You supported the court decisions. Correct? No food, no water, correct?
I feel very badly for Terri, but she’s gone, and she was gone even before she was gone.
You sound like Michael Schiavo. As usual, you never discuss the evidence either.
Posted on 11/28/2007 4:10:27 PM PST by jy22077
Actually, Bobby and Suzanne did in 2002. The hospice turned them in and got them banned from visiting her. Just all around nice people who wanted Terri dead.
Yes, I think that was in 2001. Bobby and Suzanna wanted to see if they could have the nurses try to get Terri to take baby food. The nurses refused and Bobby and Suzanne did have argument with the nurses over this. When Michael found what Bobby and Suzanne wanted to do, he had them banned from visiting Terri.
No, you are a jerk who can't comprehend what I wrote, either now or at the time.
I will speak for my positions. You are way too stupid or zealous to do so accurately.
In spite of that, you made the 7th post on the thread, and your post has led to many of the later posts.
Regardless of whether Terri was going to recover or how aware she was, some people believe that she was wrongly killed. When people believe that an innocent person is wrongly killed, they tend to be passionate about wanting justice to be done. Even when they realize that justice will not be done for one victim in the past, they want justice to be done for other victims in the future. While these passions are inconvenient, sometimes based in ignorance, and often overly zealous, passion for justice is a good thing.
Personally, I don't have a problem with removing a feeding tube in these cases, but the proper person needs to make the decision. Once Michael Schiavo started a life with another woman, he was no longer the right person to be making decisions for Terri. The woman who had born his children was his real wife at that point, and others should have been making decisions for Terri.
Another point is that lawyers and judges are rarely qualified to make these kinds of decisions. Most of them do not have technical or medical training and do not understand the mindset behind technical or medical issues. To people with training in areas like law, political science, and history, truth is what a proper authority or academic consensus decides based on the power given to that authority. For those trained in technical and medical areas, truth is what happens in real life.
Bill
Actually the court made the decison and not Michael Schiavo. However, the problem with this was that the only claims that Terri wanted to die came from Michael and his family. I agree, Michael had moved with his life. Michael and his siblings produced nothing tangible other than their word that Terri wanted to die. The court used their testimony alone to determine Terri really wanted to die. The court also unsurped all testimony from the parents and Terri’s sibilings. Without something in writing or tangible, Michael’s and siblings claims should have been given no weight due to fact that he had moved with his life and was going to profit substantially from her death. Unfortunately, the 2000 trial was poorly conducted because the parents had a lawyer who was ill-financed and ill-experienced in these matters and the Michael’s conflicts of interest were not adquately brought to light and considered. Michael’s attorney was an expert in these matter and virtually steamrolled over the attorney. After the trial the parents got better lawyers and started to put forward a meritous defense but it was too late because everthing was on the legal record. This along with several judicial errors made at the 2000 trial (no lawyer or GAL for instance; Greer serving as her guradian) made overturning the facts from the 2000 trial virtually impossible.
Let's see, you still feel justified in the murder of Terri Schiavo, correct? I guess that's what you mean by "my positions".
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED the Respondents' Emergency
Expedited Motion for Permission to Provide Theresa Schiavo with food
and Water by Natural Means is is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, this 8 day of March, 2005.
It is clear that the credible testimony was that given by Dr. Bamhill for various reasons, not the least of which is that he has examined Terri Schiavo and reviewed her medical records.
While the attorney for the Respondents did get him to acknowledge that he could not say with certainty how much of her nutritional requirement she might be able to ingest orrally, he was quite positve that in no way could she comsume enough in the manner to sustain herself. The court does not feel that another medical procedue merely to specify what portion of insufficiency would result from the removal of the feeding tube warrants the granting of the Petition. Accordingly, It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition for Order Aurthorizing Evaluation, be and the same is hereby denied. http://judgegeorgegreer.com/docs/030805orderdenyfood.pdf
Well dog gone, what is your position on straving people to death by court order? Maybe you can cite a case or two?
Dr. Barnhill’s testimony was given 5 years before. Judge Greer felt despite evidence proffered by the Schindlers that he would not give Terri Schiavo the benifit of the doubt and felt it better to simply deny her oral food and water.
I think more just and proper decision would have been to allow to accept oral feeding. Even though the doctors and specialists had not actually examined Terri Schiavo, Greer could have allowed those doctors to examine Terri Schiavo and then report to the court if their conclusions were that of Dr. Barnhill. To simply deny Terri any chance at oral feeding and at very least deny an examinations from the Schindler’s doctors was indeed a travesty of justice.
This is similiar in which Greer was given evidence and allegations of abuse by Michael Schiavo. Greer said he was interested in pursuing it but since Terri had already been sentenced to die, Greer felt it did not matter if Michael had abused her or not. DCF made the same concerns about abuse regarding Michael Schiavo and wanted time to investigate and that Terri Schiavo should be kept alive longer for the this purpose. Greer said that DCF was free to investigate but felt that it was not neccessary to keep Terri Schiavo alive during this investigation.
If you care to look back, which you don’t, you will see that my position was that definitive testing had to be conducted before the feeding tube was removed. I was not in favor of doing so without having the question of whether there was any cognitive function in Terri answered to the satisfaction of everyone.
On the other hand, I don’t favor keeping anyone artificially alive who is otherwise dead. Those decisions are made every day in hospitals around this country with no major publicity. There simply is no point in doing so.
The difference in the Schiavo case was that it wasn’t simply a matter of turning off the respirator which is how most of these situations are resolved.
She didn’t starve to death, by the way. The body, who used to be Terri, died of dehydration. Terri was already gone. Her corpse had been kept alive for a long time.
It’s true that her husband was not vindicated until the autopsy. But you’re in denial if you don’t think he was.
Let me repeat myself. I would have wanted current testing before the order to remove the tube was issued, and I don’t like finding out after the fact that it was justified. It needs to be justified before such an order is issued.
But it’s over. The correct thing was done for the wrong reason. We need to move on.
Once again, is withholding food or water orally correct? That is in light of numerous caregivers affidavits that she could swallow food and liquids. I have showed you the court order that forbid that, and that is after Greer threw out those affidavits. I can't believe that you are that blind.
Did you ever come up with a case yet where a judge denied food or water orally to someone?
I’m not sure why you’ve chosen me as your token of aggression regarding this issue. If you would bother to check my posts on the issue, which you won’t, you’d see that I stated several times that it certainly couldn’t hurt if someone chose to take care of Terri and keep her alive as long as possible.
I never argued that Terri was suffering and that an earlier death was the humane thing to do.
I have no idea whether another judge ever ordered the same thing regarding another patient, and I have no intention of attempting to research the orders of all courts in all 50 states to attempt to answer your question. You may want to argue about Terri for another 50 years, but I have no such urge.
Terri’s case was fascinating from many different perspectives, but it is over.
While I don't think that is true, I also did not see you protest her being denied orally food or water either. If so, please post it. Your lack of response to Greer's order that I posted to you above also indicates that fact. Correct?
But you are still here, like a guilty conscience.
Greer relied on his testimony to deney her food or water orally, as you say. Barnhill also testified that he did not need to exaimine Terri either to make that determination.
One year later he again reconfirmed his earlier diagnosis. He felt no tests of any sort were needed for evaluation. In the spring of 2000, three physicians, including Dr. Jay Carpenter, who is a former Chief of Medicine at Morton Plant Hospital, filed affidavits after observing Ms. Schiavo. All three physicians stated that it is visually apparent that Ms Schiavo is able to swallow and, in fact, does swallow her own saliva.
The patient continued with no physical therapy, communication or speech therapy, or routine medical screening evaluations and treatment such as dental care, mammography, gynecological exams or pap smears during this time.
Should of pinged you to # 57
Don’t ping me to #57 or any other post. Frankly, don’t even reply to me or I will likely be drawn back to this thread to see what you’re saying. And I don’t care.
I feel very badly for Terri, but she’s gone, and she was gone even before she was gone.
It raised all kinds of legal, ethical and emotional issues at the time, and it’s still of some interest to me because of that. But I’m not interested in getting in argument with anyone about it. But don’t try to portray me as some sort of Terri-killer because I never was.
I’m ready to move on, and I wish more people could do so, too.
You supported the court decisions. Correct? No food, no water, correct?
I feel very badly for Terri, but she’s gone, and she was gone even before she was gone.
You sound like Michael Schiavo. As usual, you never discuss the evidence either.
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.