Log in

View Full Version : Shiavo circus in Florida



Pages : 1 2 3 [4]

SthnrnGrl77
03-30-2005, 12:11 AM
i will believe the autopsy when I see it. He has not exactly been a trustworthy cat in the past. He's bluffing, IMO. He'll say anything just to have her dead.

Madcap
03-30-2005, 05:23 AM
People beat the campaign for/against euthanasia war drums and they forget that this chick is a real person.

That's my distaste for this whole thing, that everyone seems to be forgetting TERRI in all the political bullshit.

Sergent D
03-30-2005, 09:53 AM
Well the only reason why this is a national issue instead of a private family dispute is because of the religious right's politicizing of this event.

VenusGoddess
03-30-2005, 09:56 AM
No, it's because Terri's parents feel that her husband is acting out of HIS best interests and hers.

Lurker
03-30-2005, 10:12 AM
VG, how many millions of interfamily and intrafamily disputes are there in this country? You're right that this wouldn't BE a national issue if the parents and husband were on the same page, but the reason it IS a national issue is because it suits the Republican establishment to make an issue of the case.

Melonie
03-30-2005, 10:43 AM
I would argue that, at this point, the future legal/political/financial implications of the rights of the incapacitated (or lack thereof) are far more of an issue than Terri's specific circumstances.

LilSweetVixen
03-30-2005, 10:45 AM
Well the only reason why this is a national issue instead of a private family dispute is because of the religious right's politicizing of this event.

exactly, because they probably want to make a larger point about a perceived hypocrisy in liberal pro-choice stance. if you're going to say things like 'she responds to stimuli' or 'she feels pain' then you have to concede that these facts also apply to fetuses and therefore you should be pro-life. Think about sanctity of life nexttime you swat a fly.

and I don't believe that Michael actually wants to watch her starve to death just for kicks. Why would he? Oh right, because he's a nefarious cartoon character with nothing better to do. ::) They've been watching her starve to death nearly her ENTIRE LIFE. We just got in on the action and now we want to act all saddened.

Sergent D
03-30-2005, 11:39 AM
No, it's because Terri's parents feel that her husband is acting out of HIS best interests and hers.

I'd like to believe that but that just isn't the case. The pro-life movement jumped on this and made a circus out of it. Suddenly you have people like Tom DeLay getting involved talking about how wrong it is to pull the plug on someone without a living will. Well, coincidentally, DeLay and his family refused dialysis for his father, who also didn't have a living will. I guess it was fine for his family to make that choice for him but wrong for Michael to make that choice for Terri?

So much for the Republican 'less govt interaction' philosophy.

There are many layers of hypocrisy on the political level of this case. If you can get past all of that crap, all that remains is a woman with no cognitave abilities (as verified by independant court appointed doctors) and no chance of improvement. On one hand you have Michael, doing what he believes she would want and on the other you have a family that cannot grip reality. Also, you can throw in the fact that the Schindlers testified that they would never withdraw life support on Terri, even if they did believe that is what she would want.

Lurker
03-30-2005, 12:17 PM
I agree w/Melonie and the second half of LSV's post. Oh, and with Sergent D's post above.

I don't think liberals are hypocritical about this case--they're on the side of taking Terri's life (at least for the purposes of this discussion), which is well-aligned with being pro-choice. You think you know best about whether to preserve or dispose of the being unable to speak for itself.

Sergent D
03-30-2005, 12:28 PM
But this is not a pro-choice/pro-life debate!!! There are big differences between end of life decisions and arguing about when life begins.

If I have to make it political I take it as spousal rights and end of life decisions. I was talking to a friend about this and he believes that these decisions should always be handled by blood family and that the spouse should have no say in the matter. Maybe it's because he's never had a serious relationship but you are stuck with family. Since you choose your spouse it should be easy to see that in most cases a spouse is more able to speak in the patient's best interest.

No law is perfect but as it is, the FL law matches the bell curve. If they end up changing it so that you NEED a living will to make those choices they are shooting for the extreme cases.

Melonie
03-30-2005, 01:27 PM
I don't think liberals are hypocritical about this case--they're on the side of taking Terri's life (at least for the purposes of this discussion), which is well-aligned with being pro-choice. You think you know best about whether to preserve or dispose of the being unable to speak for itself.

Agreed.

If the cold hard truth were actually being discussed (which it clearly isn't, in mainstream media at least), the issues behind the Schiavo legislations and court rulings are actually rooted in future financial responsibility of the gov't (and to a much lesser degree, families) to provide medical care for 'incapacitated' persons. Here's another current example, but one which is receiving much less governmental and media attention than Terri Schaivo ...



"SAN RAFAEL, Calif. (AP) - An 82-year-old woman who has refused to leave Kaiser Permanente San Rafael Medical Center for more than a year and has run more than $1 million in unpaid medical bills was removed from the hospital Tuesday on a judge's order. (snip)"

The simple truth of the matter is that it's much less expensive to pay for one funeral than it is to pay for months or years or decades worth of medical care, whether the party that stands to benefit financially from the 'incapacitated' person's (un)timely death is the State of California/Florida or other family members of the 'incapacitated' person i.e. Michael Schiavo.

It would appear that the worldwide liberal position on this subject is quite a bit farther down that 'slippery slope' than current US law ...



"(snip)The Dutch government, the first to legalize euthanasia for some terminally ill people, will tackle an even thornier ethical dilemma: what to do when doctors say it is best to end the lives of infants, the mentally handicapped or the demented.(snip)"

~

Hello~Kitty
03-30-2005, 11:09 PM
It's funny that I am the one being accused of believing unbased theories. Everthing I have brought up here can be verified in the court records or from the parent's website. You people are the ones coming up with crazy theories such as saying he abused her, he wants her dead for money, or that he doesn't care about her. Sure, many docs may say they can help but they have not examined her and have not viewed her records extensively. None of the claims about abuse and whatnot have been substantiated. The few that have been presented in court were deemed invalid.

Sorry but the facts are on my side.


Well the only reason why this is a national issue instead of a private family dispute is because of the religious right's politicizing of this event.


the reason it IS a national issue is because it suits the Republican establishment to make an issue of the case.

IMHO, Sergent D and Lurker are 100% correct.

I am disgusted at how the GOP and people like Randall Terry are using Terri her family and her husband to suit their political needs.

Here is some info for anyone here not familar with Randall Terry:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/144/story_14449_1.html
http://mediamatters.org/items/200503220001

Pryce
03-30-2005, 11:16 PM
OMG!!! South Park tonight hit on this topic. Scary and sad.

Melonie
03-31-2005, 05:03 AM
probably the definitive conservative rant on the subject ...

Hello~Kitty
03-31-2005, 12:48 PM
Based on her public statements, I think Ann Coulter is one of the more disgusting people to have walked the earth. Ofcourse I don't know what she is like in private but I have my doubts she is much different.

She comes across as wanting to murder anyone who disagrees with her point of view , as do most of the people I have read or spoken with who like Ann Coulter. But then again as the old saying goes, like attracts like.

I have a hard time respecting anyone who considers her anything other than the definitive example of a hateful hag.

Melonie
03-31-2005, 01:19 PM
Be that as it may, there are also 'fellow' extremists on the liberal side of the aisle who are just as vocal, with supporters who are just as deserving of the old saying 'like attracts like'.

Sergent D
03-31-2005, 01:50 PM
There may be people just as extreme on the other side but we keep them mostly locked up where they belong. They don't have a weekly column, regular TV appearances, and books to make them appear more valid than they really are.

Hello~Kitty
03-31-2005, 02:03 PM
Be that as it may, there are also 'fellow' extremists on the liberal side of the aisle who are just as vocal, with supporters who are just as deserving of the old saying 'like attracts like'.

Agreed. That is why I do not subscribe to either extreem politcal point of view. Despite having been immediatly labled a "liberal biased loon" for simply not sharing a particular point of view with someone else- I am not either liberal or conservative. I am a centerist or otherwise called a moderate. A rare breed it seems these days :-\

doc-catfish
03-31-2005, 03:00 PM
Be that as it may, there are also 'fellow' extremists on the liberal side of the aisle who are just as vocal, with supporters who are just as deserving of the old saying 'like attracts like'.
In a perfect world, Ann Coulter and Michael Moore would marry each other.

Melonie
03-31-2005, 04:30 PM
I have not ignored a single fact. As a political science major I have considered every peice of evidence that is out there to be seen....

Well, this I suppose depends on whether you choose to look beyond the mainstream US media reports. For example

Michael Schiavo's attorney was a political contributor to Judge Greer, who ordered the removal of Terry Schiavo's feeding tube. Attorney Felos was also a director of the Hospice Group which runs the Hospice where Terri Schiavo was being cared for.

The one doctor whose original diagnosis of Terri Schaivo has been the basis of every single court appeal has nicknamed himself 'Dr. Humane Death' and is a member (and former keynote speaker) of the Hemlock Society (later renamed Choice in Death Society)

The CEO of the Hospice where Terry was being cared for is also a member of the Hemlock Society, as well as the Euthanasia Society of America

A former county sherriff/crony of Judge Greer (endorsed the judge's re-election) was also a member of the board of directors of the Hospice where Terri was being cared for, and actually hired Michael Schiavo while the original guardianship case was before Judge Greer.

The Florida appeals judge's brother is also a board member of the Hospice where Terri was being cared for

A Florida senator and representative, who were instrumental in killing an attempt via the state legislature to reinsert Terri's feeding tube, were also both members of the board of directors of the Hospice.

Of course none of this gained any traction in the US media, but here's a news report from Canada ...

Hello~Kitty
03-31-2005, 04:45 PM
Ok, then, I ask you to explain just ONE piece of evidence, out of the countless many. Explain the bone scan presented earlier.

Sigh..... I am too tired to explain all this myself so I am borrowing a detailed comment to maybe help shed some light on this. I would like to add that the questions asked on this topic will be most likely answered for everyone after the autopsy, but untill then:


First, the DATE on this bone scan is March 1991. Terri's cardiopulmonary arrest -- as far as I can tell -- was in February 1990; therefore, the abnormalities that are described occured AFTER Terri's February 1990 arrest, probably in the weeks or month(s) just prior to the bone scan, unless she had a second arrest at some point -- and I do not have that history. Certainly there was trauma. As I understand it, the issue is how the trauma occurred.

Trauma from CPR generally involves the anterior aspects of the ribs where they join the sternum. This is usually due to vigorous compression during CPR. Any other proposed trauma during CPR would need to be documented by the notes or by eye witnesses as to the mechanism (e.g.: did she fall off the stretcher?).

The bone scan report of TS describes an injury NOT to the anterior ribs, but, to a different part of the ribs-- posteriorly -- namely at the juncture of the ribs and vertebrae (the costovertebral juncture, or CVJ). In addition, although the report mentions several rib fractures, it does not specify if they were all CVJ located or in different/various locations. This is important. Finally, I do not see a report of correlative x-rays for the ribs, which would be helpful to determine the TIMING of the injury (fractures look very different depending on WHEN they occurred).

Well, this I suppose depends on whether you choose to look beyond the mainstream US media reports.

Which I do, thankyou very much ::)

I think it might be time for those on both sides of this argument to agree to disagree.

Madcap
03-31-2005, 08:37 PM
Fun, fun, here in good ol' SW.

Pryce
03-31-2005, 09:31 PM
How about a little r e s p e c t? Let's not lose ourselves in argument.

Rebuildme
03-31-2005, 10:03 PM
On Craiglist Houston in Rants & Raves someone titled a post "ding dong the bitch is dead" that was a bit much, it is amazing how caught up in an issue people get, to the point of losing sight and just becoming negative.

Madcap
04-01-2005, 12:58 AM
She's dead. Lets try remembering her.

Madcap
04-01-2005, 01:08 AM
I get "creep alert" whenever i hear something about her hubby. He called her fat for one thing. FAT.

You don't ever call your wife fat. Your wife loves you.

myssi
04-01-2005, 09:00 AM
Looks like we are continuing to move towards a krytocracy... government by judges.
See this link for an example:
http://www.supremecourthistory.org/04_library/subs_volumes/04_c18_k.html

Sergent D
04-01-2005, 10:22 AM
Agreed. That is why I do not subscribe to either extreem politcal point of view. Despite having been immediatly labled a "liberal biased loon" for simply not sharing a particular point of view with someone else- I am not either liberal or conservative. I am a centerist or otherwise called a moderate. A rare breed it seems these days :-\

With all the extreme nationalism (facism, actually) going around these days being projected by the extreme right, anyone who isn't in their exact podium is labeled a liberal biased loon.

Hello~Kitty
04-01-2005, 01:16 PM
With all the extreme nationalism (facism, actually) going around these days being projected by the extreme right, anyone who isn't in their exact podium is labeled a liberal biased loon.

You couldn't be more correct about that Sergent D ! I see it on campus alot and also in the media too and after reading through most of this section yesterday I notice it's rampant here too :'( I think Facist tendency is a good description as well.

Oh well, people can lable me anyway they want I guess . I know who and what I am and stand for and that is what really counts !


Looks like we are continuing to move towards a krytocracy... government by judges.


I disagree. The Judges in this case were only doing their job.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17378-2005Mar31.html?nav=rss_opinion/editorials

Deogol
04-03-2005, 10:25 PM
Based on her public statements, I think Ann Coulter is one of the more disgusting people to have walked the earth. Ofcourse I don't know what she is like in private but I have my doubts she is much different.

She comes across as wanting to murder anyone who disagrees with her point of view , as do most of the people I have read or spoken with who like Ann Coulter. But then again as the old saying goes, like attracts like.

I have a hard time respecting anyone who considers her anything other than the definitive example of a hateful hag.

She does have a manner of coming up with creative names for people.

I find her arguments are more name calling than substitive and that is a real disappointment.

erotictonic
04-03-2005, 11:01 PM
She does have a manner of coming up with creative names for people.

I find her arguments are more name calling than substitive and that is a real disappointment.

Like she said, like attracts like. Seems as if you have a new girlie friend Deogol. *shudder*

barbee
04-05-2005, 07:34 PM
i just have one thing to say about the shiavo case. And it's about those supporters who were trying to give Terry water. i heard there was over 50 people arrested for doing that, even a young kid. what i dont understand is that, do these people NOT know that terri had swallowing problems, thats why she's on a feeding tube. If anyone of those people would've made it in to give her water, they would've killed her by choking her. I really think these people did not know what condition she was in!! and above all, the media didn't even say anything to this extent....do not give her water or you will kill her!!! I am pretty sure they took the feeding tube out of her so the only way to give her water was by mouth. I understand that attempting to do that seems like a heroic geature but my goodness. this really shows that those folks didn't even know much about her condition!! All they're thinking is, hey we're starving this woman so she needs food and water, and i'm going to give her some. And another thing, about all these people stating that they should kill terri's husband for doing this, hey i dont like the guy either but 2 wrongs dont make a right, and if they're such a supporter for life then please value all life don't pick and choose, i think God is the only one who can make that decision. sorry if i offended anybody, but i work in the medical feild and if terri's condition is like what they say she is, then i'm pretty sure i know what i'm saying.

polecat
04-05-2005, 07:54 PM
what i dont understand is that, do these people NOT know that terri had swallowing problems, thats why she's on a feeding tube. If anyone of those people would've made it in to give her water, they would've killed her by choking her. I really think these people did not know what condition she was in!!
Actually, they were quite aware of what condition she was in.

They didn't want to give her food or drink, just put droplets of water on her lips/tongue in order to be more humane in her murder. Someone being murdered by dehydration isn't a pretty sight. Their lips dry up and have massive cracks and their tongue becomes a solid dry mass, like a rock. A few droplets of water in and around the mouth can make this kind of murder much more humane.

Even before the ruling, when she was on the feeding tube, Michael would chide nurses for doing the same in order to provide comfort, NOT sustanance/liquids. Instead, he'd only allow vaseline or lip balm applied to her mouth and let her mouth rot dry and be uncomfortable.

This wasn't a 'choking' thing.. it was a humanity thing.

discretedancer
04-05-2005, 08:06 PM
I'm still wondering why Doctors don't hand out "living wills" with fine-print clauses that waive off all malpractice liability?

barbee
04-05-2005, 11:22 PM
polecat,

thanks for the info. but whenever a patient is dying or going down hill fast they are usually on "comfort measures only" daily hygiene care is still in progress which means the patient still gets bathe and mouth care (usually use mouth swabs(even flavored) to clean mouth out to prevent dryness and cracks). and even after the patient passes... the nursing assistants usually are suppose to do a full bed bath. i wasnt there but i'm pretty sure Hospice did not sit there and let her rot slowly, Hospice is suppose to assist in making the dying process go smoothely with respect and dignity. I dont know if those people knew about her situation or not but i really hope you are right about what they were trying to do, I'll just have to believe you so it'll ease my mind a little.

polecat
04-06-2005, 12:06 AM
I dont know if those people knew about her situation or not but i really hope you are right about what they were trying to do, I'll just have to believe you so it'll ease my mind a little.
Yuppers... they were mainly championed by the nurses who's signed affidavits were disallowed in court.

Several nurses signed and offerred to testify towards Michael's treatment of his wife even before this unplugged state.

His immediate family had MANY beefs with her final day's care, saying her lips were severely cracked and mouth was dry. Swabs and daily care were NOT permitted by Michael by court order. It took DAYS of deliberation just to allow the nurses to put vaseline on her badly cracked lips.

The protestors interviewed were all championing final day relief- not the ingestion or giving of liquids as sustenance. Those arrested simply wanted to squeeze a damp wash cloth over her mouth to allow droplets to liquify her long dried mouth and lips to provide comfort.

Some of the nurse testimony (Carla Iyer) from prior to this event (i.e. not even when she had her tube removed!):

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 Terri’s hand to keep her fingers from curling together, and Michael saw it and made me take it out..
...
Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused on Terri’s 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.
...


Also, Heidi Law, who was another certified nurse from the time period of 1995 and 1996 had this to say about Michael's treatment insisted upon for his wife:


..whenever Michael Schiavo entered Terri’s room and saw that Terri was being fed by means other than a feeding tube, he told the nurses to stop and threatened them with being fired...
...
"At least three times during any shift where I took care of Terri, I made sure to give Terri a wet washcloth filled with ice chips, to keep her mouth moistened."
...
Law testified that the only reason she didn't attempt to feed Ms. Schiavo more frequently was "because I was so afraid of being caught by Michael."


Lastly, Carolyn Johnson, another certified nurse, from 1993 and prior had this to say about Michael's neglect of treatment to his wife:

"I learned, as part of my training, that there was a family dispute and that the husband, as guardian, wanted no rehabilitation for Terri. This surprised me, as I did not think a guardian could go against a doctor's orders like that, but I was assured that a guardian could and that this guardian had gone against Terri's doctor's orders."
..
"Once, I wanted to put a cloth in Terri's hand to keep her hand from closing in on itself, but I was not permitted to do this," Johnson said, "as Michael Schiavo considered that to be a form of rehabilitation."

Sergent D
04-06-2005, 10:58 AM
lol lie after lie. what else would be expected.