a new low in separation of powers

Ridiculous.

In addition, a guardian will be appointed for Terry Schiavo, taking away the authority for decisions about her away from her husband.

Disgusting, and frightening.

When a legislature or executive can over rule a court order, i see a serious flaw in constitutional due process and a flagrant violation of law and order. It has always been my understanding that only a higher court can overturn a court order...Is this the Bush agenda at work?

Seems that way!

Separation of Powers
Don't forget that the Florida governor's name is BUSH, which seems to be a key that will open any door.

Man, when my time is up I hope I just GO. These cases where people hang around in a vegetative state are simply nightmares for all concerned. Even in cases where the patient has previously signed all the requisite legal papers concerning his wishes, well-meaning relatives can enter the scene and cause one of these tragic brouhahas.

Clarification question to everyone.

Is Theresa brain dead?

Theresa
I have not heard or read any scientific assessment. Several accounts have stated that the family believes she does respond to certain things, but that may just be wishful thinking on their part.

Has anyone heard anything more definitive?

There was a thing in the NYT Magazine about the difference between minimally conscious and a persistent vegetative state. Big difference, and I'm curious about which she is, too.

I think the separation of the Judiciary and Executive powers still holds true to the letter. The executive has the right to commute or pardon a criminal and in many situations the President or Governor can make a last minute call in the execution room to commute or pardon the sentence.

Theresa has been handed a death sentence and the Governor is commuting the sentence. That is subject to the fact that Theresa is still brain active and thus considered a person.

Persistent vegetative state.



This is indeed repugnant, on many levels. (As a quote in the article below says.)

http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=6&aid=1022082623_5302_lead_story

Unfortunately, the timeline ends in 2002.


Adapted from the Associated Press, Dec 25, 2002

The following is the timeline in the case of Terri Schiavo, who first collapsed and fell into a coma in 1990. The conflict between Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, began in 1993, and continues to this day. The court battle began in 1998, when Michael Schiavo petitioned the court to remove Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.

- Feb. 25, 1990: Terri Schiavo collapses in her home. Doctors believe a potassium imbalance caused her heart to stop, temporarily cutting off oxygen to her brain.

- Nov. 1992: Terri's husband, Michael, wins malpractice suit against doctors who he say misdiagnosed his wife; jury awards more than more than $700,000 for her care, Michael receives an additional $300,000.

- Feb. 14, 1993: Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler have a falling out with Michael over the malpractice suit money and Terri's care.

- July 29, 1993: Bob and Mary Schindler file petition to have Michael Schiavo removed as Terri's guardian. The case is later dismissed.

- May 1998: Michael Schiavo files petition to remove Terri's feeding tube.

- Jan. 24, 2000: Trial begins over whether to remove feeding tube.

- Feb. 11, 2000: Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge George W. Greer rules feeding tube can be removed.

- Jan. 24, 2001: 2nd District Court of Appeal upholds Greer's decision.

- March 29, 2001: Greer rules feeding tube to be removed at 1 p.m. April 20.

- April 18, 2001: Florida Supreme Court refuses to intervene in the case.

- April 20, 2001: U.S. District Judge Richard Lazzara grants the Schindlers a stay until April 23 to exhaust appeals.

- April 23, 2001: U.S. Supreme Court refuses to intervene.

- April 24, 2001: Feeding tube is removed from Terri Schiavo.

- April 26, 2001: Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Frank Quesada orders doctors to reinsert Terri's feeding tube; the Schindlers pursue lawsuit against Michael Schiavo, accusing him of committing perjury by saying his wife did not want to be kept on life support.

- April 30, 2001: Lawyers for Michael Schiavo file emergency motion with an appellate court asking for the court to order removal of Terri's feeding tube.

- June 25, 2001: 2nd District Court of Appeal hears arguments in case.

- July 11, 2001: 2nd DCA sends case back to Greer, ruling that Terri can't be taken off life support until after July 23.

- July 18, 2001: Schindlers ask Greer to let their doctors evaluate Terri before making a final decision on removing the feeding tube.

- Aug. 7, 2001: Attorneys receive Greer's order that the tube be removed Aug. 28.

- Aug. 8, 2001: Schindlers repeat request to Greer to allow their doctors to evaluate Terri.

- Aug. 10, 2001: Greer denies the Schindlers' evaluation request, as well as their request to remove Michael Schiavo as guardian.

- Sept. 26, 2001: Schindlers' attorneys argue before 2nd District Court of Appeal, citing testimony from seven doctors who say Terri can recover with the right treatment.

- Oct. 3, 2001: 2nd DCA delays removal of feeding tube indefinitely.

- Oct. 17, 2001: 2nd DCA rules that five doctors can examine Terri to determine whether she has any hope of recovery. Two doctors are picked by the Schindlers, two are picked by Michael Schiavo and one is picked by the court.

- Feb. 13, 2002: Mediation attempts fail; Michael Schiavo again seeks to be allowed to remove Terri's feeding tube.

- Oct. 12, 2002: Weeklong hearing begins in the case. Three doctors, including the one appointed by the court, testify that Terri is in a persistent, vegetative state with no hope of recovery. The two doctors selected by the Schindlers say she can recover.

- Nov. 12, 2002: The Schindlers' attorney says medical records suggest Terri's condition may have been brought on by physical abuse, and asks for more time to get more evidence.

- Nov. 22, 2002: Greer rules that there is no evidence that Terri has any hope of recovery and orders feeding tube to be removed Jan. 3, 2003.

- Dec. 13, 2002: Circuit Judge George W. Greer stays order to remove feeding tube on Jan. 3 until the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Lakeland reviews the case. A date has not been set for the court to hear the case.

- Dec. 25, 2002 The 2nd District Court of Appeals agrees to consider appeal by Schiavo's parents. Schedules oral arguments for April 4.

I saw a photo of this girl in the paper today. She certainly seemed to be looking and smiling at the person in front of her. There was definitely life in her eyes.

Why is it not common practice, if not the law, to require a form giving instructions to family and doctors about a patient's wishes each and every time they complete an application for medical and life insurance and each time they are admitted into a hospital for any kind of treatment?

The government has no business being involved in these decisions this late in the game. The government should have already stuck their nose into the issue by creating laws to require each of us to sign forms designating our wishes in such situations.

Butrflynet- In many cases, they do. I am going in for an operation today. (in Florida, no less). I was given a choice of signing the hospital's living will form, or bringing in a copy of my own, which I did. They actually were quite insistent about it. In the past, the admitting office would simply ask me if I had one. Now they want a copy in hand.

The thing with Terry Schiavo was that she was twenty nine when she had heart failure, and not in a hospital. How many 20 somethings that you know have living wills? They may have spoken about their desires, but how many have acted upon it?

There needs to be an educational push to have even young people sign living wills. In Florida, the state senate is handing out copies of living wills, providing a printable one on the internet. You never know.

Link to Living Will

If you like this, and want to see more of it in the future, simply punch that chad for the party that wants to get government out of your lives.

The Republicans.

What about a young person who is involved in a car crash? He might not be able to sign after the fact.

It might not be a bad idea if a living will be part of the enrollment package when a person signs up with a physician. Also, what about colleges and places of employment? Of course, it is up to each person as to whether or not they want to sign a living will, but they should be more easily available!

Phoenix -- Hope you are out of there and out raising hell again in no time flat.

In this case, the woman is healthy and not on life support. The question is whether a feeding tube should be removed and she should be killed by starvation and dehydration. Her husband says yes, her parents and siblings say no. She has no provable wishes in the matter. Although news accounts often list her as being in a coma, no one connected with the case asserts this. Some assert that she is in a persistent vegitative state, some say she is not. Doctors hired by the husband say that she has no self-awareness, doctors hired by the parents say that she does. There is some money involved and some people believe that the husband has financial motives for wanting her to be dead, which would amount to a conflict of interests.

I feel that it is wrong to kill a healthy person who is not in pain, and that starving her is not materially different from shooting her. I believe that even if the bill passed by the Florida legistlature is unconstitutional, it was justified to save a helpless person from being killed over the screaming objections of her family by a guardian who may have selfish motives. Anyway, even if this law is inappropriate, there is nothing to stop the Florida congress from going back and passing a law governing euthanasia to prevent the husband from having her killed. If her husband is allowed to do this, it might make it easier in the future for guardians to eliminate inconvenient ill or elderly persons in their care. After the governor ordered feeding of her to resume, the husband initially forbade her family to visit her, had her moved without informing the family, and ordered that they not be allowed to see medical reports. The family is suspicious of what caused her to be deprived of oxygen long enough to cause this brain damage, and when it appeared that she would be starved to death, asked that an autopsy be performed afterwards. The husband refused and ordered that she be cremated as soon as her life signs ceased.