Skip to comments.Is Terri a person with constitutional rights?
Posted on 03/23/2005 3:20:34 AM PST by syriacus
1. Dr. Cranford said, to Hannity last night, that PVS persons have no constitutional rights.
2. Cranford has said that Terri is PVS
Does Terri have the constitutional right to ask to be starved to death?
if the people who want her to live think she does have rights
Which group can represent her rights?
So anyone know why Greer decided this guy was the only doctor whose testimony was worth considering?
Probably because he wasn't interested in any other result.
She does have rights, and so far the courts have upheld them.
Terri has no constitutional rights. Neither do any married women in America. That's what all of these courts who are allowing her to be starved to death are saying, anyway.
Remind me what motivation causes people to work in the "healing" professions. I think it's the same one that causes spouses to be beaten, and dogs to be kicked.
She does but according to the courts she allowed for this to happen by confirming it to her husband.
Is Terri a person with constitutional rights AS a Guinea-pig of the ABA and AMA....?
Golden-Judges say,....to the 'right' and to the 'left'...........New-'Order'-Golden-Kings in Amerika...
Hitler believed in Re-Incarnation 'Karma' Nazi Science!
God and The Innocent say,....Choose Life!!!......for 'Mercy' sake!
"Rights" are not easy or cheap.
The only one I've seen named is Dr. Crawford, the longtime euthanasia activist. Do you know the names of any of the others?
Including Cranford, who said she has no rights.
I have another question
The Constitution does not say that its laws are only for those deemed physically and mentally fit. It would have been a much lesser document if it had.
The "doctor" is deluded and deranged.
No, I don't have their names. But all professional opinions have been part of the eight years of litigation--due process denied, indeed--and part of the consideration of the three guardians ad litem that have been appointed and all come to the same conclusions.
Cranford the quack examined her 45 minutes only and he was totally ridiculed onHannity. Hammesfahr examined her for 10 hours and does not believe her to be PVS. Plus he did not get paid to give his opinion unlike the quack.
You seem to have trouble following this case right???
Or Even a TV show for that matter because Hannity only brought up the expertise of his brother an emminent radiologist as to the matter of an MRI test, which is a radiology field and your hero quack was tootally stumped and proven for the incompetent death driven deranged person that he is.
"Tell me who your friends are..."
Apparently, she has no more rights than an unborne child.
The guardians at litem I've researched... the latter two have serious conflicts of interest and cannot be considered credible. The 2003 guardian was particularly bad, IIRC. I wasn't able to find enough info on the first.
Let's hear from you who exactly performed the diagnosis?
Becuae that is how the husband feels. You can question his motivation all you want--and the specualtion has been rampant and almost libelous--but he was in the better position to know. Better than any one in this forum, certainly. The matter of law here is simple: when one becomes incapacitated the spouse becomes his or her advocate regarding medical treatment. Whether you agree with Michael Schiave or not; or whether he has been consistent or not; whether he has been true to his wedding vows or not; whether he tortures ants with a magnifying glass or not and whether you like it or not.
That is the rule of law.
The problem is that when you delve into the details there are conflicts of interest all over the place, and a distinct pattern of considering only evidence that supported the husband's position.
Where did you get your law degree or did you just stay at a Holliday Inn last night.
Reminds me of people who are, somewhat, similar to these folks--
Angels of Death - The Doctors: Why do doctors kill? New chapter on Linda Hazzard who became rich off the deaths of her patients.
Angels of Death - The Female Nurses: Nurses continue to murder their patients. Dr. Katherine Ramsland examines the motives and some high-profile and recent cases.
Angels of Death - The Male Nurses: Evidence of nurses who murder their patients has reached epidemic proportions globally. Dr. Ramsland examines the motives and major cases.
[from page 9, at that link]
the 146,000 male registered nurses represent 5 to 7 percent of all nurses yet are responsible for more than one-third who have killed patients in the U.S. since 1975.
Since male nurses are statistically over-represented among the nurses who kill, I wonder why Sheriff Everett Rice down there in Florida hired Michael Schiavo without an interview.
It's for sure I wouldn't hire a nurse without an interview.
"Dr. Cranford said, to Hannity last night, that PVS persons have no constitutional rights.
Remind me what motivation causes people to work in the "healing" professions. I think it's the same one that causes spouses to be beaten, and dogs to be kicked."
Hitler still lives. He declared them to be inhuman with no rights as he sent millions to the gas chamber. He was able to get plenty of help from his courts to carry out his executions.
Excellent Message: (Pastor) Frank Pavone's homily on Terri and a call for Civil DISOBEDIENCE
But Michael is not supposed to be suing for his rights, he is supposed to be suing for Terri's rights.
Michael's chief medical supporter, Dr. Cranford, thinks Terri has no rights.
I'm not impeaching anything. The courts have considered the opinion of these doctors. See my next post.
Where did you obtain your law degree from?
Personal attacks are quite charming.
As a society we've flung ourselves right down the rabbit hole, and we're never going to pull ourselves out again until the notion that a human being is his own chattel property is completely laid to rest, both in the law, and in the public consciousness. The notion that "I own my body and can do anything with it that I please," is what has given rise to the mess we're in.
Judicial "collegiality" kills.
How the husband feels is material as he is her advocate and, again, he might have been in a slightly better position to know these things than any of us.
The same place Jesus got his Divinity degree, no doubt.
So the Florida state judiciary is in cahoots with the federal judiciary to murder this one lady? For collegiality?
So you agree with starving an innocent women to death? As long as a doctor and a judge says it's ok. Hey, killing babies in the womb is ok, too, cause the law says it is.
Welcome to a vibrant land where forwards is backwards, up is down
Terri is trapped in a sick, sick Wonderland.
I didn't say cahoots...you did.
There are many things that are legal that I don't like. But then one should work to change the law--i.e.-the advocate system of law in Florida seems to be the case here. Isn't that what true conservatism is. Or do principals get thrown out when you don't like the results?
I didn't say cahoots...you did.
What does this mean?
So her right to live depends on whether he is having a good day or a 'roid rage day?
I wonder if Michael used steroids? I hear they can make you cranky.
This country is in the grip of immense evil.
Again, wonderful, well thought point. Your forensic skills are sharpening.
I've never heard of an eight year roid rage, though.
"Your right. If any doctor has any questions regarding treatment for a patient he should: ignore state law; disregard the spouse; ignore the vast majority of expertise and empirical data from his field; petition you and Sean Hannity and his brother-in-law for treatment advice and get Congress involved.
Welcome to medical & family law 2005."
Have you read history, young man? I suspect you are feeling pretty immortal yourself at the moment..But, your day will come if you live long enough..You might even begin to understand that freedom requires constant vigilence about whether the laws enacted by our government are effective in carrying out what was truly intended in reality. Laws can be distorted for the purpose of reflecting the political goal of raw power. Regarding spouses..50% of the marriages in this nation end in divorce and before those divorces occur, some great animosities grow between the people involved. In our own family, I shudder to think that any of the ex's would have any power over our family member. We had one who would have gone for money over anyone's life. As far as medical expertise..I am a medical person and I can tell you that the first thing one learns in medical school is just how little we know. Vaccinations, winning over infectious disease and the development of good anesthesias and surgeries have increased our life span, along with the good nutrition which keeps so many overweight. It is unfortunate that medical people now think that this kind of success makes them smart enough to challenge God's knowledge of the brain and nervous system which makes possible the expression of the soul. The understanding of all this is a new frontier and those who strut while sitting down, so proud of their definite opinions (in my view simply reflecting the lust for power) about whether Terri should live or die, are pushing us into a place where we do not want to go. Of course, once this kind of thing is set into motion, it spins faster and faster like a tornado and like a tornade, it leaves destruction in it's wake. God help us all!
I wan't aware she "asked her husband to execute" her rights.
I am aware he is trying to execute/kill her now.
But since Michael's friendly doctor, Cranford, doesn't think Terri is a person, I guess it's A-ok to kill her.
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.