Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

And you know that, how?

<And how many times did you post the misinformation about Terri's brother and sister?>

JW, If you bother to go back and read my posts, you'll find that I have apologized for my mistake concerning Terri's brother and sister. It may have been misinformation provided by the media or my misinterpretation of what they said. As for "how I know that," that's what Michael's attorney said during an interview. You'll have to ask him.

BTW, the reason I found out about Bobbie (Terri's brother) is the fact that he was on t.v. last night on an interview, and expressed his feelings about his support for Terri and his parents. As soon as I learned my of my mistake, I posted an apology first thing this morning.

Neocons are clueless regarding accountability and corrections when one has erred. Just look at this entire administration as a glaring example...

For example:

Michael Schiavo tried to kill his wife. Terri's nurse said so.

If you want to believe this you must also believe that practically every person involved in Mrs. Schiavo's care conspired to cover up attempted murder. The court did review the affidavit of one Carla Iyer, registered nurse who claims:

- Mrs. Schiavo was lucid.
- All of her notes indicating Terri was lucid were mysteriously deleted.
- She saved Mrs. Schiavo's life after her husband "injected her" with insulin.
- A fellow LPN was possibly killing patients.
- She was fired after she told police about all these crimes.

The court found Ms. Iyer's tales "incredible" which is legalese for "bullshit". In order for her claims to be true everyone from Mrs. Schiavo's doctors to the police had to decide to cover up for Michael Schiavo.

Theresa Schiavo is lucid.

I do not wish to be disrespectful here, but I am dealing with people determined to ignore cold facts, so I will be blunt. Mrs. Schiavo is about as lucid as your average Venus Flytrap. She responds reflexively to some stimulus, but there is NO willful, deliberate or conscious actions.

The cerebral cortex of Mrs. Schiavo's brains was destroyed 15 years ago due to anoxia (oxygen starvation) brought about when heart stopped beating due to a potassium imbalance. The cerebral cortex is responsible for all higher brain functions. It is the part of the brain that makes you "you". It allows you to think, it contains your personality, your language and and voluntary motor functions. Without this part of your brain you are like a computer with know operating system. They can boot you up in the morning, but you pretty much just sit there and do nothing except consume electricity.

Theresa Schiavo could get better.

Yes, theoretically, in a parallel universe, two hundred years in the future where Star Trek is actually real, Dr. McCoy could travel back in time and stumble across Mrs. Schiavo and give her a pill (which she couldn't swallow, since swallowing is a conscious action) and she would regrow her cerebral cortex. Mr. Spock would then find the keeper of her katra and restore her personality via a Vulcan Mind Meld™.

But, short of that, no, she won't get better.

c.i., Mr. Schindler also made his statements on CNN last night. Now, why in the world do you think he would lie, knowing that any spokesman for the hospice could refute his claim? Schiavo leaves his instructions concerning visitation with hospice personnel.

When you insisted on repeating your misinformation about Terri's siblings, I didn't rudely tell you to "get your facts straight". I've always found you an easy person to debate with even though we almost never see eye to eye. Lately, however, it seems that you feel a need to insult those with whom you disagree. I know this is an emotional topic, but that's not called for.

The sickening hypocrisy continues:

Frist's Schiavo Assertion At Odds With His Comments About Christopher Reeve

Frist's assertion that Schiavo could recover stands in stark contrast to his attacks on John Edwards for saying back in October that stem cell research could help people like Christopher Reeve walk again. Observe:

Frist on Schiavo Possibly Recovering: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist several times questioned Schiavo's diagnosis, saying he had reviewed a videotape of her and her case file and wasn't sure whether she really was beyond recovery.

"Remember, Terri is alive. She is not in a coma," Frist said Sunday. "Although there are a range of opinions, neurologists who have examined her insist today that she is not in a persistent vegetative state. She breathes on her own - like you and me. She is not on a respirator. She is not on life support of any type. She does not have a terminal condition." [The Tennessean, 3/22/05]

Frist Attacking Edwards: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist attacked Sen. John Edwards for saying that stem cell research would enable people like Christopher Reeve to "get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."

Frist responded on a conference call with reporters arranged by the Bush-Cheney campaign: "I find it opportunistic to use the death of someone like Christopher Reeve -- I think it is shameful -- in order to mislead the American people… We should be offering people hope, but neither physicians, scientists, public servants or trial lawyers like John Edwards should be offering hype.

"It is cruel to people who have disabilities and chronic diseases, and, on top of that, it's dishonest. It's giving false hope to people, and I can tell you as a physician who's treated scores of thousands of patients that you don't give them false hope." [CNN.com, 10/12/04]

Unless you're Terri Shaivo's family.

I don't know why Mr Schindler would lie. I really don't why anybody lies. If you knew my information about Terri's siblings were a mistake, all you need to do is spell it out for me. I think there were two posts in the past where I talked about Terri's siblings. If I make a mistake, and I learn otherwise, you can be assured I will be the first one to acknowledge my mistake. That's been my MO forever, and will not change in the future. How many more apologies do you want from me?

I was just scanning this forum, with no intention to participate, since I am at work late, writing code, and want to concentrate on that. However, your post presents such a potent combination of misunderstanding me, and revealing the feebleness of your own approach to ethics, that I had to reply.

I support Bush because he agrees with most of my opinons. He has a few opinions I do not agree with at all, such as his advocacy of tort reform, which I will, by the way, not discuss now, but generally he says what I already believe. If he showed so little empathy as to want to deny a helpless woman who is not brain dead, food and water, I would be greatly saddened and surprised that someone I trusted could show such a lack of empathy. I don't know what kind of subhumans you hang out with, but I form my opinions in my own head and nowhere else. I vote for people as long as they agree with me on the bulk of important issues and not one second longer.

Well, folks, take heart. It sure looks like the feeding tube will not be removed from U.S. Federalism afterall:



Can you say "backfire?"

And the truth comes out. There is enough sympathy for BOTH sides of this equation (Michael and Terri's family), but the line is becoming firmly drawn regarding the abuse of Federalist powers.

And we can thank the neocons for overstepping this boundary. Thanx a bunch, guys. '06 is starting to look rather promising right now...

If the poll question was framed to ask about someone in a "coma", then I'm not surprised at the results. Would be interesting to know exactly what was asked of the 737 adults.

I am glad I am not in this position and I am one who thinks it is time for Terri to die. I may be wrong, but it is my closely held belief. If an obviously pandering move (IMO) to keep her alive for political gain backfires it will give me great pleasure. If it can be said I side with anyone on the issue I suppose I side with the husband and believe in doing so I ultimately side with Terri.

Having said that, the pictures of her obviously broken hearted and dejected parents are heartbreaking and I truly feel badly for them.

There are no winners here, only losers.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/23/opinion/polls/main682674.shtml

(CBS) Americans have strong feelings about the Terri Schiavo case, and a majority says the feeding tube should not now be re-inserted. This view is shared by Americans of all political persuasions. Most think the feeding tube should have been removed, and most also do not think the U.S. Supreme Court should hear the case.

An overwhelming 82 percent of the public believes the Congress and President should stay out of the matter. There is widespread cynicism about Congress' motives for getting involved: 74 percent say Congress intervened to advance a political agenda, not because they cared what happened to Terri Schiavo. Public approval of Congress has suffered as a result; at 34 percent, it is the lowest it has been since 1997, dropping from 41 percent last month. Now at 43 percent, President Bush's approval rating is also lower than it was a month ago.

VIEWS ON THE CASE
Most Americans side with Terri Schaivo's husband in saying that the feeding tube should not be re-inserted now.

WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN TO TERRI SCHIAVO NOW?

Re-insert tube
27%
Do not re-insert
66%

Both Catholics and Protestants think the tube should not be re-inserted now. Liberals and moderates both believe the tube should not be re-inserted; conservatives are more closely divided. Most Democrats and Republicans agree the tube should remain out at this point. A strong majority of Americans in every age group says the tube should not be re-inserted now.

President Bush signed the legislation concerning Terri Schiavo on Sunday night, but a majority of those who voted for him last November do not think the feeding tube should be re-inserted. John Kerry's voters agree.

Most Americans do not now think the case ought to go further up the judicial system. A majority, 61 percent, says the case should not be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, while 37 percent say the court should hear the case.

SHOULD SCHIAVO CASE BE HEARD BY U.S. SUPREME COURT?

Yes
37%
No
61%

Overall, views on what should happen to Terri Schiavo now closely match what Americans think should have happened to her leading up to now. 61 percent think that the feeding tube ought to have been removed, while fewer -- 28 percent -- think it ought to have remained in place.

But whatever their stance on the issue, more than three in four say they feel "strongly" about their views on the matter. Majorities of those on both sides feel strongly.

HOW STRONGLY DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS ISSUE?

Strongly
All
78%
Don't re-insert tube now
85%
Re-insert tube now
77%

Not strongly
All
19%
Don't re-insert tube now
13%
Re-insert tube now
20%

That intensity of feeling cuts across religions, and religiosity. Both Catholics and Protestants feel strongly about their stance, as do both evangelical and non-evangelical Christians. Those who attend religious services frequently say they feel strongly, and so do those who attend less often.

More than three-fourths of the public -- 76 percent -- say they are following the story either very or somewhat closely. This is about as high as the 79 percent who reported they were closely following the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in May 2004, and higher than the 61 percent who closely followed the Congressional hearings surrounding the 9/11 investigation in April 2004.

INVOLVEMENT BY THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT
The vast majority of Americans say Congress and the President should stay out of the Schiavo matter.

SHOULD CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT BE INVOLVED IN SCHIAVO MATTER?

Yes
13%
No
82%

There are no partisan political differences on this issue: majorities of Democrats (89 percent), Republicans (72 percent), liberals (84 percent) and conservatives (76 percent) are in agreement that the government should not be involved. 68 percent of white evangelicals think that Congress and the President should stay out of the Schiavo case.

And Congress' motives for being involved are seen as driven by political calculations, not compassion.

WHY DO YOU THINK CONGRESS GOT INVOLVED?

They care about Terri Schiavo
13%
Trying to advance political agenda
74%

Congress' involvement in the case may have damaged the public's view of that institution. In this poll, 34 percent approve of the way Congress is handling its job, down from 41 percent last month, while 49 percent now disapprove, up from 44 percent last month. This is the lowest approval rating Congress has received since December 1997, in the wake of Congressional hearings into Democratic fundraising practices.

CONGRESS JOB APPROVAL

Approve
Now
34%
2/2005
41%

Disapprove
Now
49%
2/2005
44%

THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT
In general, Americans believe the issue of whether a family can remove a patient from life support is not for government at any level to decide. Just 9 percent say the Federal government should decide such matters, 13 percent say these are state matters, and 75 percent say government should stay out altogether.

ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN DECIDING LIFE SUPPORT CASES

Federal government should decide
9%
State government should decide
13%
Government should stay out
75%

Americans of all political persuasions -- Republicans, Democrats, conservatives and liberals alike -- share similar feelings on this issue.

The public also foresees troubling ramifications from this case: two-thirds are concerned that Congress' actions in this matter will set a precedent, making it easier for the legislature to intervene in individuals' lives in the future.

WILL CONGRESS' ACTIONS THIS WEEK MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO INTERVENE IN THE FUTURE?

Yes, and concerned about it
68%
Yes, but not concerned about it
9%
No
17%

ATTITUDES TOWARD LIFE AND DEATH
This poll also asked Americans general views on life and death decisions in these kinds of matters.

There is an overwhelming view among Americans that if they themselves were in a coma, they would want their feeding tube removed. 82 percent say so; only 14 percent say they would not want their doctor to remove the feeding tube to let them die in that scenario. This was also the case when the CBS News Poll asked the question back in 1990; then 85 percent said they would want their feeding tube removed.

IF YOU WERE IN A COMA, WOULD YOU WANT YOUR DOCTOR TO REMOVE THE FEEDING TUBE AND LET YOU DIE?

Yes
Now
82%
1990
85%

No
Now
14%
1990
11%

In general, 73 percent say if a patient is in a coma with no brain activity, a close family member should have the right to tell the doctor to remove the feeding tube and let the patient die. 17 percent say family members should not have this right. Conservatives are somewhat less likely than liberals and moderates to say this, but 62 percent of them still think so. Back in 1990, even more Americans -- 81 percent -- thought a close family member should have the right to tell a doctor to remove a feeding tube.

IF PATIENT IS IN A COMA, SHOULD CLOSE FAMILY MEMBER BE ABLE TO HAVE DOCTOR REMOVE THE FEEDING TUBE AND LET THE PERSON DIE?

Should
Now
73%
1990
81%

Should not
Now
17%
1990
13%

In general, in the absence of a legal directive, most Americans think a spouse has the ultimate authority in these matters. If a patient is in a vegetative state, has left no legal document stating what kind of medical care he or she would want, and family members disagree as to what should be done, 62 percent of Americans think the patient's spouse should have the right to make the final decision about what should be done for the patient medically. 15 percent think the patient's parents should make the final decision, and another 10 percent want the patient's adult children to decide.

WHO SHOULD MAKE THE FINAL DECISION IF THE PATIENT IS IN A VEGETATIVE STATE AND DID NOT LEAVE LEGAL INSTRUCTIONS?

Spouse
62%
Parents
15%
Adult children
10%

In a separate situation, six in ten say if a doctor injects a terminally ill patient with a lethal dose of drugs at the person's request it is not the same thing as murder. 28 percent say it is.

IF A DOCTOR INJECTS TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT WITH LETHAL DOSE OF DRUGS AT THE PERSON'S REQUEST, IS THAT THE SAME AS MURDER?

Same as murder
Now
28%
1998
30%

Not the same
Now
63%
1998
61%

Views on the matter are similar to what they were in November 1998, shortly after CBS' 60 Minutes aired Dr. Jack Kevorkian participating in the death of a terminally ill patient. Back then, 61 percent said a doctor injecting a patient with a lethal dose of drugs at the person's request was not murder.

LIVING WILL
The Schiavo case highlights the importance of living wills -- legal documents that detail what kind of medical care individuals would want should they become unable to make medical decisions themselves. This poll shows that Terri Schiavo is far from alone in not having such a legal document: only one in three Americans say they have a living will; 67 percent say they do not.

DO YOU HAVE A LIVING WILL?

Yes
33%
No
67%

Older Americans, those who are college-educated, and Republicans are the most likely to currently have a living will. A majority of Americans age 65 and older say they have one.

HAVE A LIVING WILL
Total
33%

Gender
Men
31%
Women
34%

Age
18-29
6%
30-44
23%
45-64
42%
65+
68%

Currently Married
Yes
39%
No
25%

Church attendance
Every week
42%
Less often
31%
Never
23%

Education
High School or less
27%
Some College
28%
College grad +
48%

Income
< $30K
24%
$30K-$50K
31%
Over $50K
40%

Party Identification
Republican
44%
Democrat
29%
Independent
28%

THE POLITICAL IMPACT OF THE SCHIAVO CASE
As mentioned earlier, Congressional approval ratings have fallen since last month and are at their lowest point since 1997, and President Bush's job approval ratings have also declined. 43 percent now approve of President Bush's handling of his job as President; 48 percent disapprove.

36 percent approve of President Bush's handling of the economy, and 53 percent disapprove. Bush's approval rating on Iraq has also dropped; 39 percent approve, down from 45 percent in late February; 53 percent now disapprove.

BUSH JOB APPROVALS

Overall
Now
43%
2/2005
49%

Economy
Now
36%
2/2005
38%

Iraq
Now
39%
2/2005
45%

There is a strong partisan element to these views; the President's approval rating is especially low among Democrats (11 percent approve), while 85 percent of Republicans approve.

As a matter of national priority, the public continues to say the war in Iraq (26 percent) and the economy and jobs (15 percent) are the most important problems facing the U.S. today. Only 6 percent mention Social Security, about the same as last month.

So, as most Americans are siding with Michael and the rational thinking of like-minded individuals on this matter, it would seem as though the attempted demonization and spinning regarding this matter has utterly failed to convince the American people otherwise.

Now, enough of the distractions. It's time to finally nail the "hammer" to the wall, and put DeLay finally in his place. This man is the most pathetic and disgusting political figure I have ever witnessed.

I don't think there is going to be a fall out over this one issue. I don't agree with the GOP on this issue but I do think they had the best intentions in this case. Media attention being the driving force, I'm sure the GOP felt they had to make a play to save the women.

My wife and I have a living will, because she works in the health industry, and she brought home the forms from work. That was about five or six years ago; maybe longer.

Maybe the poll question should have asked...

"If a person is breathing on their own and if that person's legal guardian has moved on with his life and if that person has a loving family that unhesitatingly wants to take her home to care for her, would you agree that that person should be starved and dehydrated to death?"

JW. The last part of your question has no place in any transfer of responsibility.

c.i. - that's your opinion and you are welcome to it.

My opinion is that Terri Schiavo is dying an unnatural death in having nutrition and water denied her.

When (and if) her medical records are released after her death, you will most likely see that a pain medication of some type was mercifully administered, as there is no definitive nor conclusive "proof" that brain-impaired patients feel no pain.