Posted on 02/02/2007 3:49:53 AM PST by 8mmMauser
I don't know about anyone else, but I am still waiting for Michael Schiavo to make a correction on his blog about what "actually" took place in Colorado when he went there (to the debate) to supposedly ask Congresswoman Musgrave one question and she and her staff supposedly tried to have him removed. He called it, "My unreal night in Colorado - with radio link" (Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 08:05:14 PM PST). I'll say (from what I read) that it was his "unreal night".
As I said before in "Standing up and Admitting a Mistake: Not Schiavo's Style?", if four uniformed officers were around my seat, I would have some idea of what was going on. I certainly wouldn't be sitting in "duh mode" to only be told later of what took place right there around me, as Michael suggests he was. If Michael's account is realistic -- his response and reaction is not. Nor is his response appropriate now that he has "learned" what he was "allegedly told" is not what took place. One would think if he can't get the words out that he was mistaken, he could at least have removed the inaccurate entry from his blog.
He has done neither.
I'm also still waiting to read about, "Also, maybe tomorrow I'll post about my election-eve rally with Bill Clinton in Florida." (A real election impact by Michael Schiavo, Thu Nov 09, 2006 at 10:40:34 AM PST). Indeed, I would love to read that story by Michael, since I read it was not possible. Not if he was implying it was the Bill Clinton that is the former President of the United States. Will be interesting to see what he says about that if he ever does.
If Michael couldn't get it straight what happened at the Musgrave debate or even if he spent election-eve with former President Bill Clinton -- do you suppose he might have gotten Terri Schiavo's wishes mixed-up as well? (He does claim to have a bad memory from what I read.) Makes one wonder. At least makes me wonder. Whatever...
I'm still waiting for the corrections if not the explanations!
Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.
Global warming certainly is a religion to liberals. They have SO many religions, all of them 100% intolerant of any other view. Liberals never went to Sunday School or church when they were small, so they have no feel at all for religious observance. All they can do is feel deeply, emote, and set the hounds to howling by being so batty.
Rush's monologue on global warming from Friday was one of his very best ever, regardless of subject.
Missed it, but he speaks well on the subject. Catch Dr. Art Robinson if you can, there's a scientist who knows his stuff.
If I was in the same position, I probably would have deferred to the parents plea for their daughter, however other husbands will be thankful in the future that this debacle didn't eviscerate husbands rights.
No.
I have followed Terri Schiavo’s situation for several years. I have delved into many aspects of her life as a woman with disabilities. I have been bewildered by a single question since Terri’s death. Why did some disability advocates abandon Terri? I have heard them say it is a right-to-die issue, it is an end-of-life issue, or it is a private matter between family members. I am the mother of a ten-year-old boy with profound mental retardation, quadriplegic cerebral palsy, and epilepsy. If Terri Schiavo is not a member of the community of people with disabilities, then neither is my son. Reading articles and editorials written by otherwise respected disability advocates that snub Terri and turn their backs on her first scares me, and then infuriates me. Terri Schiavo was a woman living with disabilities deserving of all of the same rights and legal protections as any other person with a disability. Terri Schiavo’s starvation is a disability rights issue.
The most tenacious encounters that I have had over Terri are with those on disability rights list serves and forums. The more vicious attacks on Terri are also coming from the group of people that should be standing in support and respect of Terri as a woman living with disabilities. Disability rights activists are taking the opportunity to use Terri to bash Republicans and scorn President Bush. Their anger at Conservatives blinds them to their own hypocrisy.
I have wondered why disability advocacy groups and individuals who would otherwise support and advocate on behalf of people with disabilities would not embrace her into our community. Is it that some less disabled people find it difficult to relate to those with profound or severe cognitive impairments? Are people that have disabilities limited to their physical realm afraid to have that close association with a person that has profound mental retardation or severe brain damage? Are parents of children with disabilities that are less cognitively impaired prejudiced against us parents who have children with profound mental retardation and severe brain damage? Is it that you might offend your political ideologues? What is it about disability advocates that they so vehemently want to exclude Terri Schiavo from being called one of us? What are you afraid of?
8mm
Pennsylvania has new blueprint for a better death
8mm
Advisory Group Split On Futile-Care DebateHOUSTON -- A group charged with proposing changes to the state's futile-care law is at an impasse over the amount of time a family should have to transfer a patient if the hospital decides to end life-sustaining treatment.
Group chairman Greg Hooser said in a new report that he hopes members will find a compromise extending the transfer window, which is now set at 10 days. But the group members will have to work around their fundamental disagreement over whether doctors should even be allowed to withhold treatment.
"What we have is a collision of deeply held values, deeply felt emotions and medical science," said Hooser, a lobbyist and attorney with Sneed, Vine & Perry. "Both sides are finding it difficult to surrender their positions."
The coalition, which is made up of doctors, hospitals, right-to-life groups and disability activists, was formed a year ago by the state House Committee on Public Health to investigate reforming the futile-care law.
~snip~
Hooser said the group will continue meeting and he hopes it will reach a consensus that could be introduced to lawmakers during the ongoing legislative session.But Dr. Robert Fine, a representative of the Texas Medical Association and supporter of the law, said Texas Right-to-Life has refused to compromise and has insisted that the law require hospitals to continue treatment until an alternative facility can be found.
Elizabeth Graham, director of Texas Right-to-Life, countered that the medical association has also refused to compromise.
"The missing consensus stems from underlying philosophical differences regarding patient rights, quality of life judgments and medical treatment," Graham said. "Bridging these chasms in a short time period will prove quite challenging, especially since the coalition has been trying to reach some type of substantial consensus for over a year."
Hooser's report included other changes the group could propose, including requirements that hospitals do more to assist families during the transfer process and the establishment of a voluntary state registry to store advance directives.
I don't see what's so difficult about solving the crisis in Texas. Just stop allowing the doctors to redefine what futile care means. I understand that it's futile to give kidney dialysis to a patient who doesn't need it, but some of these doctors are deciding to refuse kidney dialysis based on their perception of who deserves it instead of who needs it.
Remember Venlang Vo? She was receiving kidney dialysis. Her doctor decided that she was in a persistent vegetative state, and therefor did not deserve kidney dialysis. Her family disputed the PVS assessment, but even if she was, she had previously made her wishes (to continue treatment) known. Last I read, they were still battling over whether or not she deserved to live. I never learned what the conclusion was.
So now we have a committee attempting to decide how to solve the crisis of Texas doctors and ethics committess condemning patients to death based on the perceived futility of their lives. They claim it's the futility of their treatment, but are Texans stupid enough to demand kidney dialysis to treat brain damage? No. These are cases where the treatment is doing exactly what it's designed to do, on patients that the doctors have decided are futile. And the committee is tasked with getting everyone to compromise on a time frame for exterminating the futile patients. Maybe the good doctors will be kind enough to grant more than ten days.
So what can we do? Kill everyone who has a lawyer?
As I recall, Mrs. Vo hung on for a time and died at home. In that sense, she was like Andrea Clark, who also got to leave on a reasonable basis -- instead of under a death threat by the hospital's withdrawal of care. She died with dignity with her family and was able to express her gratitude for that kindness. I believe the same was so for Mrs. Vo.
It should suffice to make lawyers work for minimum wage. NO contingency fees or otherwise taking a piece of settlements.
I think the lawyers got $800,000 initially out of Michael's latter two phony malpractice suits. Do you suppose they would have pursued the swindle unless they got 40%? Imagine if the sharks made, oh, $5.50 an hour, Terri would probably be taking bike rides in the park today.
They got another $400,000 or so out of the same settlement money later by killing her. Now we're up to 60% of the settlement devoured by lawyers. Michael got his loss of consort award -- what was the net, $300,000? 75% of the settlement gone. I don't even want to think what part the IRS got.
The jury awarded the money to take care of Terri, and as far as possible, to give her the therapies she needed. Instead, Michael and the lawyers killed her and kept the money.
I presume this is what the whole so-called "right to die" movement is really about -- killing for profit.
Which is why, I might have added, that former prosecutor Wendy Murphy called Michael a "fraud on the court." Frankly, I think all of the lawyers who undertook the malpractice lawsuits were frauds on the court. One of them MADE UP the "malpractice," shown (much later) to be nonsense by Terri's autopsy. In the later litigation Felos, Bushnell et al. twisted or concealed the truth over and over in order to kill an innocent woman. They took huge fees from Terri's own trust fund (!) to put her to death. But then, why was the court ever involved, after Michael had shown himself to be a fraud back in 1993?
The whole think stunk more than a hog farm.
It is not only HARD to accept the state sanctioned murder of Terri, done in a GRUESOME WAY (death row inmates get a more merciful death than 13 days of being denied water and food), but it is WRONG to accept it, EVER.
Schiavo is a MONSTER.
After that, I'd certainly never live in Pennsylvania. I hate even to pass through a place like that. You never know when you'll fall ill. If you have more than a buck and a quarter in your pocket, you'll be bioethicked.
>> "On April 21, 2005 my husband Chris Barnes suffered a cardiac arrest after jogging. No cause for the heart failure was ever established. Chris was 32 years old at the time of his injury, an athlete, 100% healthy. Chris was resuscitated twice with the defibrillator but as a consequence he suffered an anoxic brain injury due to the lack of oxygen to his brain. This blog is a daily account of his progress since the accident."
Chris has made little progress, apparently, and his wife, Koo Cho, is understandably discouraged. Send her a prayer.
These are names of "other brain injury site" linked on this page (but these are only the names, not links). We should take a look at these. There are many stories here.
Abby Vara
Anoxia Survivors
Aubrey Robbins
Candice Bendek
Chad Kunis
Charbel Rouhana
Dani Dixon
Debbie Rich
George Melendez
Kathleen Davey
Laura Laughlin
Lisa Wintory
Madison Randolph
Michael Mobley
Neuro-regeneration, Repair and Functional Recovery
Ross Dillon
Sam Howell
Sarah Scantlin
Tori Schmanski
Tyler Archibald
This college student's essay (some months ago) about Terri, and other brain-injured patients, is informed and well reasoned. It is really a pleasure to see students like this offering an uplifting, morally responsible view -- especially in contrast to the debased posturing we've heard so often from purported grown-ups.
And note this remarkable reference:
>> "In 2002, a 31-year-old comatose stroke victim, Mark Ragucci, managed an almost complete recovery through intensive and innovative methods of therapy, procured through the efforts of his devoted wife. His doctor, Stephan A. Mayer, director of neurointensive care at Columbia University's medical center, had previously called the situation hopeless. Ragucci reports that, while in a vegetative state, he was at least semi-aware, and was distressed to hear his caregivers referring to him in the past tense. His own opinion of his quality of life during his coma, therefore, differed significantly from what medical experts assumed. "
This needs exploring.
You can say that again...
From your previous link about Chris Barnes, I found an encouraging entry. Chris eating and feeding. Patients are routinely made dependent on feeding tubes, only to have those feeding tubes suddenly removed, causing death. Chris' wife is doing what she can to break his dependence on the feeding tube.
Thanks for showing up. Do you know of a way to make the topic go away? We do what we can to stop the killings, but every day there are more. If you have any ideas on how we can make this topic go away, please share.
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.
