Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

I would give a doctor who had actually spent some quality time with Terri Shaivo more benefit of the doubt than one who had not.

I don't know and don't care enough to go back and re-read. I'll take your word for it.

I have read far too many 'expert witness' reports seeking to discredit the other side's 'expert witness' reports to give an inordinate amount of weight to 'expert witnesses'. I would give a doctor who had actually spent some quality time with Terri Shaivo more benefit of the doubt than one who had not.

And Hammesfahr seems to have some pretty impressive credentials too.

what undemises [Hammesfahr's] creditability [sic] is that he did not present to this court any evidence other than his generalized statements as to the efficacy of his therapy on brain damaged individuals like Terry [sic] Schiavo. He testified that he has treated about 50 patients in the same or worse condition than Terry [sic] Schiavo since 1994 but he offered no names, no case studies, no videos and no tests results to support his claim that he had success in all but one of them. If his therapy is as effective as he would lead this court to believe, it is inconceivable that he would not produce clinical results of these patients he has treated. And surely the medical literature would be replete with this new, now patented, procedure. Yet, he has only published one article and that was in 1995 involving some 63 patients, 60% of whom were suffering from whiplash. None of these patients were in a persistent vegetative state and all were conversant. Even he acknowledges that he is aware of no article or study that shows vasodilatation therapy to be an effective treatment for persistent vegetative state patients.

However, do you give doctors who have not actually spent time with a patient more credibility than those who have? If you say yes, are you making it up? If you say no, are you making it up? How ridiculous is it to personally insult a member for having a perfectly logical opinion?

The Drs that ARE her regular Drs have all said the same thing. the Drs appointed by the court have all said the same thing. Drs can't just waltz in anytime they want and spend "quality time" with her. That is impossible based on the court rulings in this case.

I would give a doctor who had actually spent some quality time with Terri Shaivo more benefit of the doubt than one who had not. And as a mother, I know from experience that very often the mother knows more than the doctor in some cases.

The web is filled with information on it. Terri's parents had to get the court order to allow their 2 Drs to examine her. Her parents needed a court order to get her medical records.

I posted a pretty comprehensive timeline here earlier. It includes links to court rulings.

And you didn't answer my questions. Do you give more weight to the doctor's opinion who has examined a patient than the one who has not?

Yeah but Fox, respect for differing opinions is fine, but the thing is - there's first simply the factual question of a) which doctors exactly have seen Terri and b) what they said about it. That's not opinion-stuff; that's fact-stuff

Why are we arguing something that can be proven so easily? It doesn't take congress to do this experiment.

At first blush, the video of Terry [sic] Schiavo appearing to smile and look lovingly at her mother seemed to represent cognition. This was also true for how she followed the Mickey Mouse balloon held by her father. The court has carefully viewed the videotapes as requested by counsel and does find that these actions were neither consistent nor reproducible. For instance, Terry [sic] Schiavo appeared to have the same look on her face when Dr. Cranford rubbed her neck. Dr. Greer testified she had a smile during his (non-videoed) examination. Also, Mr. Schlinder [sic] tried several more times to have her eyes follow the Mickey Mouse balloon but without success. Also, she clearly does not consistently respond to her mother. The court finds that based on the credible evidence, cognitive function would manifest itself in a constant response to stimuli.

Dr. Hammesfahr testified that he felt that he was able to get Terry Schiavo to reproduce repeatedly to his commands. However, by the court's count, he gave 105 commands to Terry Schiavo and, at his direction, Mrs. Schindler gave an additional 6 commands. Again, by the court's count, he asked her 61 questions and Mrs. Schindler, at his direction, asked her an additional 11 questions. The court saw few actions that could be considered responsive to either those commands or those questions. The videographer focused on her hands when Dr. Hammesfahr was asking her to squeeze. While Dr. Hammesfahr testified that she squeezed his finger on command, the video would not appear to support that and his reaction on the video likewise would not appear to support that testimony.