Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

What if she was aware? And she couldn't speak, move, communicate, anything?

You'd feel comfortable keeping someone trapped inside a literal prison for the rest of their natural life?

It would be like hell! Even if there are chances for medical advances in the future, she's already had to deal with 15 years of non-communication.

Not that this conversation matters, as the part of one's brain that deals with consciousness is located in the area of the brain that TS didn't even have anymore, so....

Cycloptichorn

I was under the impression that what would be important in such a case is whether that individual wanted to live.

What did the minority of doctors have to say? What did the people who spent the most time around her have to say? There simply was not the unanimity you like to claim.

Quote:

I was under the impression that what would be important in such a case is whether that individual wanted to live.

? What could have ever given you that impression about this case?

Quote:

What did the minority of doctors have to say? What did the people who spent the most time around her have to say? There simply was not the unanimity you like to claim.

Yaknow, we have an interesting system here in America for figuring out things like this, when you and I cannot be involved personally b/c we simply don't live in Florida and are not acquainted with all the details of the case.

It's called the legal system. In this case, the legal system looked at all the different evidence, evidence that you and I are barely privy to at all, and made a decision based upon said evidence. The court decided that the person who had spent the most time around her was trustworthy, and that was one Michael Schiavo. This decision has been upheld many times.

You like to convienently discount the fact that he, alongside the Schindlers, busted his ass for years trying to Rehab Terri, and it didn't work. He stated that she said in the past that she wouldn't want to have lived this way; that's the end of the whole thing as far as I'm concerned.

Cycloptichorn

Many here would likely applaud the life Christopher Reeve lived after the tragic horseriding accident that left him almost totally paralyzed from the neck down. He required an artificial breathing apparatus fopr most of his remaining years and very likely was fed in the same manner as Terry Schiavo. Despite his horrific injuries, the prospect of which might well have led him to prefer death if asked, he found the will and desire to live about ten productive years afterwards and to inspire many people in the process. Was this stage of his life worth living?

Debra, If you are indeed well informed, your quote "he ordered that no food or water be allowed to pass her lips" shows lack of knowledge, because Terri could not swallow or drink liquids through her lips/mouth. She would have surely choked and died, because she did not have the ability to swallow.

So,can my sister order his death,or cant she?

[It was h]ardly a case of "he said, she said". I think Nimh has posted extensively from the court rulings. You are free to disagree with the courts decision but don't turn it into something it wasn't. The court looked at a lot of evidence in this case. [..]

Several people testified as to Terri's wishes on both sides. The court looked at that testimony and made a decision based on what it felt was true and what wasn't. The court included its reasoning in its decision. The husband prevailed when it came to Terri's wishes not because he was next of kin but because the preponderance of evidence was on his side. When it came to Terri's medical condition, the husband prevailed because all credible medical evidence pointed to Terri being in PVS. Again, the court wrote extensively about why it ruled the way it did. [..]

The court used the "clear and convincing" standard that Debra demanded [..]. Judge Greer wrote that the evidence was "clear and convincing". The appeals court has said there is not any evidence that the "clear and convincing" standard wasn't met.

Gelisgesti wrote:

What is the nature of your medical training that allows you to diagnose a patient over a TV broadcast and say that she was not in a PVS when a majority of real doctors that examined her first hand says she was. Are you saying that a tube surgically inserted into her stomach is not artificial? Do you have one?

2 entries found for ignorant.
ig·no·rant Audio pronunciation of "ignorant" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gnr-nt)
adj.

1. Lacking education or knowledge.
2. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
3. Unaware or uninformed.

Not name calling, fact. She claims to get her knowledge from the web and Fox tv. Think of how many neurologist their money on medical school when they could have done the same thing sitting on the sofa.

My credentials? Thirty five years as a Cardio Pulmonary Technician ..... working on patients such as Terri, at least a thousand of them. I'm the guy that gets acall from the unit to please come down and pull the plug on so and so ..... the guy that keeps them alive and breathing.

On what do you base your observance of sentiency .... when and where?

I do not lack education or intelligence. I do not lack knowledge of the facts. I am not unaware or uninformed.

I am aware that there is substantial disagreement among medical professionals concerning the diagnosis of PVS. I don't need to be a medically trained professional to understand that when people who are trained in the profession disagree that there is room for error on either side.

And, for your information, the court did not merely rule that Terri would wish to have her feeding tube removed when her wishes could not clearly and unambiguously be known, he ordered that no food or water be allowed to pass her lips. He had armed guards at her door to ensure that no person place a single drop of water in her mouth. Tell me, how can placing a drop of water in Terri's mouth be construed as "artificial life support?"

The court did not simply order the removal of life support, he unequivocally ordered her death by starvation and dehydration.
You are not engaging in a debate on the facts or information available to us, you are engaging in name-calling.

Dookiestix wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Dookiestix wrote:

D-I-S-T-R-A-C-T-I-O-N. A tried and true neocon way of playing this media game...

And your only motive in posting on this site at all is that you plan to write an expose about A2K. It's despicable that you use the site like this to further your own career.

I have a career. I'm a graphic designer.

And what expose could you possibly be talking about?

It is all too clear that you only espouse these positions for crass, commercial reasons connected with a book project, and I, for one, think it is awful that you are capitalizing on A2K this way.

Debra, If you are indeed well informed, your quote "he ordered that no food or water be allowed to pass her lips" shows lack of knowledge, because Terri could not swallow or drink liquids through her lips/mouth. She would have surely choked and died, because she did not have the ability to swallow.

OVERVIEW

In updating this page recently, I decided to include a summary about the case's events. After some efforts, it occurred to me that I should simply reproduce an email and my response that I recently blogged. They seem to make for a good summary. Here's the email:


Hi Matt,

I stumbled across your site and quickly became immersed. I have been an avid follower of Terri Schiavo as I feel quite passionately about the case as explained in the letter I wrote to the Rocky Mountain News which was recently published (see below). So far, no amount of legal jargon has been able to quench my desperate desire to understand this case. I have been searching for answers for so very long, that I felt some sense of relief when finding your site. I would really love to hear your opinion as to whether or not there is any hope whatsoever to save Terri at this point, or is this it? Thank you so much in advance for your time and for listening. And also, for this site. Have a great day!
I left the reader's attached letter out. Here was my response:


Thanks for the kind words and the sincere thoughts.

This is a very tough situation for all involved -- and mind you I'm not at all involved. I just discuss the case as part of what seems to be my running commentary on Florida law.

I appreciate that you wish to understand more. Ultimately, Terri's case is understandable, though painfully so. If you take away the "evil" allegations that have been leveled against everyone, it's easy to see what you're left with.

You're left with a woman who suffered a heart attack 15 years ago, who essentially died but was resuscitated, though not entirely. Her brain had suffered enormous damage from the heart attack. As time passed, her brain further deteriorated -- to the point where much if not most of her cerebral cortex (the portion of the brain that controls conscious thought, among other things) was literally gone, replaced by spinal fluid. Doctors hired by Terri's husband say the deterioration of Terri's brain left her without thoughts or feelings, that the damage is irreversible, and that Terri's life-like appearance is merely the result of brain stem activity -- basically involuntary reflexes we all have. An independent doctor hired by the court reached the same conclusions. Doctors hired by Terri's parents did not dispute the physical damage done to Terri, but they claim there are new therapies that could improve her condition. In two separate trials, the trial court found such claims of potential improvement to be without merit. Terri's body continues to function without her cerebral cortex. She is sustained by a feeding tube surgically inserted into her stomach. She cannot eat through her mouth without a strong likelihood of choking to death.

You're left with a husband who lived with his in-laws following Terri's heart attack, who apparently provided care and therapy for years but who later came to believe Terri would never recover. He believes she would not have wanted to be kept alive in this brain-degenerated condition by a surgically implanted tube. He is apparently willing to continue his fight to achieve what he believes Terri would want despite ridicule, hatred, expense, and threats.

You're left with parents who were once allied with Terri's husband in an effort to care for Terri and restore her but, unlike Terri's husband, they never lost hope. They believe Terri reacts to them and has conscious thoughts. They believe Terri would not want, and does not want, her feeding tube removed, and that some cognitive function could be restored through new therapies. Terri's parents are willing to continue their fight to achieve what they believe Terri would want despite ridicule, hatred, expense, and threats.

You're left with judges who have been placed in the utterly thankless position of applying Florida law to this impassioned situation. Florida law calls for the trial court to determine what Terri would choose to do in this situation, and after a trial hard fought by Terri's husband and her family, where each side was given the opportunity to present its best case about what Terri would do, the court determined the evidence was clear and convincing that Terri would choose not to continue living by the affirmative intervention of modern medicine -- that she would choose to have her feeding tube disconnected. In a second trial, brought about by Terri's family's claims new therapies could restore her and that the existence of such a therapy would make her "change her mind," the trial court again heard evidence from all sides and determined that no new therapy presented any reasonable chance of restoring Terri's brain function. The propriety of these decisions -- from the sufficiency of the evidence to the appropriateness of the procedures used -- has been unanimously upheld on appeal each time.

You're left with a public that is much confused. Some see video clips of Terri moving, appearing to make eye contact, and making sounds, and they assume such are the product of conscious thought -- that Terri's "in there." Some believe Terri's husband has been motivated by money. Some believe that no heart attack occurred -- instead, Terri's husband beat her nearly to death and has been trying to end her life ever since. Some believe he is a bad person because he has taken up with another woman and has children with her. Some believe Florida's judiciary is corrupt or inept, to the point where death threats have been made against the trial judge. Some are sad that families would fight like this. Some believe that removing Terri's feeding tube would cause her pain and is inhumane (I'm no doctor, but the medical information I've seen on this subject uniformly says the opposite.) Some are disappointed that the law does not allow someone in Terri's condition to be kept alive perpetually if a family member is willing to care for him or her. Some believe no life should be permitted to reach an unnecessary end unless irrefutable proof, or at least written proof, shows the person wanted things that way.

All of these positions are understandable in some sense, though if you've read my posts over the years you know I am particularly sensitive to the judiciary's position of following the law correctly and yet being so horrifically misunderstood by many.

Is there hope? Well, if you mean hope to keep Terri alive any longer, there is some. Terri's family continues to launch new legal battles, and to appeal old ones, in hopes a court somewhere will give them another chance to prove Terri would not want to discontinue her feeding tube, or in hopes they can win the authority to care for Terri themselves. There is a new legislative measure under consideration that could prove to be a repeat of 2003's "Terri's Law." How long can these efforts forestall the tube's removal? Can they stop it altogether? I can't say. But I don't think anyone with knowledge of how the legal system works would have foreseen several years ago that Terri would be with us in 2005, yet here she is.

I continue to hope that when this saga ends it will be the ending that Terri would have wanted.

What's happened to Terri since her collapse?

The Second District's first opinion in this case explained:


Since 1990, Theresa has lived in nursing homes with constant care. She is fed and hydrated by tubes. The staff changes her diapers regularly. She has had numerous health problems, but none have been life threatening.

Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs.

In a later opinion in the same case, the Second District further explained:


Although the physicians are not in complete agreement concerning the extent of Mrs. Schiavo's brain damage, they all agree that the brain scans show extensive permanent damage to her brain. The only debate between the doctors is whether she has a small amount of isolated living tissue in her cerebral cortex or whether she has no living tissue in her cerebral cortex.