Posted on 03/08/2007 3:11:27 AM PST by markomalley
Bobby Schindler, brother of late Terri Schiavo, spoke to members of the Cornell community last night to promote awareness of issues facing disabled individuals.
After collapsing in her home on Feb. 25, 1990, Terri Schiavo suffered several minutes without oxygen to her brain, resulting in severe brain damage. Although she needed immediate care afterwards, a few weeks later, she only required a feeding tube to regulate her nutrition.
During 1991 and 1992, Schiavo showed signs of improvement due to rehabilitation programs and therapy, according to Schindler.
In 1993, Terri was awarded a medical trust fund of $1.5 million for life-long rehabilitation, of which her husband Michael was made guardian.
According to Schindler, after Michael deposited this money, Terri stopped receiving therapy.
Tensions arose in 1993 between Michael and Terri’s father Robert Schindler.
In 1998, Michael wrote the Schindler family a letter, explaining that he was petitioning the courts to remove his wife’s feeding tube.
Terri’s family opposed removal of the feeding tube. Michael, backed by his brother and sister-in-law, said Terri had made statements before she suffered brain damage that she would not want to live in such a condition.
“Our family was very naïve at what we were up against,” Schindler said. “The attitudes of our country [toward this issue] have been changed because of the influence of the media, judges, doctors and bioethics.”
Schindler said he was frustrated that the media portrayed his sister as bedridden and unable to be moved. In fact, Schindler said, had Terri been alive today, he could have brought her with him; she would have merely needed a wheelchair to be transported. Schindler emphasized that Schiavo was not connected to breathing stabilizers of any sort.
“My sister was not dying. She was physically as healthy as you and me,” Schindler said.
Although she could not respond rapidly, she did show signs of coherence, according to Schindler. He recounted a moment when he told his sister that he had the chance to shake hands with Bruce Springstein. Terri had purchased her brother his first C.D. by the artist. When he told her, she smiled.
Such responses were ignored by the court systems, according to Schindler. He said he believed then that videos demonstrating her ability to react to speech would convince the courts that she was not in a persistent vegetative state — one in which a person cannot respond to any external stimuli — but a judge said this did not prove his case.
On March 31, 2005, 14 days after the removal of her feeding tube, Terri died from dehydration.
“The courts have taken [on] a power of God,” Schindler said. Schindler said doctors took on a similar role and are still quick to overlook the benefits of long-term rehabilitation.
“If society knows the truth, then we can properly address the issue and give [the disabled] the right to live, a basic human right,” said Elisabeth Wilbert ’07, vice president of Cornell Coalition for Life.
CCFL invited Schindler to speak to demonstrate that the club supports pro-life organizations.
“It was a good opportunity for Cornell to get a personal view of something with such a national interest,” said Tristen Cramer ’09, president of CCFL. Schindler said his family would have preferred not to generate national interest; family members received a large number of e-mails that condemned the family for keeping Terri alive.
“I learned a lot more true information compared to what the media portrayed,” said Kourtney Reynolds ’09.
Schindler said he hopes to devalue false information given to the public by the media.
He also said that euthanasia occurred before his family’s struggle and continues to occur today.
“Are we going to care for [the disabled] or find ways to justify killing them?” Schindler asked.
Who do you think brought the media in. The last thing Michael Schiavo wanted was all the media coverage. But once it started, he and his side felt they had a right to tell their side of it.
Good question. In other words, if I wade through a cesspool, I can expect to.....oh forget it.
They certainly do at times, but that was not the question was it? Did the media make any of the events I discussed up?
LMAO.
People who fight for every Americans right to live life are not whackeydoodles. You should be so lucky as to have these people fight for yours. Trip off to one of your Rudy threads, although you certainly do him no good.
The point, exactly.
but don't complain about the media
It's a free country. America is a nation of complainers. We try to change things that bother us. Complaining is often the first step in finding a solution.
People feel they have a right to complain.
The heart of your argument seems to be that people on this thread should not complain.
However, I am pretty sure that you don't want anyone to curtail your "right" to complain about people complaining.
You are welcome to bring in the peripheral issues. Don't be surprised, though, if most people want to stick to the main topic...which is...
?
It's a free country. America is a nation of complainers. We try to change things that bother us. Complaining is often the first step in finding a solution.
Agree. But don't condemn others who may disagree with you.
The heart of your argument seems to be that people on this thread should not complain.
The heart of my argument is that to suggest the Schiavo protesters didn't get media coverage doesn't even pass the laugh test. Complain, but don't get mad when confronted with the truth.
However, I am pretty sure that you don't want anyone to curtail your "right" to complain about people complaining.
Where did I say that? I am not complaining about anything, merely setting the record straight as to media coverage. But those on your side of this supposed "free speech" issue have referred to me as a terrorist, communist, leftist, liberal, troll, and a couple of more niceties, while one of your group actually filed a complaint of abuse against me.
So tell me all about how your side cherishes its free speech right to complain.....
Your side begged for media coverage by participating in flag and crucifix desecration, child abuse, threats of bodily harm, spokesmen who were off the chart in terms of extremism, and then when the media covers it, your side complains that it was not fair. You got plenty of media coverage from the far right news sites. That the MSM was interested only in the news and not a crusade isn't my fault or the fault of the media. Your concerns were heard a thousandfold over Michael Schiavo's concerns, at least as far as Foxnews coverage went.
I would hardly call those things done simply to bring in the media peripheral issues. They showed the character of those who would participate in such a show quite well.
Shame, shame, there you go again. Liberals project, haters call people they hate haters. I have no need to project.
I just figured you wandered off the DU or daily kos threads by accident and found yourself here with real conservatives.
Real conservatives are not filled with hostility and fury like you portray.
Awwww, wait! You are really Melissa from the Edwards blogs, aren't you!
I'm a Hunter supporter. Sure hope the whackydoodles don't get around to trying to destroy him, too.
They aren't whackeydoodles. They seek to destroy no one. They want to save lives. Now what about that makes them deserve to be called names? It takes all people, some may fight different battles than you do, but that is needed and important. I bet Duncan Hunter would agree with that.
Their embarrassing antics detract from conservatism and contribute to a general lack of credibility. The whackydoodles deter people from our cause, whether it be the cause of life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.
When you say OUR, who are you speaking for? Be honest and say me, you see, you just told me that you are selfish and you use OUR as a cover for ME. How are their feelings about life embarassing? Maybe to you, because you have never been in the position of the people they fight for. And who are YOU to describe the meaning of conservatism? Ronald Reagan would frown on you for your antics.
Possibly. Not been proven either way. They certainly shaded their reporting so as to present one point of view. I would hope you would be honest enough to admit that.
You're missing the point.
The media needed to be 'brought in'? I doubt that very much.
The last thing Michael Schiavo wanted was all the media coverage.
Got proof of that assertion?
You're the one who thought people should not complain.
RR would sure frown on the whackydoodles, completely disabled by emotion. I know he would frown on the way they negate any conservative gain with their foolishness.
To promote awareness of disabilities?! Ya that's who I want around me if I'm disabled! They'll just pull the plug on ya!
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.