Skip to comments.SCHIAVO CASE: APPEAL COURT SAYS NO TO HER PARENTS
Posted on 03/16/2005 10:06:33 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
TAMPA, Fla. (AP) -- A state appeals court has refused to block the expected removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube on Friday.
Are you being intentionally dense? The question is whether the mere citation of Ex 20:13 proscribes allowing someone to die without man-made interference. It does not.
My point is merely that those who claim to believe that Ex 20:13 proscribes suicide are regurgitating unsupported RCC dogma, not the Scriptures. That is not a Biblical argument, it is an argument from unsupported RCC dogma.
The death penalty and proper use of deadly force are simply two examples (which I think most Biblical Christians agree upon) which demonstrate that "You shall not murder" does not mean "you shall never under any circumstances kill." [Even unsupported RCC dogma doesn't go that far.]
"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man".
And Romans 13:4b:
"But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."
Both of these verses, and others, lend support to what you've said.
And I'm still waiting...
Where did this news release come from? Do you have a link? It sounds a bit fantastic to me.
I don't care what you stated after that. You don't compare apples and oranges.
You state the two cases and your legal garbage to try to link the two.
Eye for an eye. Ever read that one?
You think if God wanted her to come home he wouldn't call her?
I meant religious information. Not legal.
It is hard to keep up with the posts.
You still are wrong.
You are probably one of those people who say that abortion is OK and forget the death penalty.
I told my family the same thing. :)
Yes, I agree with your point. Both of the verses you cite support capital punishment.
My point is merely that glib citations of Ex 20:13 are not dispositive of the question of suicide or a fortiori the question of withdrawing extraordinary, non-volitional "life-saving" impositions from a person suffering from irreversible and complete debilitation.
Poor Terry has become a political football for people with much larger agendas. The 'extend physical life at all costs' types have had a field day at her expense. Let her go home in peace.
No, for the reasons set forth in #502 (which I adopt in #509) I fully believe that capital punishment is Scriptural. Moreover, I also believe that some abortions are Scripturally sanctioned; most are not.
I do not favor killing people willy-nilly, BUT when a person is so debilitated that they have no hope of ever sustaining their own life, I see no Scriptural injunction anywhere to extend physical life at all costs.
In such situations, I believe it is appropriate to let the civil authorities decide who should exercise the decision-making power for the one who can no longer do so. Here (in Terry's case), after legal arguments ad nauseum, the civil authorities have decided that Terry's husband should do so. I believe the Biblical position is to respect that decision of the civil authorities.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
1. My name is Carla Sauer Iyer. I am over the age of eighteen and make this statement of my own personal knowledge.
2. I am a registered nurse in the State of Florida, having been licensed continuously in Florida from 1997 to the present. Prior to that I was a Licensed Practical Nurse for about four years.
3. I was employed at Palm Garden of Largo Convalescent Center in Largo, Florida from April of 1995 to July 1996, while Terri Schiavo was a patient there.
4. It was clear to me at Palm Gardens that all decisions regarding Terri Schiavo were made by Michael Schiavo, with no allowance made for any discussion, debate or normal professional judgment. My initial training there consisted solely of the instruction Do what Michael Schiavo tells you or you will be terminated. This struck me as extremely odd.
5. I was very disturbed by the decision making protocol, as no allowance whatsoever was made for professional responsibility. The atmosphere throughout the facility was dominated by Mr. Schiavos intimidation. Everyone there, with the exception of several people who seemed to be close to Michael, was intimidated by him. Michael Schiavo always had an overbearing attitude, yelling numerous times such things as This is my order and youre going to follow it. He is very large and uses menacing body language, such as standing too close to you, getting right in your face and practically shouting.
6. To the best of my recollection, rehabilitation had been ordered for Terri, but I never saw any being done or had any reason at all to believe that there was ever any rehab of Terri done at Palm Gardens while I was there. I became concerned because nothing was being done for Terri at all, no antibiotics, no tests, no range of motion therapy, no stimulation, no nothing. Michael said again and again that Terri should NOT get any rehab, that there should be no range of motion whatsoever, or anything else. I and a CNA named Roxy would give Terri range of motion anyway. One time I put a wash cloth in Terris hand to keep her fingers from curling together, and Michael saw it and made me take it out, saying that was therapy.
7. Terris medical condition was systematically distorted and misrepresented. When I worked with her, she was alert and oriented. Terri spoke on a regular basis while in my presence, saying such things as mommy, and help me. Help me was, in fact, one of her most frequent utterances. I heard her say it hundreds of times. Terri would try to say the word pain when she was in discomfort, but it came out more like pay. She didnt say the n sound very well. During her menses she would indicate her discomfort by saying pay and moving her arms toward her lower abdominal area. Other ways that she would indicate that she was in pain included pursing her lips, grimacing, thrashing in bed, curling her toes or moving her legs around. She would let you know when she had a bowel movement by flipping up the covers and pulling on her diaper.
8. When I came into her room and said Hi, Terri, she would always recognize my voice and her name, and would turn her head all the way toward me, saying Haaaiiiii sort of, as she did. I recognized this as a hi, which is very close to what it sounded like, the whole sound being only a second or two long. When I told her humorous stories about my life or something I read in the paper, Terri would chuckle, sometimes more a giggle or laugh. She would move her whole body, upper and lower. Her legs would sometimes be off the bed, and need to be repositioned. I made numerous entries into the nursing notes in her chart, stating verbatim what she said and her various behaviors, but by my next on-duty shift, the notes would be deleted from her chart. Every time I made a positive entry about any responsiveness of Terris, someone would remove it after my shift ended. Michael always demanded to see her chart as soon as he arrived, and would take it in her room with him. I documented Terris rehab potential well, writing whole pages about Terris responsiveness, but they would always be deleted by the next time I saw her chart. The reason I wrote so much was that everybody else seemed to be afraid to make positive entries for fear of their jobs, but I felt very strongly that a nurses job was to accurately record everything we see and hear that bears on a patients condition and their family. I upheld the Nurses Practice Act, and if it cost me my job, I was willing to accept that.
9. Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused on Terris death. Michael would say When is she going to die?, Has she died yet? and When is that bitch gonna die? These statements were common knowledge at Palm Gardens, as he would make them casually in passing, without regard even for who he was talking to, as long as it was a staff member. Other statements which I recall him making include Cant you do anything to accelerate her death - wont she ever die? When she wouldnt die, Michael would be furious. Michael was also adamant that the family should not be given information. He made numerous statements such as Make sure the parents arent contacted. I recorded Michaels statements word for word in Terris chart, but these entries were also deleted after the end of my shift. Standing orders were that the family wasnt to be contacted, in fact, there was a large sign in the front of her chart that said under no circumstances was her family to be called, call Michael immediately, but I would call them, anyway, because I thought they should know about their daughter.
10. Any time Terri would be sick, like with a UTI or fluid buildup in her lungs, colds, pneumonia, Michael would be visibly excited, thrilled even, hoping that she would die. He would call me, as I was the nurse supervisor on the floor, and ask for every little detail about her temperature, blood pressure, etc., and would call back frequently asking if she was dead yet. He would blurt out Im going to be rich!, and would talk about all the things he would buy when Terri died, which included a new car, a new boat, and going to Europe, among other things.
11. When Michael visited Terri, he always came alone and always had the door closed and locked while he was with Terri. He would typically be there about twenty minutes or so. When he left Terri would would be trembling, crying hysterically, and would be very pale and have cold sweats. It looked to me like Terri was having a hypoglycemic reaction, so Id check her blood sugar. The glucometer reading would be so low it was below the range where it would register an actual number reading. I would put dextrose in Terris mouth to counteract it. This happened about five times on my shift as I recall. Normally Terris blood sugar levels were very stable due to the uniformity of her diet through tube feeding. It is my belief that Michael injected Terri with Regular insulin, which is very fast acting.
12. The longer I was employed at Palm Gardens the more concerned I became about patient care, both relating to Terri Schiavo, for the reasons Ive said, and other patients, too. There was an LPN named Carolyn Adams, known as Andy Adams who was a particular concern. An unusual number of patients seemed to die on her shift, but she was completely unconcerned, making statements such as They are old - let them die. I couldnt believe her attitude or the fact that it didnt seem to attract any attention. She made many comments about Terri being a waste of money, that she should die. She said it was costing Michael a lot of money to keep her alive, and that he complained about it constantly (I heard him complain about it all the time, too.) Both Michael and Adams said that she would be worth more to him if she were dead. I ultimately called the police relative to this situation, and was terminated the next day. Other reasons were cited, but I was convinced it was because of my rocking the boat.
13. Ms. Adams was one of the people who did not seem to be intimidated by Michael. In fact, they seemed to be very close, and Adams would do whatever Michael told her. Michael sometimes called Adams at night and spoke at length. I was not able to hear the content of these phone calls, but I knew it was him talking to her because she would tell me afterward and relay orders from him.
14. While at Palm Gardens, I became fearful for my personal safety. This was due to Michaels constant intimidation, including his menacing body language, vocal tone and mannerisms.
15. I have contacted the Schindler family because I just couldnt stand by and let Terri die without the truth being known.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N.
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of September, 2003, by CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who produced her Florida drivers license as identification, and who did / did not take an oath. Notary Public My commission expires:
It's a twisted paradox in this case that those for "compassion", and for rights, and for "Terri's interests" are for killing her. It's as though words are put into her mouth such that this fake, surrogate will of hers happens to coincide with Michael's interests. She has no written statement. Michael's word, judging by his character as deduced from his actions and police reports, cannot be trusted. The whole thing stinks.
Can't speak for everyone, but I don't care much about the ideological tug-o-war. I care that an innocent woman is going to be starved to death. We are all going to see this. Every day we'll be getting a report about Terri gradually weakening, her skin beginning to change texture and color. In all this, those of us who care about justice will be asking: What has this woman done to deserve this? What does she feel now? How does her throat feel, parched and dry? Does she have chest pains from her lungs losing moisture? WHY IS SHE BEING KILLED THIS WAY? WHY IS SHE BEING KILLED... AT ALL?
And who is next? And what form will the next narrowing of criteria for prerequisite to the right to life take?
You'd best hope not. If there IS any kind of "disobedience", "disorder", or "insurrection", your cause is toast.
Hurt or kill anyone, and it's over, both for Terri and anyone there.
Now that Gritz is involved, and the rhetoric has reached fevered levels, all you need is ONE sideways maniac to pull a gun or attempt a "rescue", and the whole thing collapses.
Even people who were previously sympathetic will refuse to speak out, and those "on the fence" will go the other way in a heartbeat.
As a Biblical Christian, I am enjoined to respect that decision. As a human being, I also think it a wise one.
In Terri's case, we might be able to ascertain the truth/falshood of this statement if Michael had used her rehabilitation funds for rehabilitation instead of legal fees - all the while pointing to her lack of improvement (as a result of his misappropriation of her funds) as a reason to kill her. The very cause for which he fights - to end her life - is arguably the reason she has not recovered.
The sickness of this defies words.
Our cause is toast either way.
They are there only becuase your side says it is already over for Terri. I don't quite understand your threat?
You believe wrong.
"Lex malla, lex nulla": A bad law is no law. (St. Thomas Aquinas)
I will; I won't be there if Gritz or his monkeys cause trouble.
It's your funeral.
Are you sympathetic to the Schindlers case?
God's law is the Law of Laws (The Lex [lat.] Nom [gr.]).
Look, full disclosure, okay? I disagree with the majority of y'all about this whole thing and the way you're doing business.
HOWEVER, it's obvious how passionate and concerned you all are nonetheless. I was just offering a warning to those who don't apparently know how offside Gritz's minions can be.
SHEESH! How paranoid ARE you guys?
Why are you asking? Only a member of the "Kill Terri" conspiracy would ask that! (Goes back to eating Y2K survival rations and cleaning guns.)
BTW, that was sarcasm.
Care to share where?
Michael's word, judging by his character as deduced from his actions and police reports, cannot be trusted.
Many courts have looked directly at this issue and disagree with you. That is your problem. I frankly don't know whether "Michael's word ... can be trusted" or not, but I know that courts have exhaustively looked directly at that issue and have (apparently) decided that the evidence is not strong enough to overturn the presumption that the husband will act in the best interests of his wife. I accept that.
I care that an innocent woman is going to be starved to death.
No, she can pick up a spoon and eat whenever she wishes (and is able). What has been decided is that the husband can decide that no extraordinary means may be used to force feed her to keep her (in some very limited sense) "alive."
As one whose wife died 18 months ago from cancer amid great suffering, I am grateful for that deference being enshrined in the principles of our law. My wife told me what she wanted; she never wrote it down (because she was too sick to do so). I executed her wishes because I loved her so. I would not have wanted anyone (or group of well-meaning 'anyones') to come in and put her through more agony of chemotherapy when she wanted to go Home to be with her Lord.
Folks, too many here have lost sight of the situation and, most of all, that the critical decision is who should make that decision. The courts, after hearing almost endless, heartrending testimony have decided the husband should. I accept that.
Wow, you found ONE quote of his where he sounds sane.
Do you have something against a long affidavit by someone who has nothing to gain by telling the truth? Terri is been in solitary confinement for some 13 years now. Surly the lenght of that post pales in comparison. My apolgies if you think otherwise.
Actually, that quote is from his comments about the Terri Schiavo case on his website. Further down the page are reccomendations on how to help Terri Schiavo survive. None mention gouging, biting, bullets, handguns, M60's, Ak's, knives, fists or other assorted sundries one uses in a hostile takeover.
The thread is about Terri Schiavo, not Bo Gritz.
You are incorrect in this statement. Judge Greer has ruled that she is to be starved- no food or water is allowed. Now you tell me how that is humane.
If you take him, you WILL get his lice along with him. How much good will that do you?
Or is the publicity worth even THAT?
"If there IS any kind of "disobedience", "disorder", or "insurrection", your cause is toast."-Long Cut
"Hurt or kill anyone, and it's over, both for Terri and anyone there." - Long Cut
Since this argument is not new, I suspect that some court along the way has had the opportunity to find such uses to be "misappropriation" and declined to do so. Is it possible that it wasn't misappropriation?
That's not a threat; that's what happens when people get violent, nobody wants to be associated with them.
I'm not even gonna be anywhere NEAR the state of Florida. I'm just explaining to you what the press, the cops, and the courts are going to do if there is ANY trouble there.
Do you think they'd ignore it?
Look, you want to talk about the Schiavo case, I'm all ears. You want to talk about Gritz, go somewhere else.
You are the one preaching violence by supposing it will
You are creating the element of hyteria.
"My cause"? Me? Try millions of others.
I take it that you would not want to be associated with our founding fathers then either, correct?
If these folks can't distinguish between a warning and a threat, well, let them HAVE the Gritz blitzkrieg.
I tried, and I was being as honest as possible.
You promising to start an armed revolution in Florida? Or are you merely talking out your dorsal vent?
I can't comment on this any longer publicly...
Oh I see, you are concerned about us and Terri. Excuse my while I cough...
Apparently, you'd prefer not to deal with the fact that your side is attracting people like him, and that they have the potential to cause irreparable harm.
OOOHHH-KAY FINE. I get it.
Roger that, retracting masts and scope, going emergency deep.
Great we understand each other. You think I you know what is good for me and I think I know that your motives are less than pure. And so it goes.
Again, you miss the point. The point is that your long affidavit (and probably many short ones as well) have been considered and the civil authorities did not believe them sufficient to dislodge the presumption that the husband was acting in the best interests of his wife.
Many here (perhaps not you, I don't know) really quarrel with the result. They simply want their judgments substituted for those of the husband on some a priori basis. That's what drew me into this discussion. The argument was that the Scriptures (which are, in my view, the dispositive Word of God) would provide another outcome. I do not believe that so. That argument appears to have been abandoned in favor of a kind of PETA-like obligation to be kind to all living things. That is pure nonsense.
Apart from that, I believe the general rule of the husband acting for the wife when she cannot, is a good one absent sufficient evidence to overturn it. Moreover, I think it is very good that we have had precisely that careful review of the sufficiency of that evidence. It has now been reviewed and found insufficient to overturn the husband's presumptive role. Now is the time to accept that determination.
So, the state of the case is that (i) the Scriptures do not compel extraordinary efforts to force feed her and (ii) the courts have carefully examined the evidence against the husband's decisions and proposed decisions and declined to displace him as decision-maker on Terry's behalf. The courts have done what they are best at and I trust that determination. The fact that RCC dogma might have compelled a different result is irrelevant.
However, it looks like y'all don't even want GOOD advice. So be it.
1 John 5:16 [KJV] If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.And, as aready cited, the following:
Exodus 20:13 [KJV] Thou shalt not kill.Keeping with sound hermeneutics, one can look at the character of those in Scripture who committed suicide. You can do that on your own if you like. You will not find a single believer who did this. Finally, the burden of proof rests on you to show that Exodus 20:13 does not apply to the self.
The courts, after hearing almost endless, heartrending testimony have decided the husband should. I accept that.
You feel nothing, knowing that Terri, who is not terminal, will be dying a slow, painful death, her life ebbing away, hour by hour? That does not bother you? You won't spend any time thinking about the pain she is in?
BTW I feel for you for the loss of your wife to cancer. That is a truly horrific disease, esp. in its most aggressive forms. It is no respector of persons. My own wife lost her father two weeks ago to small-cell lung cancer. He hid his disease from us and did not seek treatment, so his death appeared to happen suddenly. My grandpa died from metastatic colon cancer, as did an aunt. All had chemo, and morphine near the end. I have no quarrel with that - the morphine is intended to ease pain and will sometimes hasten death. They were terminal.
Terri is not terminal, however, except in the sense that we all are. You can be sure Terri will not be offered any food or drink on a tray while her life slowly ebbs away. Clearly the intent is her demise.
How much power do you suppose FL will need to murder Terri by starvation?????