the morally berift self surving husband who we are unfortunate to have had his genes mixed in with her offspring. I pity this unfortunate human being who is so much less a person than our daughter whose courage to just live and keep trying so that she can see her children is awesome.

Some people look at my daughter now and are repelled. Some say she is a burden to our family. Some lose patience with her, needing cues to do almost any task and do not want to be around her. Perhaps the challange will face them some day and they will change their minds.

[nothingnew]

...and the constitutional arguements involved.BTW, Been on FR for many years, just liked this handle better...

I wouldn't know who you are in the past, would I?

So tell me about the Constitutional arguments, and please, if you could, include the letter of the law and the spirit of the law for both sides in judgements past. I'm sincere in this. I'm not a lawyer.

FReegards,

FMCDH

[tomniris]

Go to the hospices web pages and dig deep within to see the training manual for hospice employees then give me your new opinion...ok...please do...thanks for writing.

[nothingnew]

(The GodSquad, The worst of the Thought Police)

Interesting Tag BTW>

FMCDH

[Theodore R.]

In which court did Felos file -- Demers, Greer, just where?

[Theodore R.]

What happened with the guardian ad-litem? The five-day period for this appointment has more than lapsed. Demers is not following the new FL law!!!!! Perhaps Demers should be removed from the bench now for violating state law. This case can still result in a disaster for Terri!

[Krodg]

After all, the side with the lawyer wins. Her family and witnesses for her side had no one to protect or speak for them.

I support Terri and her family but I don't support false statements. Greer was not the only judge on the case (I also don't believe he was the first...just the worst), Michael has had previous lawyers so Felos can't be blamed exclusively..and the Schindlers have had lawyers for years. The only person not really represented has been Terri.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Why didn't this nurse testify during the first lawsuit? Why is there such a lapse in time before her affidavit was given?

[Pan_Yans Wife]

There is sworn testimony to the fact the Michael is an attempted murderer.

That CANNOT be true, otherwise wouldn't law enforcement have arrested him, by now?

[supercat]

So true. The Legislature needs to take this time to totaly revamp the previous law that allows a guardian to kill someone on heresay evidence. Thank God that we have a system of checks and balances...

Indeed, there need to be some major changes. I can understand not requiring such statements to be in writing, as it would be possible for someone to be capable of communicating but not capable of writing. But the circumstances where hearsay is acceptable should be very narrowly circumscribed, and rules of evidence explicitly written out, since it seems some judges are not capable of executing reasonable judgement in such matters.

Likewise, I think the guardian ad litem statutes need to be expanded to include a list--explicitly not exhaustive--of certain circumstances in which a judge would be required to find that a potential conflict of interest exists and thus to appoint a guardian ad litem.