Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

Soz - can you be certain that she will "live like this indefinitely"?

Can you be certain that he is doing the "loving thing"?

I think if there is any doubt whatsoever in these two questions, we should err on the side of life.

We do know that her parents love her and wish for miracles for her.

Reinsertion of Schiavo Feeding Tube Denied
March 23, 2005 8:11 AM EST

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. - After losing two consecutive appeals in federal court, Terri Schiavo's parents vowed Wednesday to take their fight to the U.S. Supreme Court as their severely brain-damaged daughter began her fifth full day without the feeding tube that has kept her alive for more than a decade.

In a 2-1 ruling early Wednesday, a panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta said the parents "failed to demonstrate a substantial case on the merits of any of their claims" that Terri's feeding tube should be reinserted immediately.

"There is no denying the absolute tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo," the ruling said. "We all have our own family, our own loved ones, and our own children. However, we are called upon to make a collective, objective decision concerning a question of law."

In his dissent, Judge Charles R. Wilson said Schiavo's "imminent" death would end the case before it could be fully considered. "In fact, I fail to see any harm in reinserting the feeding tube," he wrote.

An appeal was still pending in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on whether Schiavo's right to due process was violated.

Wednesday's ruling was the latest legal blow for Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, as their 41-year-old daughter's life hangs in balance. Doctors have said that Schiavo could survive one to two weeks without water and nutrients.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in Tampa also rejected the parents' emergency request.

Rex Sparklin, an attorney with the law firm representing the parents, said Wednesday that the couple will appeal to the Supreme Court. "The Schindlers will be filing an appropriate appeal to save their daughter's life," he said.

Howard Simon of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida said the ruling pointed out the limited role of government in these matters and the need for a living will "to keep politicians out of your personal life."

"While I anticipate that the Supreme Court will have to decide whether to get into it, I do think we are coming to the end of this sad case," he said.

The Schindlers have been locked for years in a battle with Schiavo's husband over whether her feeding tube should be disconnected. State courts have sided with Michael Schiavo, who insists his wife told him she would never want to be kept alive artificially.

Even before the parents' appeal was filed with the 11th Circuit, Michael Schiavo urged the court not to grant an emergency request to restore nutrition.

"That would be a horrific intrusion upon Mrs. Schiavo's personal liberty," said the filing by his attorney, George Felos. He filed a response to the Schindlers' appeal and said he would go to the Supreme Court if the tube were ordered reconnected.

Terri Schiavo suffered brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped briefly from a chemical imbalance believed to have been brought on by an eating disorder. Court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

Her parents argue that she could get better and that she would never have wanted to be cut off from food and water.

An emergency filing to the high court would go first to Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee who has staked a moderate position on social issues.

Kennedy would have the option to act on the petition alone, although on previous emergency requests involving Schiavo he has referred the matter to the full nine-member court.

The Supreme Court's history on right-to-die cases is pretty thin.

It ruled in 1990 that a terminally ill person has a right to refuse life-sustaining treatment. And next term it plans to consider whether the federal government can prosecute doctors who help ill patients die.

Between those cases, the court has not said much, choosing to allow states to decide the issue.

Mary Schindler has pleaded with state lawmakers to save her daughter's life.

"Please, senators, for the love of God, I'm begging you, don't let my daughter die of thirst," she said Tuesday outside her daughter's hospice, before she broke down and was escorted away.

Florida lawmakers previously have failed to pass legislation that could have prevented the removal of the tube. They may consider another bill Wednesday, but state Sen. Daniel Webster said he has yet to persuade any lawmakers to change their votes.

The Rev. Pat Mahoney, a Schindler family supporter, acknowledged Wednesday that their legal options have diminished and urged the state Legislature to intervene.

"Let it be known to every voter in Florida, the fate of Terri Schiavo is in the Florida Senate's hands," he said. "If ... the Republicans fail to act, it will result in the brutal death of Terri Schiavo."

In court documents, the Schindlers said their daughter began "a significant decline" late Monday. Her eyes were sunken and dark, and her lips and face were dry. The feeding tube was removed Friday afternoon.

"While she still made eye contact with me when I spoke to her, she was becoming increasingly lethargic," Bob Schindler said in the papers. "Terri no longer attempted to verbalize back to me when I spoke to her."

Demonstrators who gathered outside Terri Schiavo's hospice here decried the courts' decisions. One woman was arrested Tuesday for trespassing after trying to bring Schiavo a cup of water.

"This is a clear cut case of judicial tyranny. All the judges who have ruled against Terri are tyrants, and we fully expected this decision," said Tammy Melton, 37, a high school teacher from Monterey, Tenn.

But Richard Avant, who lives down the street from the hospice, carried a sign reading "Honor her wishes."

"We represent the silent majority, if you look at the polls," Avant said. "We agree that Congress overstepped their bounds."

Over the weekend, Republicans in Congress pushed through unprecedented emergency legislation aimed at prolonging Schiavo's life by allowing the case to be reviewed by federal courts.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge James Whittemore of Tampa rejected the parents' request to have the tube reinserted, saying they had not established a "substantial likelihood of success" at a trial on their claim that Schiavo's religious and due process rights have been violated.

The Bush administration "would have preferred a different ruling" from Whittemore, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "We hope that they would be able to have relief through the appeals process."

The Justice Department also filed a court statement, saying an injunction was "plainly warranted" to carry out the wishes of Congress to provide federal court jurisdiction over the case.

Generally, when there's an issue which involves the law on one hand, and someone's life being imminently in danger on the other, my inclination is to be more concerned with the person's life.

"There is no denying the absolute tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo," the ruling said. "We all have our own family, our own loved ones, and our own children. However, we are called upon to make a collective, objective decision concerning a question of law."

Soz - can you be certain that she will "live like this indefinitely"?

Can you be certain that he is doing the "loving thing"?

I think if there is any doubt whatsoever in these two questions, we should err on the side of life.

We do know that her parents love her and wish for miracles for her.

And if she suffers for a few days and then dies and goes to Heaven to spend an eternity in Paradise with Christ in a new body, free of all suffering and full of the enraptured joy of being in the presence of God well, how do we know that this is not just God's way of bringing her home to glory His ways surpassing all understanding and such? He's omniscient right? So if she dies, then it was His plan right? So why don't those two great Christians George Bush and Bill Frist be still and know that He is God?

Do you think we can add W and Jeb? They stand around wringing their hands while Terri IS STARVING TO DEATH.

W could issue an Executive Order right now ordering the feeding tube to be reinserted until a judge hears the motion.

Jeb could take Terri into proetective custody per Fla. statutes CH. 415.1051(2)

The Congressional leaders who issued the subpoenas could ask the US Marshals to take Terri into protective custody.

Frankly, Terri is no closer now to having her tube re-inserted than she was Friday afternoon, and its because the GOP is sitting on its collective hands. I am angry. If Terri dies because they let her, it's back to the Constitution Party for me.

I was shocked last night when Henry Hyde didn't show up, what's up with that?

Hey all you pro-deathers/quality of life advocates?

Christopher Reeve was on a respirator from the time of his accident until his death of natural causes. What makes his situation different that Terri's? She breathes on her own/he didnt. he ate, could speak and he had physical therapy/she can't eat or speak and has been denied physical therapy.

Christopher Reeve was injured and lived in a wheelchair--but no one ever suggested he should be murdered. Terri may not have a good quality of life now, but her parents and those who love her will help her--and her quality of life will improve.

Bill wrote:

My only judgments of Michael are for his treatment of Terri's parents. He blocked their access to her medical records and fought for the right to cremate Terri without autopsy. Doesn't such bizarre behavior strike you as odd? Why would he demand immediate cremation?

Again, these are subjective judgments, Bill. From what I have read, and if I believed all the scuttlebutt, I might very well assume that Michael WAS an abuser, and possibly had a hand in causing Terri's present state.

If so, why was why was there not an investigation, years ago? Why were not the police informed, fifteen years ago? All this "stuff" is coming out now, IMO, is Terri's parents' attempt to keep their daughter alive.

We all could speculate till doomsday. According to someone that I know, the reason that Michael did not want to provide rehabilitation for Terri, was that he was scared that she would regain her cognition, sit up, point to Michael, and say, "You did this to me"!

This is a tragic case. But emotion should not be a part of it. Law should!

Basically, it is very simple. A woman is in a vegetative state. Her husband is the legal next of kin, and legally has the right to determine whether a feeding tube should be removed. He wants it removed. The law is satisfied. Period.

Let me demonstrate this with the response to another famous marriage that was racked with strife when infidelity was found to have occurred. When Bill Clinton was found out by Hillary. Did you think she should have divorced him? Now compare your opinion to that of the rest of the country. IT was probably split about 50/50. Your viewpoint is not the only one nor is it by any reasonable standard the majority one.

Man. This Schiavo thing is becoming even more a disaster for DeLay and company. First, Democrats got to sit back and quietly watch the GOP make asses of themselves with the public. Now, we get to watch an encore -- Republicans turning on each other.

Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, the sole Republican to oppose the Schiavo bill in a voice vote in the Senate, said: "This senator has learned from many years you've got to separate your own emotions from the duty to support the Constitution of this country. These are fundamental principles of federalism."

"It looks as if it's a wholly Republican exercise," Mr. Warner said, "but in the ranks of the Republican Party, there is not a unanimous view that Congress should be taking this step."

In interviews over the past two days, conservatives who expressed concern about the turn of events in Congress stopped short of condemning the vote in which overwhelming majorities supported the Schiavo bill, and they generally applauded the goal of trying to keep Ms. Schiavo alive. But they said they were concerned about what precedent had been set and said the vote went against Republicans who were libertarian, advocates of states' rights or supporters of individual rights.

"My party is demonstrating that they are for states' rights unless they don't like what states are doing," said Representative Christopher Shays of Connecticut, one of five House Republicans who voted against the bill. "This couldn't be a more classic case of a state responsibility."

"This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy," Mr. Shays said. "There are going to be repercussions from this vote. There are a number of people who feel that the government is getting involved in their personal lives in a way that scares them."

Man, when Shays talks about the American Taliban in his party's ranks...
What a monumentally stupid move by the GOP.

http://www.dailykos.com/

Heart surgeon Frist has pulled the plug regularly

BY RICHARD SISK and KENNETH R. BAZINET
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has championed the "rescue" of Terri Schiavo, is a renowned heart surgeon who has pulled the plug on a "regular basis," his office acknowledged yesterday.
But Frist (R-Tenn.) ended life support only when the patient was ruled brain-dead, and he is convinced Schiavo is not brain-dead.

"He certainly has a lot of clinical experience" in the withdrawal of life support, said Frist spokeswoman Amy Call.

Frist, the driving force behind the Senate bill to move Schiavo's case to federal court and a likely 2008 presidential candidate, is under fire for declaring she is not brain-dead after reviewing a video of Schiavo.

"On a regular basis, he's dealt with a diagnosis of brain death," Call said defending Frist, a heart and general surgeon.

Medical ethicists like Dr. Kenneth Prager, chairman of the Medical Ethics Committee at Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, say it's "inappropriate" for Frist to make an armchair diagnosis. "A diagnosis should be made bedside by a neurologist. He's not a neurologist, and he wasn't bedside," Prager said.

In a 2002 interview with the Chicago Tribune, Frist recalled moral debate into "Why is somebody dead when there's no brain activity, but everything else is warm and beating?" from the early days of organ transplants. "Finally, we came to a consensus, an ethical framework, that people can generally agree to and have faith in."

The other driving force behind the Terri Schiavo bill, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), is accused of using the Schiavo case to divert attention from his own ethics problems. A Texas grand jury has indicted three of DeLay's cronies and is now looking into his campaign finances.

A DeLay spokesman said, "Anybody would be hard-pressed to question Congressman Delay's commitment to life issues throughout his career."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/292714p-250596c.html

Nonetheless, no matter how misguided, the family is clearly motivated by love, and horrified at seeing TS starved to death.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=%2Fnm%2F20050322%2Fpl_nm%2Frights_schiavo_texas_dc_1

In Texas, Critics Question Bush's 'Life' Culture

Tue Mar 22,11:56 AM ET Politics - Reuters

By Jeff Franks

HOUSTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites)'s intervention for Terry Schiavo has opened old wounds in Texas where death penalty opponents say his words of support for a "culture of life" ring hollow after so many executions during his time as governor of the state.

Bush said he stepped into the Schiavo case because the United States should have "a presumption in favor of life," but there were 152 executions in Texas during his administration, including some in which the convict's guilt was in doubt, critics said.

"It's hypocrisy at a thousand levels," said University of Houston law professor and death penalty defense attorney David Dow.

"I saw many, many cases where there was substantial doubt about whether someone was guilty or whether the death penalty was the appropriate sentence, but he never said anything," said David Atwood, head of the Texas Coalition Against the Death Penalty. "I really can't say he cares about life."

"We all recognize there is a difference between an innocent person and someone who has committed a heinous crime, but to say one life is important and one isn't, that's politics," Atwood said.

Bush has defended the high number of executions by saying he was confident everyone put to death in Texas was guilty because they had had a fair hearing in the courts he believed capital punishment was a deterrent to crime.

He interrupted a Texas vacation and flew to Washington to sign an emergency law passed by Congress Monday that forced a review of the Schiavo case in federal court.

Schiavo, 41, has been in a vegetative state since a heart attack in 1990. Last week, a Florida court, at her husband's request, ordered the removal of the feeding tube keeping her alive, but her parents argued it should stay in place.

"In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life," said Bush, who has spoken often of creating a "culture of life" by limiting such things as abortion and stem cell research.

Death penalty opponents said Bush did not give the same presumption to death row inmates in Texas, where he used his power to grant an execution stay only once while governor from 1995 to 2000.

In 2000, the state set a U.S. record with 40 executions, including that of Gary Graham, whose guilt was hotly contested and became an international controversy.

"In the face of pretty substantial evidence that Gary Graham was not a murderer, George Bush (news - web sites) didn't say anything about a 'culture of life,"' Dow said.

Legal experts say Bush has not been totally consistent on the "right-to-die" issue because in 1999 he signed a Texas law similar to the Florida law under which a judge ordered the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube.

The Texas law allows for life support to be stopped under certain circumstances at the request of a family member or other appropriate surrogate.

"If this case had been in Texas the same thing would have happened as happened in Florida," said John Robertson, professor at the University of Texas law school and author of a book on bioethics called "The Rights of the Critically Ill."

But, he said, Bush's support of the emergency bill for Schiavo was not "a direct contradiction" of the Texas law.

"He's saying he thought it was good enough from the state's perspective at the time, and now he's saying there may be cases that might need a second look," he said.

Diane Clemens, head of the Houston-based Justice for All victims' rights group, said death penalty opponents were not making legitimate comparisons.

"This woman is an innocent, brain-damaged individual who has harmed no one. Killers are convicted murderers who have harmed many people. They have had a fair process," she said.

"They have had the very process these people would try and deny Schiavo -- and that is a request for life at the federal level, in the federal courts."

Monday, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the president's decision was based on principle, not politics.

"It (Schiavo case) is a complex case, where serious questions and significant doubts have been raised," he said. "And the president is always going to stand on the side of defending life."

According to an article in today's NY Times, there are conservatives out there who aren't too happy with the fed intervention in a state issue. These are "process conservatives" as opposed to "social conservatives."

Any of those process conservatives around who care to comment here? We've been hearing plenty from the interventionist wing of the movement here...