Posted on 03/30/2005 2:14:34 PM PST by CHARLITE
That's not a "Solomonic" solution, it's a SOPHOMORIC solution. JOEL BELZ forgets (if he ever knew) that Terri is Catholic. She could only get a declaration of nullity which says that no marriage ever existed in the first place. If that were the case, he would have no grounds for being her guardian. Now, directed merely at Michael, who they say is not Catholic but Lutheran (I'm not sure), his divorcing Terri would be assuming he WANTS to divorce her.
Belz might not be willing to think that MS could have an ulterior motive: keeping the b**ch quiet, so he doesn't get in trouble for her injuries in the first place. If he does, that would explain everything, including his continuing penchant to control Terri's life, or what's left of it, anyway.
Before Nell was gagged and could not speak, she let it be known that she wouldn't want to live in a brain-damaged-no-recovery-possible condition.
Would you honor her request or not?
It is funny that the brainless bag of skin in your story was still able to communicate in morse code. Are you and your mother able to speak that way - or are you both among the brainless?
What you really mean is that when you are worthless to us you have a duty to die or rather accept us killing you. Terri is not simply dying, she is being killed.
Part of the issue with Terri Schiavo was what she wanted - your view ignores that and advances the notion of killing fields in our country.
She said this prior to 1991. What if the medical arts today are more highly advanced of assessing and perhaps treating her condition. Have we established that she is not self-aware?
How in the world is Michael's "remembering" seven years after her illness that she told him she wouldn't want to be on life-support "clean and convincing evidence"? And many would argue that a feeding tube is NOT life support. Judge Greer is murdering Terri along with her husband. May they both get what's coming to them - the sooner the better.
Robert, Robert, Robert - you don't have your facts correct. Judge Greer didn't just order that the feeding tube be removed - he forbad feeding by mouth. So are you arguing that feeding by mouth is extraordinary care?
What is so hard to understand about this? When Michael moved in with another woman and fathered her children, he should have been removed as guardian!!! What don't people see that?
Maybe we can avoid complexity altogether by not allowing anyone to contest anyone's desire to put any disabled person to death. That will make it simple, won't it?
I will accept that she said this, but she could have referring to the Quinlan case, where the woman was, i believe, in a total coma for ten years after being remoived from a respirator.
A judge hearing the dispute between Michael and the Schindlers should have resolved it by ordering a divorce that had not been requested by either spouse and that he didn't have the authority to grant?
Remember that the next time you use the phrase "judicial activism"...
Would it be possible to feed by nose?
Where did that come from?
In January, 2000, Judge Greer conducted a hearing where he was presented with medical evidence by both sides, he heard sworn testimony from both sides, and the cross examinations of that testimony by both sides.
Based on that evidence and testimony, he found that Terri would not have wanted to live the way she was living, and ordered the feeding tube removed.
Since any other judge would have ruled the same, I believe Judge Greer's decision to be an objective assessment of the facts.
Not true. He hates disabled women.
Get your tin-foil conspiracy "facts" straight.
They call it a feeding tube, your attempt at humor is lost on anyone with a heart.
Nope.
Greer wants her dead. He rejected out of hand contrary evidence, and so is murderingher.
HE REJECTED contrary evidence, refused it from being recorded - (so future (more impartial judges can't look at it) - and is her judge, jury, and executioner.
"She said this prior to 1991. What if the medical arts today are more highly advanced of assessing and perhaps treating her condition. Have we established that she is not self-aware?"
A medical spokeswoman addressed that question on TV news last night. She said that Greer's decisions lately have been based on information and technology that was from 2002. Since then we are now able to discern more about what is going on in the mind of a disabled, brain damaged patient. Michael could be in a big hurry to OFF his wife before the window of opportunity closes. If Greer were to follow the "de novo" mandate of Congress and the President, newer technology would be applicable, and Michael might not have the filtered evidence the court is now using for its out-of-date judgment.
The judge had "clear and convincing" evidence that she was not self-aware. Ditto on treating her condition.
Could the judge be wrong? Of course. But this is the system, not putting it up to a vote in USATODAY.
Had the judge revoked Michael's guardianship as a result of his wanton failure to honor the obligations of that role, a new guardian could have (and an honest guardian would have) filed for a divorce (guardians of incapacitated wards can do that in Florida in cases where continued marriage would be clearly contrary to a ward's best interest). Given that Michael had openly renounced his marriage vows, I would expect it would have been granted.
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.