Skip to comments.Spare Me the Indignation
Posted on 06/19/2005 12:01:52 AM PDT by mal
E-mail Author Author Archive Send to a Friend Print Version
E.J. Dionne, Matt Lauer, and the rest f the mainstream media vanguard are in high dudgeon. The autopsy report is finally out on Terri Schiavo, and they want to know: Where is the apology? A better question would be: Are they kidding?
Lets review the state of play at the time of Terris death, even as these revisionists reshape the history, as victors no matter how inglorious their victories surely get to do. There were two questions of critical import: Was Terri Schiavo in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), and had she really evinced a desire not to live if she were ever in such a state?
These questions were fundamental because the Supreme Court has recognized PVS as a point at which sustenance may permissibly be denied, and said that this decision may permissibly be communicated, but not made, by a surrogate. This is crucial because a person in a PVS is not dead. If she is to die, she must be killed. I know that is a terribly impolite way of putting it especially for people like Mr. Dionne and Mr. Lauer, who are so studiously sensitive and enlightened about such matters. But thats what has to happen: We have to kill her, or her life may go on for years.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
This is the absolute best analysis I read about the real issues of the Terri Schindler Schiavo tragedy.
I highly recommend reading the entire article.
Good article. Thanks for posting it.
Outstanding! Thank you for finding and posting this article
Lays the key issues out perfectly.
1- an unaccountable Judiciary.
2- whose life is it, anyway? Yours, or someone else's?
3- whose Country is it?
There are other vital issues, of course- but these three will determine just who we really are as a nation.
I'm not sure this guy even followed the case before putting pen to paper.
"First, that the proof that she was actually in a PVS was not strong enough and was suspect because basic tests that could easily have settled doubts were being resisted."
Not strong enough for whom? Let's see your medical degree, "Doctor" McCarthy. Terri's doctors examined the x-rays and worked with her for years and were all convinced she was in a PVS. The other "basic tests" couldn't have been done because of the metal implants in her skull. They weren't "resisted," they were simply not possible.
"Second, that the evidence that Terri had actually expressed a considered preference on the momentous decision of whether to end her life was appallingly thin."
Both sides presented evidence to the judge and the judge made his decision, which was his job. Several witnesses heard adult Terri say she would not want to live as a vegetable. One witness heard a very young child Terri saying that Karen Ann Quinlan should be allowed to live. The judge gave credence to the adult's opinions, and that's as it should be. What's "appallingly thin" is the author's justification for his opinions.
"Most of us did not question that a PVS patient who had credibly expressed a choice to die could lawfully be starved and dehydrated to death."
Then please explain, Mr. McCarthy, what is your article really about, if you don't question her decision?
"Therefore, if it was to be done to an innocent person like Terri, the proof on the two predicates better be convincing. As it wasnt convincing..."
Let's be clear on this, shall we? The "proof" doesn't have to be convincing to Mr. McCarthy, or to me, or to any member of the sensationalism-seeking general public. The "proof" as evidence only has to convince the judge. And since all of the evidence presented in the trial is not available to the general public, the general public has no right to demand further proof or to condemn the evidence as faulty or insufficient. In other words, Mr. McCarthy, butt out of the matter.
"She may or may not have been in a PVS to this day we dont know."
I could have sworn I heard the autopsy doctor say she had been in a PVS. I do recall him saying that she was most certainly blind. And that throws all of the Schindlers' BS observations out the window, saying that she was happy to "see" them and that she followed that Mylar balloon. They probably watched her head movements and determined when she would turn her head from one side to another, and then moved the balloon in that direction and said that the video was proof that she could see. I did see another video of her where Mr. Schindler had a set of rapidly-flashing LEDs that would attract the attention of anyone, from infant to elderly, and Terri's head kept turning from side to side, not even noticing them. That certainly confirms the autopsy determination of blindness and also confirms that the Schindlers were lying.
"We are stuck with a record that should trouble serious people: no living will, and some self-interested witnesses (mainly husband Michael, by then pulled by the ties of a new family) who suddenly remembered years after the fact that Terri supposedly made some passing remarks about not wanting to be maintained in extremis."
Michael Schiavo worked his butt off for several years to keep Terri clean and to get all kinds of special therapy and tests for her. The medical staff there said that he was a doctor's worst nightmare because he kept after them to give her special treatment. He flew her to California to have those skull implants put in to help her get back to normal again. But after her doctors informed him that she was in a PVS, he decided to let her go. And I can identify with Michael's case. If something happened to my wife, I would do everything I could to get her back to normal. But if confronted with several years of no progress, and informed by her doctors that she was in a PVS and would never get better, I would certainly honor her wishes not to be kept alive as a vegetable. Luckily, we both have living wills, so I would at that time bring out the document and be equally as dedicated to make sure her end of life wishes were honored. Michael did the right thing, regardless of his family relationships at the time.
"Im sorry that some who championed the outcome in the Schiavo case wont just come out and say what they really think. Namely, that some lives are simply not worth living or defending. And the legal protections are just trifles."
There's nothing like twisting the truth to make a point. This case was not about the "right to die." It was actually about the law in Florida and the "right of privacy," the privacy of making one's own end of life decisions. In this case the decision was verbal rather than written, so a court proceeding was required. But in the end, it was not the court or Michael Schiavo who decided that life was not worth living. It was Terri herself who made that decision, and her relatives related her words to the court when she was no longer capable of speech.
Let those who would second-guess Terri's doctors trot out their medical certificates for all to see. And let those who would second-guess Terri's end of life decisions trot out their detailed conversations with her for all to hear. And finally, let those who want to make money off of Terri's death by writing articles for the National Review Online retreat back under their slimy rocks where they really belong.
Aaron Brown of CNN says the Schindler's owe Michael Schiavo an apology. He has it bass-ackwards! I guess I better stop what I'm doing right now and send a letter to Mr. Brown telling him off. I was horrified the way the MSM went off half-cocked right after the autopsy. It's as if their scripts were already written (which no doubt they were).
As usual, they didn't do their home work. The autopsy actually opens the door for the Schindler's to file a myriad of law suits. For example, the autopsy results state that the original diagnosis about the cause of Terri's collapse was false, meaning all the money awarded to the HINO was based on falsehood.
Thanks to the autopsy, the HINO is going to have some explaining to do!!!
My comments to CNN (Aaron Brown) just sent:
Mr. Brown went off half-cocked on the day the autopsy was released. He posed the question: "Do the Schindler's owe Michael Schiavo an apology?" Of course, his guest and he had a pat-yourself-on-the-back affirmative response. And the media pretty much marched in lock-step to that tune.
Come to find out, the autopsy in fact opens the door for the Schindler's to file a myriad of law suits. For example, the original reason given for Terri's collapse - and the reason given for Michael Schiavo's monetary award - was proven to be false.
Therefore, the reason for Terri's condition was called into question and Gov Bush has asked for an investigation.
Here's a better question for Aaron Brown to pose: Why did it take Michael Schiavo between 40 and 70 minutes to call 911 that day?
Another question CNN might explore: Why did the autopsy report fail to come up with a cause of death? Everyone with half a brain (which even Terri had according to the autopsy report) knows that the cause of death was dehydration and starvation. (Duh.)
I wish CNN staff would do their homework instead of shooting from the hip when it comes to controversial issues they obviously have not thought out but rather have decided in advance. Same old boring spin machine.
Terri Schindler's memory lingers in our hearts and minds. We will never forget. And by pouring salt on our wounds, you are showing your true colors and distancing us even more from your goofiness.
Have a heart!!! Please tell Mr. Brown for me that his gloating and disgusting display on the day of the autopsy was sickening.
Thanks for "listening".
Not impressed with the article by the way. Where's the outrage?
Bump your post #6.
My kindest regards to you, Saundra.
There! There's the outrage I was looking for. Thank you!
Don't mention it. I'm NEVER getting over what they did to Terri. NEVER!!!!!!!!
With you all the way... if you wish to read my position and reasons, they are contained in replies #365 & #349.
This is my argument all along. She wasn't allowed to die, as some like to say but she was killed. Plain and simple.
bump for later
Good article. PVS is a clinical diagnosis. It can't be determined from a corpse.
Dr. Stephen Nelson, Neuropathologist, in a report contained within the autopsy report: "The persistent vegetative state and minimally conscious state are clinical diagnoses, not pathologic ones. ...
"Neurophysiologic examination alone of the decedent's brain - or any brain for that matter - cannot prove or disprove a diagnosis of persistent vegetative state or minimally conscious state".
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.