Schiavo's parents lose appeal

Orlando Sentinel ^ | 2/21/2005 | Maya Bell

[Servant of the Cross]

It is one judge, Circuit Court Judge George Greer. I would not wish to be him on Judgment Day.

[Kleon]

Judge won't let the parents in because they want to video tape her to show she is still responsive

Are there any doctors who say she is responsive? I ask this because that video could have been easily edited to make it seem as though her involuntary responses are reactions to stimuli.

[franky]

We must realize that this case is just the tip of the ice berg. It is another act of the abominations that are going on in this country.

God not only judges individuals, He judges nations. The worse part being that science, the court system and politicians are play gods. God did say "I am a jealous God".

If you pray,pray that God's chastisement to this country be short and merciful

[MizSterious]

I have read and heard about it elsewhere, HOTD, including but not limited to my church. The guy IS dirty, and it appears he's used her settlement money to grease some palms--originally. Now I think they (the judges and lawyers) want to kill her to save their sorry rear ends.

I suggest you read up on the case a bit more, and find out (for instance) how it was most likely a beating that put her in this condition (as per Baden et al), and how the husband was awarded lots of money in a malpractice lawsuit for her care--and then immediately started the process of having her killed. View, if you get the chance, the video of this dear lady that most in the MSM don't want you to see--she is not in a vegetative state, she is not brain dead, she is conscious and has spoken to nurses and others.

What they are doing in this case is murder. They treat mass murderers better than they are treating this woman. (Where's Sister Prejean, I wonder? She can always be found on death row for some despicable murderer--why not this innocent lady?)

[HairOfTheDog]

What is the argument ~against~ having her tested, videotaped and evaluated? If there is good argument to do this, where are the lawyers making good argument for that to happen?

I am not saying you all are wrong... I just wonder what the opposing argument that won out, really is.

What happened to the law that was passed? Why was it struck down?

[Time is now]

The emergency statute passed by the legislature Oct. 21, 2003, gave the governor authority to order the reinsertion of the incapacitated woman's feeding tube that had been removed six days earlier in compliance with a court order obtained by her estranged husband Michael Schiavo, who is also her legal guardian.

Michael Schiavo, represented by "right-to-die" advocate George Felos, challenged the constitutionality of the law and the governor's action, naming Bush as a defendant. The American Civil Liberties Union weighed in as co-plaintiff.

On Sept. 23, 2004, capping a series of lower court rulings all in Schiavo's favor, the Florida high court ruled the law to be an "impermissible violation" of the separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

"It is without question an invasion of the authority of the judicial branch for the Legislature to pass a law that allows the executive branch to interfere with the final judicial determination in a case," wrote Chief Justice Barbara Pariente for the court.

According to the Orlando Sentinel, pundits at four Florida law schools agree and predict the nation's high court will turn down the request to review the state court's decision because – in their view – there are no federal issues involved.

"To put it crudely, it's none of the U.S. Supreme Court's business," said Bruce Winick, of the University of Miami School of Law. "The Florida Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what the Florida Constitution means and they have spoken."

[CedarDave]

I can't believe that every judge ever to hear this case is in on some great conspiracy to kill this woman.

They aren't, but it's the ol' southern buddy system -- I'll cover your back and you cover mine. That trumps a case where the law is murky. Activist judges in California routinely ignore precedent to make law, usually ruling against God and country. It would be nice if they would err on the side of human life in this case.

[tutstar]

Judge Greer also has said no one can try to feed Terri when her tube was previously removed!

[Drango]

Here's why I'm curious.... The only place I have ever heard about this case is here, where the bias is united against the husband,

Many FReepers don't bother to post an opposing view to these threads as they quickly get insulted and shouted down. The reality is most people don't want the state, courts or church involved in end of life issues.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,101826,00.html

Majority Would Remove Schiavo's Feeding Tube

Friday, June 18, 2004

By Dana Blanton

Three times as many Americans think Terri Schiavo's feeding tube should be removed as think it should remain and — if in her place — most Americans say they would prefer the tube be removed.

When asked to consider what action they would take if they were Schiavo's guardian, a 61 percent majority says they would remove her feeding tube and 22 percent would keep the tube inserted, according to the latest FOX News national poll conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corporation.

Terri Schiavo (search ) is the Florida woman who has been in a "persistent vegetative state" since 1990. Schiavo's husband, who believes his wife would rather die than be kept alive artificially, is currently in a heated legal battle against her parents. Terri's parents believe she could still recover and want the feeding tube to remain. After Schiavo's feeding tube had been removed for several days, it was recently re-inserted by an order from Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

"It seems clear that if the governor and the Florida Legislature passed the law and ordered the tube replaced for political motives, as some of their critics have charged, then they miscalculated the politics," comments Opinion Dynamics President John Gorman (search ). "On every important point of the dispute, the public agrees with Mr. Schiavo and the courts that have ruled on this matter."

Majorities of young Americans and seniors, men and women would remove the feeding tube in Schiavo's case and would want it removed if they were in a similar circumstance. Self-described conservatives are less likely than liberals to support removing Schiavo's feeding tube, but still a majority of conservatives supports removal (56 percent to 70 percent among liberals).

Half of Americans believe the spouse should be the decision maker in right-to-die cases, while just under a third say the parents or other family members should be the ones to decide. Hardly any think the decision should be left to the government (two percent) or to the patient's doctor (four percent).

Polling was conducted by telephone October 28-29, 2003 in the evenings. The sample is 900 registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of ±3 percentage points.  

1. If a patient has been in what doctors call a “persistent vegetative” or a coma-like state with no higher brain activity for a significant amount of time, who do you think should make the decision whether the patient should be kept alive or not?

1. The person’s parents or other family members	31%
2. The person’s spouse	50
3. The government	2
4. (The person’s doctor)	4
5. (Not sure)	13

2. Terri Schiavo has been in a so-called “persistent vegetative state” since 1990. Her eyes sometimes open, but doctors say she has no consciousness. Terri’s husband says his wife would rather die than be kept alive artificially and wants her feeding tube removed. Terri’s parents believe she could still recover and want the feeding tube to remain. If you were Terri’s guardian, what would you do?
SCALE: 1. Would you remove the feeding tube 2. Or would you keep the feeding tube inserted? 3. (Not sure)

	Remove	Keep	(NS)
TOTAL ANSWER	61%	22	17
Female	62%	20	18
Male	60%	25	15
Age 18-34	64%	25	11
35-50	57%	26	17
51-59	66%	17	17
60-70	67%	18	15
Over 70	60%	17	22
Democrat	68%	20	13
Republican	56%	26	17
Independent	58%	19	23
Liberal	70%	18	13
Moderate	61%	24	15
Conservative	56%	26	18

3. If you were in Terri Schiavo’s place, what would you want your guardian to do? Would you have your guardian:

1. Remove the feeding tube or	74%
2. Keep the feeding tube inserted?	16
3. (Not sure)	10

SEARCH

[DJ MacWoW]

There are several videos of Terri here:

http://www.terrisfight.org/

[bjs1779]

Nice answer to my straightforward question. Not surprised.

Thank you. Let me repeat it in your own words if I am permitted to quote:

"Think about how stupid these laws are. Why can't they just give her an injection of something? Well, maybe because people on your side won't let that happen either. In reality, she will starve because of your side of the argument. Chew on that."

92 posted on 02/01/2005 5:58:47 PM CST by Hildy ( To work is to dance, to live is to worship, to breathe is to love.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[maine-iac7]

I don't believe this guy could be the devil he is made out to be here. If he were the devil and the parents are the heros, they'd have at least won visitation. ,,,"etc etc

You should probably do the research and bring yourself up to date before judging the folk here who HAVE been involved for months?

The parents DO visit - look up the video

BUT, if you know anything about law - the husband's "rights" trumps parents - he has, evidently, power of attorney over her medical care.

But if he's so upstanding, why has he, all along, refused her any therapy?

Why was there unexplained evidence of broken bones she had received before the hospital?>P?Why are there suspicions that she may have had injuries to her neck consistent to strangling?

Why, since he has another love by whom he has two children - doesn't he simply turn power of attorney and all responsibility over to her parents?

Why, if as it has been reported, does he plan to have her cremated immediately without an autopsy?

Could he be concerned about something?

[Annie03]

My understanding of the system is that the appeals courts do not review the facts of the case....they only look for judicial error. Legally, that ties the hands of appellate judges. If the rulings are within the law, they are upheld.

[HairOfTheDog]

Your points about him being dirty and the courts corrupt isn't new to me. I know you think that. I haven't seen anything that looked like real evidence to support all the allegations here. You guys all just run with it as if it's fact.

If there are videotapes (I have seen them) why don't they compell anyone? Where did the videos come from, if no one is allowed to make them? What is the argument against her being as responsive as the videos might lead you to believe? Why did it fail to convince those with the power to do something?

[tutstar]

ping...

[Hildy]

I've been nothing but honest about my view on this. You didn't answer my question. Is it the starvation or the dying? In your estimation, nobody should be allowed to die even in they have stipulated it in a legal document. Because if they had, at least in Floriday, the only way they'd be able to is by starvation.

[DJ MacWoW]

"persistent vegetative state"

This is what renders that poll useless. Show people videos of Terri, then ask those questions.

[CedarDave]

The problem with that poll is that the facts of this case, admittedly as presented by those on the parents side, do not fit the questions. If this person was in a "persistent vegetative" state, I too would agree with termination of life support.

BTW, why should not the parents, who are very willing to take over her care and fully pay for her support, not be given that opportunity? Why is the cretin who is living with a women not his wife and has children by that woman have a say in this?

[tutstar]

Baloney! The Florida Supreme Court wasn't the final authority when the 2000 elections was the topic of the day.
Florida Supremes will eventually be voted out if people will just pay attention when it's time.

They ought to be impeached imo.

[Servant of the Cross]

Isn't it ironic that the Florida Supreme Court uses a separation of powers argument to strike down Terri's Law? Talk about a violation of separation of powers! It is intentional that there are three branches so that two can overcome the one when it has clearly failed. And yet here we have the one tyranical Judiciary branch having the last word ... again.