Posted on 04/07/2005 5:34:06 PM PDT by News Hunter
Edited on 04/07/2005 5:39:05 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
Let's hope so.
However, Gaddy and her brother, Michael Shane Magouirk, obtained an emergency injunction from Troup County Probate Judge Douglas Boyd to prevent the planned air transport.
I read that article after I posted the question about Mae's sister siding with Gaddy. I'm not sure what relation Michael Shane Magouirk is to Mae, but a casual read is that he is Gaddy's sister, i.e. is a grandson.
I'm curious about the strong sentiment that the new WND article represent a strong backtrack of some sort. IT appears to have the same general allegation that Gaddy wrongly commited her grandma to hospice; wrongly ordered withholding of nutrition and hydration; and hustled to a court to obtain legal guardianship while Mae's siblings were attempting to restore intubation. And none of the report clarify the timeline of intubation instigation, removal, restoration, etc.
Try to answer!
Well it seems to now admit that the starving may not be taking place, which was the hot button for most here. It now discusses the second hearing which would lead to the conclusion that everyone was involved and that Gaddy had a very limited guardianship order, and that the real issue may just be whether Mae is to be transported to another location or remain in the hospice. One reads from that, that the doctors assigned will determine if she is terminal and the extent of any medical needs. The judge, it seems has ordered Gaddy to ensure proper nutrition. It appears that the judge has things under control, at least temporarily. It appears far different from the intital read.
No, it does not. I am giving up on the notion that anyone is playing by any rules in these situations, including the rules of decency.
Glenn was duped, all right, as was his entire listening audience.
Yes. Time does move forward, and events do develop.
As for the doctors making a determination whether or not Mae is terminal, I read the article differently. The article says,
Under the terms of an April 4 court order, La Grange cardiologists James Brennan and Thomas Gore, and Dr. Raed Aquel, of UAB Medical Center, Birmingham, are to evaluate Magouirk and decide what treatment would be best and where it should take place.
I suppose one can read that as implying first a determination of whether or not her condition is terminal, but the usual course (as is being taken with Mae's sister) is to decice between surgical procedures and medication procedures. In other words, the assumption being that her condition is not presently terminal.
I think it is agreed that the judge's order includes an order for "proper nutrition." But there are conflicting reports as to whether or not Mae is receiving an amount of nutrition necessary to maintain her body. The nephew's reported e-mail post-dated the order, I think, and in the e-mail he asserts that Mae was [at that moment] not being properly nurished.
I do agree that this is so far a non-story. No major media have picked it up, so the non-story status is self-evident.
Right now, proper nutrition is most likely the important issue. I assume the hospice now has the judges order, and will take it seriously.
BTW, on another point, the LaGrange News reports that the other party along with Gaddy is the grandson, and I can find no other references to more than one sister, and it seems clear that the one sister is in the Mullinax camp.
But while the doctors ponder her condition, it is not certain if Magouirk has had a nasal feeding tube inserted for nourishment or an IV for hydration. According to Magouirk's nephew, Ken Mullinax, 45, his aunt has been without substantial food or hydration for 10 days....
Ken Mullinax hoped that publicity about the case would result in a feeding tube being inserted so she could begin receiving nourishment, but he told WorldNetDaily this has not happened.
WorldNetDaily has not been able to verify if food is still being denied, but if it is it would be in contradiction of the court's ruling.
The second article seems to contain approximately the same allegations that the first article contained; that Ken asserts a feeding tube has not been restored, and Ken is concerned that this omission is detrimental to Mae's physical health.
We also are told that even hospice counsel admits Mae had been denied food. The decision to withhold food must have been legal (at least supported by reasonable belief), or else it would not have been implemented.
However, she [Mae's sister] had to be told about her sister's situation because it was necessary for her to be in Judge Boyd's courtroom for the April 4 hearing as she was fighting Gaddy's petition for guardianship over Ora Mae, and had already learned about the denial of food by talking with Hospice counsel, Carol Todd.
I sincerely doubt that the lynch mob would have come out if WND and Glenn Beck had reported what is currently on the WND website and the LaGrange News. I do believe that WND was reporting with an agenda, which it has every legal right to. But as you and others have noted, it does seem like more of a non-story now than before.
Anyone who says he can see through a woman is missing alot.
You are senseless on this matter of this woman in Georgia.
Let's hope the 81 year old woman doesn't die before your lapse into righteous "even mindedness" has taken effect.
"Proper nutrition" is also an indefinite term, unless accompanied by a definition. I'm sure hospice is taking all of this attention seriously, and probably wishes this family feud was not in the public eye.
BTW, on another point, the LaGrange News reports that the other party along with Gaddy is the grandson, and I can find no other references to more than one sister, and it seems clear that the one sister is in the Mullinax camp.
So you would modify your earlier, "Also note that Mae's sister aligned herself with Gaddy in the guardianship issue with the judge" to read "Mae's grandson." And as the article says, that alignment is reported on a narrow issue, transportation to a hospital via air.
However, Gaddy and her brother, Michael Shane Magouirk, obtained an emergency injunction from Troup County Probate Judge Douglas Boyd to prevent the planned air transport.
Assuming for the sake of argument that Gaddy wants grandma to be with Jesus, it may be that her brother objects to transport at this time becuase he is afraid it will cause her to be with Jesus. ;-) They may agree on an action, but for completely different reasons. No way for us to know, and the reverse could be true. It is also true that people are known to change their point of view, which makes the entire situation fluid.
Yikes. That "lynch mob" terminology is a bit inflammatory.
Anyway, the genesis of the story seems to lie with Ken. I wonder whether events would transpire differently if Ken and Mae's sister's side of the story didn't expand beyond their personal sphere of influence. No way for us to know for sure.
My "non-story" comment wasn't meant as a comparison between the story as reported on Thursday and as reported now. It was that the events either way are and were a non-story. No major media outlet is covering this.
FWIW, the original genesis is a press release dated April 6 (Wednesday). Of course it is a one-sided presentation, because Ken did not agree with the steps Gaddy, hospital and hospice were taking.
You may have seen it already, if so, just ignore this pointer ;-)
I prefer the orthography "Theresa Marie Schindler (Schiavo)". Makes clear who is being talked about, while at the same time making clear which is the real name.
Heheheh. I was just rereading the thread and noticed this. My "best interests is subjective" point is, I think different from the one you alude to. My point was meant to illustrate that "best interests" can be subjectively taken in diametrically opposite ways.
"Best interests is to be with Jesus sooner, via withholding nutrition and water"
vs.
"Best interests is to choose a medical course of action that has the greatest likelihood of sustaining the patient's life."
The second one involves all subjective medical points and uncertainties. The first is not a medical decision to treat a treatable condition, rather it is an ethical judgement that the patient is better off dead. I must concede that a significant fraction of the medical and legal community holds that withholding of food and water constitutes an acceptable "medical treatment" for otherwise non-terminal patients, in particular, those that it deems to be better off dead.
To admit one made a mistake, explain the wisdom one has received since then, and seek to correct the mistake, is not the action of a flip-flopper. A flip-flopper is someone who says one thing is correct, and then later says some contrary thing is correct, without ever admitting that the first thing was wrong.
What evidence is there that the grandmother would be PVS or comatose were she not massively drugged?
I did earlier tell you that I could not get an independent verification of that, and that another source reported it as a brother. Later I told you that it appears to have been Gaddy's brother, not Mae's brother.
They may agree on an action, but for completely different reasons. No way for us to know, and the reverse could be true. It is also true that people are known to change their point of view, which makes the entire situation fluid.
It would be a major step forward for those here with a fixed picture to admit that perhaps there is more to this than any of us know.
Present company completely excluded. You have been more than willing to discuss this reasonably. By the lynch mob I refer to those who immediately condemned some with no other news but the first reports. And the condemnation was heated and pretty nasty.
Anyway, the genesis of the story seems to lie with Ken. I wonder whether events would transpire differently if Ken and Mae's sister's side of the story didn't expand beyond their personal sphere of influence. No way for us to know for sure.
I am tempted to question Ken's motivations for going so public, but then I would possibly be jumping to conclusions. It would be interesting to know just how involved Ken was with Mae during the 10 years that Gaddy cared for her. We may never know the total story.
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.