Death Angel vs. Terri Schiavo
This Saturday, March 31, will mark the second anniversary of the death by starvation and dehydration of Terri Schiavo. Too bad she wasn’t a convicted murderer. She’d still be going through the appeals process.
Yes, had Terri been a convicted murderer, MSM would certainly have taken up her cause as well, like it did the 34-minute execution of convicted killer Angel Diaz . Did I mention Terri’s execution took 14 days? Both were in Florida. Compare the coverage:
“[Gov. Jeb Bush's] intervention in the Terri Schiavo fiasco, without even talking to her husband, was unconscionable.” ~ Orlando Sentinel, Dec. 28, 2006
“Gov. Jeb Bush was wise to suspend executions and order the review of lethal injection procedures after the bungled execution of a convicted murderer last week.” ~ News-press.com, Dec. 19, 2006
That’s just one example of the insanity….
Terri’s brother, Bobby Schindler, has documented many more.
And why was the media allowed to see the death of Diaz and not the death of Terri? Would they have described her demise as they did Diaz’s? The Associated Press appeared to luxuriate in those gory details. In an article entitled, “Doctors: Botched execution likely slow, painful,” it said:
Death penalty foes have for years warned of a worst-case scenario in which an inmate being executed by lethal injection could remain conscious, experiencing severe pain as he slowly dies. That day may finally have come.
“It really sounds like [Angel Diaz] was tortured to death,” said Jonathan Groner, associate professor of surgery at the Ohio State Medical School…. “My impression is that it would cause an extreme amount of pain.”…
“[W]itnesses reported movement of Diaz as long as 24 minutes after the first injection, with him grimacing, blinking, licking his lips, blowing and attempting to mouth words. At one point, about midway through the process, he turned his head toward witnesses….
“[T]urning one’s head toward witnesses,” interesting word choice.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Has it really been two years? I remember crying the day they took the feeding tubes out of her for the last time. It was such a sad, sad day.
Well – the only thing any of us can gain from the Terri Schaivo story is an acute awareness of how important it is to have a living will. Because I have one, thank God, I know I’ll never have to suffer for years and years like she did. There was no right or wrong in that case – because none of us can ever be sure what she would have wanted. If she would have wanted to die, that would have been her right. If she didnt, that would have also been her right. And we’ll never know which was the case.
You’re never too young to have a living will…
As far as the death penalty goes Jill – even criminals have a constitutional right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. If there was something wrong with the method of execution, we have a legal and constitutional obligation to make sure the issues are addressed before anyone else is subjected to it.
You mean the day her suffering started to end was a sad day? Sometimes death is a sweet release. And she didn’t starve to death or dehydrate to death. She was still hooked up to an IV. She was just taken off life support.
I could never imagine going through what Terri Schiavo went for. And it’s well known by the people around me that I never want to be kept the way that she was. That’s not living. That’s not being “alive.”
While I’ve heard pro-lifers say all the time, that abortion is trying to be God, was not keeping death at bay for Terri the same thing? She’s out of pain now, isn’t that what’s important?
I doubt many of you know of Pedro Zamora. He was an amazing fellow, who was also taken off life support and died. And although he had the opportunity to tel his family that he wanted to, would you really want to force your loved one to lay as a vegetable in a hospital for years on end or would you rather let them move on?
If you’re interested in reading about Pedro go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Zamora
http://www.aidsaction.org/pedro.htm
Anthony,
I beg to differ…
She was still hooked up to an IV. She was just taken off life support.
Terri Schiavo was NEVER on life support. Nor was she on an IV. She WAS starved to death. And she DID dehydrate.
She was perfectly healthy. She was not killed because she was sick. She was killed because her brain wasn’t functioning at the same level as her husbands. (of course that is debatable as I seriously believe that it was her husband that was brain damaged.)
You can argue that Terri wasn’t living a life that you would have liked. You can argue that Terri’s brain was not functioning. But please don’t argue about how she died. She was murdered. period. period. exclamation point. period.
mk
…. I remember how sad it was listening to each excruciating detail of her SLOW and PAINFUL death.
Her lips cracking from dehydration, her body shriveling and the parents not being able to do anything for their precious daughter!
It shouldn’t surprise me though that the people who advocate killing Terri Shiavo are all pro-abortion. They’re all in support of taking away a person’s *choice* to live, just because they cannot voice their request in a way that they approve of. (Terri responded to “Do you want to live” with “I WAAAAAAAAA” and they didn’t think it was worth caring about) Funny how CHOICE goes out the window when it’s a helpless victim like Terri!
The Schiavo affair was a huge embarrassment to the GOP and helped show voters how completely the GOP has prostituted itself to the most irrational elements of the right-to-life industry.
It had a lot to do with why the GOP lost both houses of congress.
Danielle,
My father makes Terri Schiavo look like Einstein.
And he has been this way for over 7 years.
Before he became ill, he told me that he knew what was coming and that he would accept it. He endures everything that God sends His way, and he always has. He is a man of great faith. Every morning he would get up at 5:00 in the morning and say his prayers for a half an hour. Then he would go to mass. He offers up his suffering (and I know this because he told me)for whatever God decides to do with it. For us, for my son with the bi-polar, and most of all, (again I know this because he told me) for an end to abortion.
So please, don’t tell me that he is not living because by his suffering united with Jesus’ on the cross he is doing more living than most of us will ever do.
Suffering, freely offered, is the only true hope this world has. And as long as there is abortion, and child abuse, and war, and immorality, there will be a need for suffering to offset it.
We in the church call these people “victim souls” and we would all do well to get on our knees and thank them. Not eliminate them, but thank them. Because without them, this world would implode.
mk
In a vegetative state you aren’t LIVING you’re EXISTING. And there is a HUGE difference.
In a vegetative state you aren’t LIVING you’re EXISTING. And there is a HUGE difference.
Only to people who don’t understand or respect life.
Weren’t you the one asking if we only cared about people that were unborn?
Accused us of not caring about the people that are here.
Do you hear yourself. Avoid suffering at ALL costs.
Pregnant? Suffering? Kill the kid. Old? Suffering? Take a pill? Causing suffering to society by being a burden? eliminate them. Brain not up to par? off with their head.
Suffering is part of life. And if you try to eliminate everyone and everything that has to suffer there will be no one left.
Plenty of people would say that they couldn’t live with the pain of “depression”…Hell, I wouldn’t want to live with depression…but I don’t advocate killing you.
The problem is you keep telling yourself that you are putting these people out of their misery, when what you are really doing is putting them out of your misery.
MK
I hope we see more stuff like the Schiavo affair, where the right-to-life industry’s shills in the republican party expose themselves to the voting public.
If I was in a vegetative state I would want them to pull the plug. My uncle who just died to cancer was the same way. He went home to die instead of going through more things to prolong his life. My gramma also says she doesn’t want help when she gets to old age. She is completely against being put on life support.
Would you really just want to lie in a bed unable to interact with loved ones? Unable to do anything? Would you really? Or would you rather your family members give you to “God” and “Heaven.”
While I cannot say what Terri wanted, I would never want to be like that. I’d rather die.
“Hell, I wouldn’t want to live with depression…but I don’t advocate killing you.”
Naw, we do that for ourselves by slitting our wrists, jumping off buildings, overdosing, ect.
If I was in a vegetative state I would want them to pull the plug.
If you were in a vegetative state you wouldn’t be capable of “wanting” them to pull the plug…or anything else.
mk
Which is way I let the people around me know that’s what I want now in case something like that does happen.
Pro-deathers turns out to be a very, very accurate term.
Another awesome South Park episode:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/31/110/68729
Only to people who don’t understand or respect life.
Weren’t you the one asking if we only cared about people that were unborn?
Accused us of not caring about the people that are here.
Do you hear yourself. Avoid suffering at ALL costs.
Pregnant? Suffering? Kill the kid. Old? Suffering? Take a pill? Causing suffering to society by being a burden? eliminate them. Brain not up to par? off with their head.
Suffering is part of life. And if you try to eliminate everyone and everything that has to suffer there will be no one left.
Plenty of people would say that they couldn’t live with the pain of “depression”…Hell, I wouldn’t want to live with depression…but I don’t advocate killing you.
The problem is you keep telling yourself that you are putting these people out of their misery, when what you are really doing is putting them out of your misery.
MK
AMEN, Mk.
Who are you all to say that Terri would have wanted to have been kept alive? The woman was a bulimic, that’s how she ended up in her vegetative state in the first place. Now, I’m not saying that she deserved to die because she had an eating disorder so do not misconstrue my words. I am just saying that people with bulimia usually have a major issue with their appearance, so if a pre vegetative state Terri could have seen how she would ultimately end up I doubt if she would choose to “live” on like that.
I have made it clear to my family that if I am ever in a persistent vegetative state that they are by no means to keep me alive by any way they can. I want them to just let me die because I feel by staying in a vegetative state I would be placing an undue burden on them emotionally and monetarily and that is unfair of me to do so.
If I ever become terminally ill, I will sign a DNR. I would like to move to Oregon so I can end my life peacefully on my terms, but I suppose I’ll have to resort to unfortunately “illegal” means.
You must realize that by allowing somebody to die or by allowing euthanasia, you are being far more merciful than if you were to force them to stay alive using invasive and ludicrously expensive means.
Rae,
You’d love this man.
“Wishing not to subject his family to a slow and prolonged death as had occurred with his mother, Zamora stated his wish not to be kept alive by artificial means. Hospitalized and unable to speak for almost a month, being fed intravenously, and becoming completely unresponsive, his family honored his wishes, and withdrew life support, including medication, food and water. Surrounded by his family, Escarno, Winick and Ling, Zamora died at 4:40am EST on November 11, 1994,”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Zamora
I’m amazed at some of the comments posted here, and I have a question for those of you who consider yourselves to be Christians:
Why are you so afraid of death?
If you are a true Christian, you’ll go to Heaven and be with God. You’ll be with your family who’ve already passed on, and you can watch over your family left behind on Earth. Your loved ones will join you when God is ready to receive them. Why would you deny God’s will by wanting to be kept alive by machines when there is absolutely no hope of you ever recovering consciousness?
I find this to be very disturbing. Who are we to resist God’s will?
Danielle and Rae – do you guys have living wills?
I made mine before I went to Africa, just to be safe, and left a copy with my boyfriend, my parents, and my sister.
It says if I am not concsious and need anything artificial (life support or feeding tubes) to keep me alive for more than 30 days, I want whatever that is turned off.
Who are you all to say that Terri would have wanted to have been kept alive? The woman was a bulimic, that’s how she ended up in her vegetative state in the first place. Now, I’m not saying that she deserved to die because she had an eating disorder so do not misconstrue my words. I am just saying that people with bulimia usually have a major issue with their appearance, so if a pre vegetative state Terri could have seen how she would ultimately end up I doubt if she would choose to “live” on like that.
WOW Rae. It’s enlightening to see what makes life more worth living and what makes it less worth living in your mind. Saddening too.
If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?
Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide… Or would you consider that murder, if she seemed healthy otherwise?
Couldn’t they say they were doing what her wishes stated?
I am curious to see how you would feel in this situation.
An important fact to remember, Terry Shiavo was NOT kept alive artificially with life support. She was living and breathing fine on her own. ALL she required was FOOD and WATER to survive…that’s all anyone needs. It infuriates me that people try to twist this into a life support debate.
I don’t, but both me and my boyfriend will probably get one once we start riding again (motorcycles). His dad died this summer in an accident. So Adam sold his bike, but seeing as the need to ride has been ingrained in him since childhood, he wants to buy another one.
And while I know that it’s dangerous to ride, there’s no place I’d rather be than on the back of that bike with him. But knowing the danger means that one has to be ready (or as ready as one can be) for the worst to happen.
“If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?
Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide… ”
I wish someone could have helped me. I was too much of a coward to press just a little bit hard with the knife.
“WOW Rae. It’s enlightening to see what makes life more worth living and what makes it less worth living in your mind. Saddening too.”
How is it sad? It’s practical and it’s what I feel is right. My family agrees with me. Both my parents have made it clear to me as well that they do NOT want to be kept alive artificially if something were to happen. It’s not a matter of what’s worth living or not, but being a burden. Some people have a problem with being a burden on others, some don’t. I happen to be one who feels it is wrong to be a burden on others, so I’m putting measures in place to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Danielle:
The same goes for me, I was just a little too scared to step into traffic…just a little too scared to take that entire bottle of Tylenol.
But now that I’m on my medication, I fortunately don’t feel that way anymore, and I hope you are the same.
“But now that I’m on my medication, I fortunately don’t feel that way anymore, and I hope you are the same.
”
Yeah, I feel much better, but still have a long way to go.
We have to be careful about projecting our feelings onto others. I would never want to live like that so that person must want to die. Would any of us have wanted to live like the late actor Christopher Reeve? Did he want to live totally paralyzed? Certainly not. I think there is no doubt though that Mr. Reeve greatly valued his life, as difficult as it was, and very much wanted to live. He was a strong advocate for the disabled and while I did not always agree with him politically, I had tremendous respect for him and the inspiration he gave others. He could have terminated it at any time by simply saying he no longer wanted to be on a ventilator, which was the only reason he was alive.
From what I have read, Terri was severely brain damaged, not vegetative. Her nurses, as well as her family maintained that she responded to her environment. I have worked with severely brain damaged patients, and KNEW that they comprehended much more than they were able to communicate. No one can ever know for certain what Terri thought or comprehended. The human brain is highly complex and poorly understood. I’ve very happily witnessed amazing and unexpected recoveries. I worked with a neurosurgeon who was adamant about never predicting the prognosis of a brain injured patient, no matter how hopeful or hopeless it seemed. Brain injuries were just too unpredictable.
Terri had a family that loved her and wanted to care for her. Her husband was free to divorce her and make a life for himself, which he had already done with a new girlfriend and family. He did not have to burden himself with Terri. Why not just let her family have her? How he could turn a cold shoulder to the desperate pleas of her parents is beyond me.
There is so much we don’t know and never will. I have read various accounts that have not made it into the general media.
Be very careful of the term “vegetative”. Brain damage can cover a wide range of symptoms and disability. “Vegetative” is open to the interpretation and bias of the observer. It is used much too freely and all too often by people who have no medical knowledge.
Among the people demonstrating to put the feeding tube back into Terri was a woman confined to a wheelchair who described herself as “a liberal, agnostic lesbian” strongly supportive of the rights of the disabled. So much for this being some right wing religious issue.
Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide… ”
I wish someone could have helped me. I was too much of a coward to press just a little bit hard with the knife.
Well Danielle, I am thankful that they did not help you, because even though you may not realize it, you are here for a reason, and there are people here on this earth who love you and it would shatter their world if you were gone.
Even though I may not agree with you on anything you have to say on this site about abortion, I do recognize that you are a person who God created with a purpose, even though I do not know what it is… and I believe that one day you will know what that purpose is.
I am thankful that you are here, and I hope that one day, your depression will stop completely, and you can learn to enjoy life again. There are too many good things, too many beautiful things about life to want to end it so soon. You still have a long way to go, and you can’t see over that hill yet, but I’m guessing one day you’ll get there. And I hope that when you do, you’ll thank yourself for not going through with the suicide.
You did not have the courage to cut yourself with the knife because deep down you know that you want to live, because life is worth living, and the people you care about would miss you terribly. Your life is precious.
Actually, Bethany, it was I, not Rae, who posted what you copyed and pasted before your post. But I agree with her, I wouldn’t want to be a burden on my family if I was ever in a PVS. And why wouldn’t you as a Christian (I presume) want the poor woman to go to live with God, with a new perfect body. The “life” she had wasn’t a real life, it was laying in a bed gorked out and being fed through a tube. If YOU had the choice would you choose to be a gorked out nursing home patient or a spirit in heaven where you can spend time with God and Jesus?
Rae, I find it fascinating that you couldn’t answer SUCH a simple question. Instead you avoided it by talking about artificial life support again, which, by the way has nothing to do with the Terry Shiavo case, since she was not kept alive by life support, only by being given food and water…what every other human being on this earth needs to survive.
Bethany said: “An important fact to remember, Terry Shiavo was NOT kept alive artificially with life support. She was living and breathing fine on her own. ALL she required was FOOD and WATER to survive…that’s all anyone needs. It infuriates me that people try to twist this into a life support debate.”
In a way, it was a life-support debate, because Terry was incapable of swallowing and taking in food and water on her own. I just read up on the case again, and frankly, there was no one home inside her head. Read the report on what the autopsy found: her brain was less than half the size it should have been for a woman of her size and age. There was extensive damage to the remaining mass of tissue. There was no possible way she would have recovered from that severe of a loss of neurons. All the doctors, pathologists, etc., agreed on that. Whatever was in her that made her Terry had already moved on. Wasn’t it time to let the body move on as well?
“You did not have the courage to cut yourself with the knife because deep down you know that you want to live, because life is worth living”
Actually no. It was because I was scared of the unknown. Of what happens when you die. Nice try though.
Bethany…I have no idea what you’re talking about. You never asked me a question. Could you please repeat the question you allegedly asked me please?
And also at the time that I was extremely suicidal there was no one to care. I didn’t let anyone close enough to care because I wanted to end it all and didn’t want anyone to be hurt by me dying.
Now I have my boyfriend to think of. He just lost his father suddenly and I know it would devastate him to loose me as well.
Rae, you wrote: “The same goes for me, I was just a little too scared to step into traffic…just a little too scared to take that entire bottle of Tylenol.”
Those are both very poor ways to commit suicide.
Use potassium cyanide or sodium cyanide. Available at any chemical supply store.
Bethany, quit criticizing Rae for not answering a question when you have not answered my question. That is hypocrisy.
Here it is again, Rae:
WOW Rae. It’s enlightening to see what makes life more worth living and what makes it less worth living in your mind. Saddening too.
If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?
Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide… Or would you consider that murder, if she seemed healthy otherwise?
Couldn’t they say they were doing what her wishes stated?
I am curious to see how you would feel in this situation.
Be honest.
JK,
If YOU had the choice would you choose to be a gorked out nursing home patient or a spirit in heaven where you can spend time with God and Jesus?
I would do whatever God asked of me. He did not take Terri, so obviously he felt that she still had something to give. Ironically, Pope John Paul II was suffering terribly at the same time as Terri. He united his suffering with her and lived and died as a witness to the Truth that there is good to be gained from suffering aand to trust that God will take you He takes you.
Once again I ask:
If nobody believes in God, why does everyone want to be Him????
I think I have to get off line now, because this has depressed me beyond words. I knew that you all believed in abortion, I tried to see how you could take that view and I tried to honestly respect your views…but now, I don’t know. It’s like I’m talking to aliens from another planet.
I feel sick. I’m gonna take a break. I don’t want to say or do anything that will be called “unchristian” though I’m beginning to doubt if most of you know what that even means.
Pray for me. I’ll pray for you. But this is honestly too much for me.
God Bless,
MK
You ask us why we want to play God? If you let the God take care of Terri, she would have died. Instead there was medical intervention, keeping her alive! How is allowing her to die playing God more so than keeping her alive artificially?
And why wouldn’t you as a Christian (I presume) want the poor woman to go to live with God, with a new perfect body. The “life” she had wasn’t a real life, it was laying in a bed gorked out and being fed through a tube. If YOU had the choice would you choose to be a gorked out nursing home patient or a spirit in heaven where you can spend time with God and Jesus?
It is not my choice to make. God has a plan for everyone, and I truly believe that. I believe God had a plan for Terry, and just because “I” can’t understand why she has to go through years with just feeding tubes, I am not God, and do not think that I should play God by taking a life. That is His call.
Maybe what Terry needed was those extra years with emotional bonding with her parents. You don’t know. Maybe this is what she needed and maybe in those years while she had her parents love and devotion, she was healed from the sadness she had before going into the coma.
If sending someone to heaven is a good excuse to kill, then wouldn’t it be ok for me to kill any random person that I see, who looked like they might have the slightest amount of suffering, under the guise that I was doing it to “send them to Heaven”?
Actually, I seem to remember a woman cutting her baby’s arms off and letting the baby bleed to death while saying she was sending the baby to heaven. Does this sound like the action of a sane person to you?
A Sane and rational person does not kill people to put them in Heaven.
Anyway, answered your question.
How do you know it wasn’t God who let the decision for her to die come to pass? How do YOU know what God does and what he doesn’t do?
MK this discussion makes me feel physically ill also.
OOps better not say that too loud…they may want to euthanize me to put me out of my suffering!
You say that we try to play God, but you try to talk for Him.
Actually, you did not answer the question. I want to know if the choice was YOURS. People like to hide behind God when faced with big decisions, but this is a hypothetical one. I would appreciate YOUR choice on the matter.
She wasn’t being kept alive by artificial means, Danielle.
Do I have to keep repeating myself? She required:
food
Water
a place to live
Hmm, sounds like what most people need in order to survive.
“how do I know what God does and doesn’t do”…I know God does not advocate murder because it says so in the Bible.
Therefore, if someone murders, I know it is going against God. There you go!
JK, I would choose the hospital life. Because I do not like killing people, period.
But if “everything happens for a reason,” then Terri also died for a reason. You can’t pick and choose what everything as you so choose. If everything happens for a reason. That means everything. Terri dying, abortion, ect.
“She was not breathing and had no pulse. They attempted to resuscitate her, she was defibrillated several times, and transported to the Humana Northside Hospital. There she was intubated, ventilated, and eventually given a tracheotomy.”
So rescesitating her isn’t play God?
“If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?
Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide… Or would you consider that murder, if she seemed healthy otherwise?
Couldn’t they say they were doing what her wishes stated?
I am curious to see how you would feel in this situation. ”
In that situation I would say the girl was in need of psychiatric help. Psychiatric problems like anorexia, bulimia and depression are different from terminal illnesses and persistant vegetative states. So in those cases, according to the law, by assisting a suicidal (because of mental illness) person you would be committing murder (or manslaughter).
But if “everything happens for a reason,” then Terri also died for a reason. You can’t pick and choose what everything as you so choose. If everything happens for a reason. That means everything. Terri dying, abortion, ect.
Yes, I actually agree with you on this. Just as Joseph was sold to his brothers into slavery and that was a BAD thing, God turned it into a GOOD thing in the end. God does great stuff like that.
Terry’s death was an wakeup call for all of us who respect life, to stand up for what we believe before it’s too late! She had a purpose, even in death. Of course, That doesn’t make her murder any less horrible. The people who supported it and had something to do with it will be held accountable.
The doctor who performed Terri’s autopsy reported that he found no evidence that she had ever been bulimic, the condition with which Michael Schaivo accused her gynecologist of neglecting to diagnose her. He won a million dollars when he sued on that basis. The court of Florida, in the case that came to be known as Schaivo III, allowed diagnoses by five doctors to determine Terri’s potential for recovery. The two appointed by her husband reported independently that she was in a Persistent Vegitative State. The court-appointed neurologist also diagnosed her with PVS. The two specialists chosen by her parents reported her to be in a state of minimal consciousness. The same court reviewed a six-hour tape, including footage of Terri with her parents, and the judge stated that she did not consistently respond to them.
The fact that the courts ruled over and over that Terri’s tube should be removed indicates that they believed this would be the best decision for her. Her parents are Roman Catholic, which contributed greatly to their opposition to the removal of the tube. If they had not fought her husband at every turn, the case would probably never have been brought to national attention.
I just wonder why, when you dont fight a person’s DNR or contest a living will, it is so incredibly different when the person closest to her and then the courts find this to be in her best interest.
I know I’m beating a dead horse here, but Terry Shiavo was already dead. Pulling out the feeding tube just let her body go with her mind.
She had no measurable consciousness of her environment. She had no cognitive ability. Her awareness was minimal. She had no enjoyment, no understanding, no measurable thoughts.
A person is a measure of their thoughts and choices in life. Terry was incapable of making either of those. Her life was already over.
Bethany -
You keep insisting that Terri Schiavo was not kept alive by artificial means. Drinking water is not artificial. Eating food is not artificial. This is true. However, Terri was on a feeding tube that went directly into her stomach. If food was placed in her mouth, she was not capable of eating. If water was placed in her mouth, she was not capable of drinking. An artificial method of supplying her food, a tube shoved down her throat that went directly into her stomach, was the only thing that was keeping her alive. If you don’t think that supplying someone with food by a tube directly to the stomach is artificial, then I’m not sure what you consider artificial. I would have to agree with Danielle. When she was initially resuscitated and brought back to life, that was an artificial means of trying to keep her alive. I am not saying that doctors should not attempt to resuscitate patients, but without medical intervention she would have stayed dead, and with medical intervention she lived by a tube in her stomach for years. She was blind because her visual cortex was damaged and her brain at autopsy was half the size of what would be expected. She was non-responsive. I know the family probably thought she was responsive and interpreted certain things, but they were drawing at straws. They wanted her to be responsive, so they saw anything, the blink of an eye, as a response.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again:
Terry Schiavo for congress!
… and Bob Dornan for prez!
The number-one, true pro-lifer. The pro-lifer’s pro-lifer.
Bob Dornan!
Samantha,
I’ve reposted this here because it’s about to be dropped. Let me know when you’ve read these so I don’t have to worry about moving them, okay?
Thanks.
Okay Samantha,
First some background:
In the Catholic church (as far as I know, only the Catholic church) believes that at the consecration (the right performed at a mass prior to communion) a priest, by virtue of the powers invested in him at ordination (the sacrament of taking holy vows to become a priest)changes ordinary bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus.
We believe that at that moment we are transported back in time and take part in the crucifixion as it is happening…
Every object has two forms. The accident and the substance. A piece of white bread is white in color and soft in texture. This is called the accident. The outward appearance.
It is made of flour, water, sugar, and butter. This is it’s substance.
If you put this piece of bread in the toaster and toast it, the outside (accident) will change and it will no longer be soft and white.
But the substance remains unchanged. So the accident changes, the substance remains the same.
In the act of consecration, we (Catholics) believe that the accidents (appearance) of bread and wine remains the same, while the substance changes and becomes something else. The body and blood of Jesus. Still looks like bread and wine, but it no longer is bread and wine.
Other churches, like the Lutheran church, believe in something called consubstantiation. They believe that the accident and substance remain the same but that Jesus exists in addition to the bread and wine. After communion, He leaves. This is why they can throw their communion wafers away when they are done with them.
In our church, once it has become body and blood it must be eaten, drunk or placed in a tabernacle under lock and key. (The tabernacle in the old testament held the word of God, or the torah and ten commandments. Our tabernacle holds the word made flesh.
Most protestant churches believe that the bread and wine are mere symbols, a meal to be shared with the “community” and can therefore be walnut bread and grape juice.
In the Catholic church it must be unleavened bread and wine mixed with water.
Now we know that an enemy will strike at the heart of his foe. And we know that the “heart” of the Catholic church is the Eucharist (the bread after it has been changed). This is why the Eucharist is attacked. Stolen or desecrated by those who hate the church. Or in the case of protestant churches “watered down” to become merely a symbol. Strike the Eucharist and you strike the very center of our faith. (No offense to protestants, I just need to set the stage here).
Throughout history, there have been times when a communion host has actually begun to bleed. These hosts are then scientifically examined. The blood type always comes back AB, and often the host is found to have turned to human flesh, most often, part of a heart.
Many of these hosts can still be seen today. They do not disintegrate as a normal host would.
Go to these links to see stories and pictures:
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html
http://biblia.com/jesusart/eucharistic.htm
Notice that some of these miracles have happened as recently as 1993.
enjoy!
mk
You might also enjoy this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cbGCQyP_uk
mk
MK says:
“She was perfectly healthy…her brain didn;t function on the same level as her husband’s.
Only to people who don’t understand or respect life.
Weren’t you the one asking if we only cared about people that were unborn?”
MK sometimes you seem so intelligent and the again you seem so- I don;t know. She was NOT perfectly healthy. HER BRAIN WAS ALMOST DEAD! It did not function at all! Just because her body looked intact does not mean SHE WAS HEALTHY!!! I guess it can be confusing when someone looks intact and has got open eyes. But face it, she was as little ‘alive’ as a person as an unborn before viability.
What makes you as a human special, what makes you a person? The fact that your body exists when it is hooked onto external support or the fact that your body is inhabited by a soul, consciousness, and the ability to actually live?!
And her ‘execution’ did not take 14 days; her dying had already lasted all those years she had been kept in a vegitative state. Why would you even fret so much over her death? There are 24 000 *conscious* people dying every day of preventable hunger, feeling the pain of it and no one gives a sh*t about covering them in the news. Why don;t we all worry about that for a change instead of a single pathetic case of allowing someone to pass away?
I remember the “wizard” in the “Wizard of Oz” telling Dorothy that a man is not measured by how much he loves, but by how much he is loved.
If we use this criteria then Terri Schiavo’s life was worth much.
She was loved by her parents.
She was loved by her siblings.
If nothing else, this made Terri “special”.
This made Terri a person.
My father is loved by my mother.
My father is loved by my siblings.
My father is loved by me.
My father will go home when he is called.
He will not go home because you think he is useless.
Do you guys realize that you have spent an entire evening discussing how many ways a person should die or be killed.
Kill me with a knife.
Kill me with pills.
Kill me with a car.
Kill yourself with cyanide.
Kill all the vegetables.
Kill people on life support.
Kill unwanted babies.
Kill people who are suffering.
Kill me when I’m suffering
And you wonder why we call it a “culture of death”
I’m also fascinated by the fact that more than half of you suffer from depression. I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t a connection there.
So many of you have tried to kill yourselves.
All of you think unwanted babies should die.
You think people who are suffering should die.
It seems to me you have very little respect for life. In any form. Easy come, easy go.
I’m really sad for all of you. You’re lives must be hell sometimes.
Danielle,
You say you now have a boyfriend who loves you.
I believe he does.
But what if God forbid, that changed. Would you revert back to being suicidal? Does your self worth, self love and self respect rely totally on his loving you? That’s a lot of pressure to put on someone.
I don’t know what else to say. Just that I hope you guys don’t represent the general population.
I pray that you are an anomaly and not the norm.
Because if this is the way the majority of your generation thinks, we’re in a lot of trouble.
mk
Correcting misinformation on Terri Schiavo
Many comments to my post yesterday, “Death Angel vs. Terri Schiavo,” perpetuated false information, which Terri’s brother Bobby dispels in a column today The most obvious thread between abortion support and euthanasia support is promotion of death. The…
You know, MK, I don’t doubt that the day will come that these same people who do not value others lives will begin supporting the death of born children with mental retardation , downs syndrome, cerebral palsy, autism, etc… because their brains don’t function as ours, and “obviously” they’re just “existing, not living”. Right?
After all, who would choose to live their life like that? I guess they should all be “put out of their misery”, because although they have family who cares about them and wants them to live, they just don’t have the brain function of “normal” people, so they should not be living here to continue to be a “burden” to others.
Oh the day is coming. It’s already here since they support it in the womb, but they haven’t yet formulated their arguments well enough for killing these children out of the womb yet. Oh wait, they have. They’ve defended women who killed their newborn babies…and people like Andrea Yates. Forgot about that.
The day is coming where these same people, who hate God and believe we decended from Apes, will want to kill children and adults with Leukemia or other types of cancer, painful back problems, people who are paralized, people who have brain cancer, people who have any other kind of disease that causes them suffering…. they’ll advocate killing them to (like Danielle mentioned) “send them to Heaven!”, or because “they’re suffering, why would they want to continue living that way? They might say they want to live, but do they really?” Besides, they’re costing people a LOT OF MONEY.
Hey, they may argue with me about this and say they would never do that because the people in question can voice their opinions and say they want to live, or whatever. But I know it’s only a matter of time. After all, the arguments in this post already support killing any person who has any amount of suffering. Because apparently, people shouldnt have to suffer? It’s scary, really, to think about.
I sure hope that by the time I am old, if I have a disease like Alzheimers, people like these don’t try to kill me because my brains’ not totally there.
It’s really sad how little these people respect life of others, but it does make sense that most of them talk about trying to kill themselves too. They respect their own lives almost as little as the people around them.
I wanted to add something to what you said MK.You can’t look to another human being for long and try to find happiness.It just wont work.I went through a phase too. I decided that I wasn’t going to believe in Christ,God….nobody.I was going to lean to the arms of flesh to find my solace too.My life just got worse and worse.I’d reach for my bible and then put it away.It was a REAL struggle.It still is.However,I’ve found that nobody of the opposite sex was able to figure it out anymore than I.So,I turned back to God.I can ask him for the guidance I need.I get my answers.Life was so very lonely without him.
PS Giving a guy casual sex leads to one end result.They will eventually chew you up and spit you out.
Bethany,
Thank God you are here. Sorry I abandoned you last night. It just got to be too much.
I agree with every word you have spoken. Just now and all throughout these last few weeks.
I just pray psychosis isn’t contagious. Sometimes (like last night) I just cry myself to sleep.
There is so much beauty in the world. Baby bunnies, children’s laughter, rain on a tent,
fat clouds…but all of this is created by Him.
That which is created by us seems to get uglier and uglier.
I actually yelled at God last night. I told Him that He needs to either show His face soon or start pouring grace and mercy on this poor world.
I asked Him how it was possible to allow these beautiful young people, so full of hope and promise to become so rotted and soiled. Where is He? Why doesn’t he help them?
I know I have to trust Him. I know He loves them.
I love them, though I don’t know why. I love them enough to beg Him, in tears, to do something to save them.
God help us Bethany. God help our children.
God help the Terri Schiavo’s and the little babes, and the old people and the sick.
All I can say, is they will reap what they sow.
I can’t even imagine how this world is going to be in ten years. We are going to be stuck in a world created by narcissistic, self-absorbed, self-hating individuals and that will be the only time I will wonder if the “suffering” is too much.
Because, there are worse things than dying.
MK
Mom,
Big Hugs…:)
MK
I despise your all’s generalizations that all pro choice individuals are lining people up for the slaughter. The difference between a person who is suffering in a PVS state and a child with down syndrome is the child with down syndrome is coherent and highly capable of living a productive life albeit not one that would be considered “normal”. Why would you want someone that was suffering imensely to be dragged on for years and years in that state? To me this is cruelty. And if a person’s quality of life is measured by how much other people love them, then nearly everyone currently 6 feet under would also be considered “alive”. The Schindlers were keeping Terri alive for their own benefit, not for Terri’s. She is in a better place now, where she has a new body and a new mind.
The difference between a person who is suffering in a PVS state and a child with down syndrome is the child with down syndrome is coherent and highly capable of living a productive life albeit not one that would be considered “normal”.
As has already been stated ad nauseum, and by the way, proven, Terri was not in a persistent vegetative state. You choose to ignore this and just go on stating it as if it’s a fact.
Productive to whom? Maybe she was not productive in YOUR eyes, but her family saw value in her. In Terri’s case, her life was very productive, in that when she was alive, her parents had comfort in being able to take care of her, and to give her love and get it in return. She gave comfort to her family, and was responsive to them… of course, it wasn’t the kind of response you would consider “normal”…. but how is giving your family comfort and love “unproductive”? She wasn’t doing things that you consider worthwhile?
Who are you to call her worthless just because you don’t think she’s “normal enough”?
If the quality of life depends on how productive you are…
What about people who are paralized and actually can’t do anything but talk and need assistance for most of their daily needs? How productive do you measure their life to be?
What about people who are old and in nursing homes, being waited on hand and foot by nurses? How productive do you measure their lives to be?
What do you think is “productive”?…please define “productive”.
JK,
I despise your all’s generalizations that all pro choice individuals are lining people up for the slaughter.
And I despise having to make these generalizations.
Unfortunately, after listening to all of you last night, this is the only conclusion I can come to.
The difference between a person who is suffering in a PVS state and a child with down syndrome is the child with down syndrome is coherent and highly capable of living a productive life albeit not one that would be considered “normal”
Thank you for clearing that up. So people with down’s are safe provided they were allowed to be born in the first place. But people with PVS don’t deserve to live because you said so. Okay.
Why don’t you just make up a list of people that you think should be allowed to live and people you think should be put of misery. Then I won’t accidentally mention anybody in the “death” group that you would deem worthy of living. I Wouldn’t want to offend your sensibilities.
I remember the “wizard” in the “Wizard of Oz” telling Dorothy that a man is not measured by how much he loves, but by how much he is loved.
If we use this criteria then Terri Schiavo’s life was worth much.
And I said that this was a measure of whether they were alive or not, where? I believe I said that how much they were loved was a measure of how much they were worth…
mk
Not with a dictionary definition by the way…your own.
To all of you who say, “I wouldn’t want to live that way,” I don’t think anybody would choose to live disabled. But they do. I’m sure my sister didn’t want to live that way. But she did. There are a lot of ways we wouldn’t want to live.
But who are we to decide who has a good enough quality of life? Who are we to decide it’s ok or not ok to kill somebody?
This is so common sense. We care for someone who needs our help. End of story.
But there’s no common sense anymore. We try to think of all these rationalizations to kill people just because they are disabled.
Bobby, I am so glad to see you here. What you’re doing to help others after what happened to your sister is so wonderful. God is really using you in such a great way.
Bobby asks
“But who are we to decide who has a good enough quality of life?”
Quite easily. if someone does not have a brain anymore that functions on a level other than the vegitaive state, the person exists, but does not have a life. To speak of quality in this case is almost funny, if it wasn’t as off the point.
“Who are we to decide it’s ok or not ok to kill somebody?”
Who are we to decide to keep someone floating between here and heaven by keeping them on atrificial life support for years? It is playing God just as much.
Mr. Schindler,
You are the best thing I have seen on this blog in a long time.
God Bless You.
I was just praying to Terri, asking her to talk some sense into these people.
And here you are. An answer to a prayer. Sorry you have to hear all of these hateful things being said about your sweet sister.
My father is in the same state Terri was and I thank God every day that we still have him with us. He brings me such joy. He is my hero. I am closer to him now than I was before his dementia.
When he looks me in the eye and I see him come to the surface, my heart soars. I’m sure you felt the same way.
God Bless you and Keep You,
You and your family are always in my prayers,
Love,
Mary Kay Hastings
I’m gonna write a book someday and call it:
“I’m not dead yet. Just don’t ask me to dance”
mk
Quite easily. if someone does not have a brain anymore that functions on a level other than the vegitaive state, the person exists, but does not have a life. To speak of quality in this case is almost funny, if it wasn’t as off the point.
AGAIN….Terry was NOT in a persistent vegetative state! This is getting ridiculous.
And Terry did have a LIFE. Look life up in the dictionary. Maybe it wasn’t what YOU consider to be worthwhile, but it was a LIFE. Twist it all you want, say she wasn’t as “productive” as you’d like her to be, her brain didn’t work like yours or mine…. but the fact remains, she was alive, and she had the love of her family and she loved them in return.
Who are we to decide to keep someone floating between here and heaven by keeping them on atrificial life support for years? It is playing God just as much.
No. Playing God is when you decide that YOU have the answers and can pick and choose who gets to die and who gets to live.
A Good doctor HEALS patients and tries to keep them alive. A bad doctor tries to find excuses to kill.
speaking of brains only working on the level of a vegetative state…
No, I won’t go there. It would be unchristian. And besides, it’s self evident.
mk
and again, TERRY WAS NOT HOOKED UP TO ARTIFICIAL LIFE SUPPORT.
Maybe you can read it with capital letters.
Joe, you say my sister was in a “vegetative state.” You say she was on “artificial life support.” You are wrong on both counts. Read my column today that Jill linked to (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54935).
If you read what I wrote, you will see your response is actually an example of what I said. You prove my point.
Thanks to all of you who supported my sister and still support our family.
speaking of brains only working on the level of a vegetative state…
No, I won’t go there. It would be unchristian. And besides, it’s self evident.
mk
It surely is.
“No. Playing God is when you decide that YOU have the answers and can pick and choose who gets to die and who gets to live.”
Ok. So, keeping Terry alive was NOT deciding who got to live? It was not the parents thinking THEY had the answer? Do you see your one way ‘logic’?
Quie frankly I really do not care whether she existed or died. It was up to people to whom she meant something.
Ok. So, keeping Terry alive was NOT deciding who got to live? It was not the parents thinking THEY had the answer? Do you see your one way ‘logic’?
Yes, you’ve got it right. Doctors should help people live, not help people die.
Bobby,
sorry I didn’t read anything about your sister, bless her. I simply referred to Terry in my post.
Haha right Bethany, so as long as people play God the way it satisfies your sentiments, it is totally acceptable?
No, the Bible is clear on what God allows and does not allow. He does not allow murder, he does allow saving lives.
Joe, all Terri required help with in order to live was food and water. Do you really mean to say it is playing God to help people eat and drink?
And to your last point, I wish the courts had agreed.
Productive meaning having the ability to contribute physically or intellectually to society. i.e. Stephen Hawking may be paralyzed by Lou Gehrigs disease but his brain is currently still fully functional. Also, If he so wished to be “euphanized” he would have the ability to express that wish.
It is not just to be someone’s “pet” or something that exists just to be the object of someone’s love. How come you want to keep denying people in immense suffering the opportunity to move on to be with God? I thought as a Christian that is the ultimate goal.
What about people who sign DNR papers? Do you want to go against their expressed wishes just because their families love them want to keep them around for awhile?
JK,
Brick wall…brick wall…brick wall….
That’s gonna leave a mark.
mk
It is not just to be someone’s “pet” or something that exists just to be the object of someone’s love. How come you want to keep denying people in immense suffering the opportunity to move on to be with God? I thought as a Christian that is the ultimate goal.
Hmm…so people who are suffering in any way should be killed so they can go to Heaven?
Here’s something i asked and never got an answer to by any of you:
If sending someone to heaven is a good excuse to kill, then wouldn’t it be ok for me to kill any random person that I see, who looked like they might have the slightest amount of suffering, under the guise that I was doing it to “send them to Heaven”?
Actually, I seem to remember a woman cutting her baby’s arms off and letting the baby bleed to death while saying she was sending the baby to heaven. Does this sound like the action of a sane person to you?
A Sane and rational person does not kill people to put them in Heaven.
Do they? Should they? In your opinion.
Yes, your subtle references to my intellectual capabilities are EXTREMELY Christian of you. Just because I don’t line up as a sheep in your field does not mean I am lacking brain cells, its quite the opposite. People like you all are the reason there are so many atheists in the world.
Great,
Jill and I agree. I seriously think those people who wanted to keep her should have decided over it. After all it was only them really who was affected. And even if they do have such a distorted picture of human dignity, it is not up for a court to interfere.
I do have respect for human life. I simply also have some respect for human dignity.
Bethany, you are grasping at straws. What’s done is done, nothing anyone says here is going to bring her back to life.
JK you aren’t answering my question..
And I never said that anything we say is going to bring her to life…what made you say that?
I think this issue should raise awareness of the fact that OTHER people are going through the same thing as Terri Shiavo, even if theirs isn’t publicized as hers was. I hope that if anything, this issue will help others learn how to respect human life, and realize that regardless of whether those people are not the same as us, they are still worthy of life, and have friends and family who care about them deeply.
I also hope it will expose the lies of people like you, who continue to say that Terri was kept alive artificially, when the facts state otherwise.
Go ahead, keep lying, people are watching.
Mr. Schindler,
Thank you for joining this discussion. I posted a comment earlier that I hope you will read. I have worked with brain damaged patients and realize all too well that a PVS diagnosis can be subject to the bias of the observer. The public is mostly misinformed on this subject in addition to our society’s strong bias against the disabled.
How interesting that the professional observations and opinions of the mostly female nurses who cared for your sister, and who wholeheartedly supported her, were brushed off as their “emotional attachment” to Terri. Male doctors of course always make professional observations and give professional opinions.
Michael Schiavo was portrayed as the devoted husband. We can never know what truly goes on in a marriage or how truly “devoted” any spouse really is. I will say this, when a person dies mysteriously, the first person police will suspect is the “devoted” spouse. I never could understand why he didn’t allow your family to have Terri and care for her. Its not like he was going to be burdened with her care. His callous disregard to the pleas of your parents spoke volumes about this man, in my opinion anyway.
I wish you and your family the best.
On the above reference to Stephen Hawking. Yes he is able to function mentally, the man is a genius. The fact remains he is totally dependent on others for his care and survival. He must be tube fed, and there are certainly other aspects of his care that must be tended to on a daily basis that I will not elaborate on here. He cannot speak or move and has been deteriorating physically for years. Yet the man certainly values his life. Would it be your or my choice to live like him? Certainly not. Its not his either. Don’t we look at someone like that and say we would prefer to die rather than live like this?
That’s the point I made earlier about projecting our feelings onto others, assuming people don’t want to or wouldn’t want to live because their lives don’t fit our idea of “quality” or “perfection”.
Mary,
Well put. I always welcome your “voice of reason”.
You are able to put things in ways that I am not.
Thank you.
mk
MK
I appreciate your kind words. They made my day. Have a great weekend everyone!
I do not take kindly to being called a liar. People do not “naturally” eat out of tubes in their stomachs, so a feeding tube is an artificial thing.
You go ahead and believe what you believe and I will continue believing how I believe. That’s what being pro-choice is all about, not necessarily believing in something but respecting the fact that people can choose it if they so desire. If you think abortion is morally reprehensible, then don’t get one. If you want to be kept alive at any cost do not sign a DNR and be sure to make it clear to your loved ones what your wishes are. BUT DO NOT JUDGE OTHERS IF THEY DO NOT CHOOSE THE SAME PATHS AS YOU. Do not call people stupid and brain dead for disagreeing with your opinions, and do not harass girls who have chosen to have an abortion, it is their matter, not yours.
Ban me if you want but in this life you will eventually have to listen to people who disagree with you.
Still couldn’t answer the question, huh?
Do not call people stupid and brain dead for disagreeing with your opinions, and do not harass girls who have chosen to have an abortion, it is their matter, not yours.
They can choose to have an abortion but we cannot choose to speak out against it? What kind of America would we be living in if that were true?
Also, I don’t see anyone on here harrassing women who had abortions.
You can debate politely without resulting to degrading and name calling. I believe the constitution gives you the right to protest peacefully, but there are plenty of pro lifers who will throw things at women seeking abortions.
And about your question if it will make you happy. There is a difference between people who are suffering because they’re having a bad day and people suffering from a terminal illness. I frankly feel that you are insulting Terri and her family by even comparing the two.
You should not randomly shoot people based on how you feel about them. There, is that a good enough answer?
And you never seem to answer my questions, so why should I have to answer yours?
Please Google these people:
Steve Chiappa
Glenda Hickey
These two people have locked-in syndrom. The doctors all said they were vegtables and didn’t know what was going on around them. Their families were encouraged to let them die.
Oops, they were conscience and knew everything around them. I asked this on another post and I will ask it here. How do we know? We keep telling everyone to “let them go in peace” that we never give them a chance. How many of these locked-in people were put to death? They say that this is rare, but how do they know, they keep letting people like this die!
A quadraplegic has to have total help in eating, some even need to be fed through a tube.
My cousin’s son had to be fed through a tube too, did he deserve to starve because he couldn’t swallow, move correctly or communicate like you and I do?
You can debate politely without resulting to degrading and name calling. I believe the constitution gives you the right to protest peacefully, but there are plenty of pro lifers who will throw things at women seeking abortions.
I called you a liar. You lied, so I wasn’t calling names. You said that Terri Shiavo was in a persistent vegetative state, and you also said that she sustained by artificial life support. You and I both know that does not mean being fed through a tube.
By the way, what does women throwing things at women have to do with me taking advantage of my right to free speech on a blog?
And about your question if it will make you happy. There is a difference between people who are suffering because they’re having a bad day and people suffering from a terminal illness. I frankly feel that you are insulting Terri and her family by even comparing the two.
The question was “Would you advocate killing a person who was suffering to send them to heaven?” and also, my second question was, “Do sane people kill people to send them to Heaven?”
I wasn’t talking about depression, I was talking about physically suffering.
You should not randomly shoot people based on how you feel about them. There, is that a good enough answer?
I’m not talking about randomly shooting anyone. I’m talking about seeking out the particular people who are suffering miserably, and putting them “out of their misery” by killing them and “sending them to Heaven”. Wouldn’t this be an act of mercy in your eyes?
Does anyone have that right? To look at a person and decide for themselves that a person is suffering too much, and then decide that person should be killed? Why should anyone have that right?
JK I answered all the questions that I saw that you asked me. I answered directly and honestly. If I missed one, please let me know.
JK,
Yes, your subtle references to my intellectual capabilities are EXTREMELY Christian of you. Just because I don’t line up as a sheep in your field does not mean I am lacking brain cells, its quite the opposite. People like you all are the reason there are so many atheists in the world.
And who did this terrible thing? I’ll have a word with them if it helps. Just point ‘em out.
mk
I see quotes such as “she was perfectly healthy” etc.
Wow. Does nobody else on here know about the autopsy results? Not only was she blind (so the video that showed her watching a balloon was just stimuli-reaction) but half of her brain was liquified.
Megan,
As far as I know, blind people can be healthy people.
And if she was blind, then she wouldn’t react (even with stimuli-reaction) to a balloon.
She was not on life support. She could recognize the people who loved her. And none of that matters anyway. She was alive. Her food and water was taken away from her. She slowly died.
She was murdered. Period.
If a person kept food and water from a dog for 14 days, he’d be arrested.
mk
Megan, In the context that was written in, I understand it to mean that she was able to function without the use of artificial life support. And she was! She wanted to live, if she hadn’t, her body would have given up long before it was forcefully taken away from her.
All she required was food and water to survive, as has been reiterated time and time again.
from Bobby’s article:
” an effort to dehumanize Terri, they repeatedly reported she was in a coma, brain dead, a “vegetable” and that the autopsy proved she was in a persistent vegetative state, all of which are patently false.”
All of you ignore the fact that she had massive and irreversible damage done to all parts of her brain. People claim she was “healthy”, which must be a joke, considering her brain function.
“She wanted to live, if she hadn’t, her body would have given up long before it was forcefully taken away from her”
Wow… how illogical. That isn’t how a person’s body functions, if a body has the capacity to function, it will, whether or not a person “wants” to live. Schiavo’s body had the capacity to function, I am not denying that, however, due to the irreversible brain damage there was no chance she could ever get any better. She would forever be bed-ridden, any action by her would be simple stimuli-response, etc.
She would forever be bed-ridden, any action by her would be simple stimuli-response, etc.
And of course, that alone makes her not worthy of life in the eyes of people who have no respect for life. Even though she has a family who loved her very much, and were willing to take care of her in this state to the natural end of her life, people seem perfectly willing to sit by and say, ah well she was going to be bedridden for her entire life anyway. It was a merciful act. (14 days, no food or water, dehydration, cracked lips, sunken eyes..yeah, that’s mercy).
What about people in nursing homes who are bedridden? Should they all be euthanized too?
Bethany, do you want me to scratch “I must not tell lies” onto the back of my hand with a quill? Because I am looking forward to the new Harry Potter movie and I would love being able to go in such a dedicated costume.
A question I never received an answer on is…..”Do you advocate disregarding a DNR order simply because the family is not ready to let go?”
Where were the hoards of people advocating to string my grandmother along in her last days of suffering?……Oh wait, my grandmother had Alzheimer’s, a less politically advantageous illness, especially in the eyes of conservatives.
JK,
Huh?
MK
Bethany, do you want me to scratch “I must not tell lies” onto the back of my hand with a quill?
hehe
Hmm, might not be the worst idea you ever came up with.
A question I never received an answer on is…..”Do you advocate disregarding a DNR order simply because the family is not ready to let go?”
If the person is only kept alive by being fed and given water, absolutely. That’s just common sense. It’s murder to kill someone like that.
Besides, there is always a chance they could come to…kind of like Christa Lilly did for 3 days, after being in a coma for 6 years. The doctors couldn’t explain it! She talked, laughed, ate and had a great time for a while. So what that tells me is that even while in a coma, many times the people are “still there” even though they are “hidden” for a while. To kill the body still kills that person’s spirit. I do not advocate killing an innocent person, even if they said they wished to die in certain situations, because I feel that people sometimes don’t really know…they don’t always know what’s in store for them in the future. They also don’t know for sure that they won’t come out of a coma. It’s always better to err on the side of life, rather than the side of death, in my opinion.
Where were the hoards of people advocating to string my grandmother along in her last days of suffering?……Oh wait, my grandmother had Alzheimer’s, a less politically advantageous illness, especially in the eyes of conservatives.
I’m with MK…huh? What are you talking about?
Who could know what someone wants better than themselves?
I don’t know…ask that to the people who try to commit suicide, then several years later THANK the person who saved them in the nick of time while their wrists were bleeding, or while they were having their stomachs pumped.
Megan, please read my column.
All of these mean comments are prejudiced. People have bought into this notion that we can decide when it’s ok to kill somebody, but it’s not up to us.
As for how we treat animals, we as a society employ judges to level the stronget punishment for abusing their family pets, and then we give these very same judges awards for starving the disabled – my sister – to death.
How warped things are in our country. We’re killing the unborn, we’re killing the elderly, we’re killing the disabled, we’re trying to ok it to kill ourselves by assisted suicide. Who else will there soon be to kill?
Don’t forget killing Muslims, our country loves it when we kill Muslims.
JK,
You’ve either got to get off of the drugs, or on them. What in heavens name are you talking about?
mk
Advocating the death of a terrorist is not the same as advocating death for all muslims. Muslim does not automatically equal terrorist, even though many terrorists are muslim. You might need to check your facts before speaking.
So …what does this have to do with killing innocent people?
I’m all for medicating the elderly, so they can live longer, healthier lives. To bad the government and prescription drug companies think otherwise.
The innocent Muslims that get caught in the crossfire in Iraq, all in the name of big oil.
In regards to what, MK?
Bethany,
I was just on your site…saw your drawings…oh my, I’m surrounded by extraordinary people today…first Bobby Schindler, and now you…
Humbled. Truly Humbled.
mk
In regards to what, MK?
I’m still trying to figure out what the heck this post meant:Where were the hoards of people advocating to string my grandmother along in her last days of suffering?……Oh wait, my grandmother had Alzheimer’s, a less politically advantageous illness, especially in the eyes of conservatives.
And then you bring up killin’ muslims out of nowhere.
Open a window and get some fresh air…
mk
Bethany,
I was just on your site…saw your drawings…oh my, I’m surrounded by extraordinary people today…first Bobby Schindler, and now you…
Humbled. Truly Humbled.
mk
MK thank you so much! That means a lot to me!
Jk, I agree…I really would like to understand where all these weird arguments are coming from. You’re pulling up all kinds of off the wall topics that have nothing to do with Terri Shiavo at all.
??
What’s the deal?
Bobby was talking about all the different types of people Americans like to kill, I was adding one he forgot to mention.
Well what was the deal with the comment about your grandmother?
JK asked …..”Do you advocate disregarding a DNR order simply because the family is not ready to let go?”
Did I miss something here, which is quite possible considering I have a 1 and 4 year old running around.
DNR – Do not resuscitate – right?
How is that anything like this case? A DNR is if a patient stops breathing or heart stops, basically the ‘code blue’. Tery didn’t code, she was breathing without machines, her heart was beating on its own. How does a DNR have anything to do with depriving someone of food and water?
DNR’s are usually set by the patient via a living will or by the family. At least I think so.
Thank you for that info, Valerie. I actually didn’t know that’s what it stood for.
Valerie, the question that I asked was hypothetical, I just wanted Bethany’s opinion on it, it had nothing to do with this exact case.
Bethany, my grandmother died in a strikingly similar way as Terri, but no one tried to keep her alive. Because advocating to find treatments and cures for diseases such as Alzheimers would require people to take a liberal point of view, and actually support science.
Yes, Terri Schiavo was indeed starved and dehydrated to death.
Below are some disturbing facts:
Terri was starved and dehydrated to death – whether she was denied a feeding tube or natural food or water does not matter. Terri was subject to an act that can’t done to dog, a deathrow inmate or a terrorist. Starvation and dehydration (whether by removing a tube or natural) on it face is cruel.
Terri was not dying. No disease. No Cancer. She just needed help with food and water. Disabled – Yes. Dying – No.
There was nothing in writing – Just oral statements that had nothing to do with a feeding tube or living in PVS.
Michael Schiavo was conflicted in the following way:
At the time the decision was made (This is a key fundemental point (year 2000)):
Michael was living with and sleeping with another woman and provided no proof to his claims.
Michael was set to inherit $750,000.
Terri had no Legal counsel.
Terri had no GAL.
Another key important fundemental point – With those conflicts in mind – Neither Michael Schiavo or the Schindlers ever thought the case would last another 5 years. Michael has even written that he was suprised by the fact that the Schindler could appeal the 2000 trial decision.
I ‘think’ that is what it is…
Hey – I went on your site to look at your drawing. Gorgeous! You have a very wonderful gift. I’m so glad your husband encouraged you.
Why are you so touchy about me changing subjects?
This is an anti abortion blog and we are talking about Terri Shiavo. Ironic.
Bethany, my grandmother died in a strikingly similar way as Terri, but no one tried to keep her alive. Because advocating to find treatments and cures for diseases such as Alzheimers would require people to take a liberal point of view, and actually support science.
While I am very sorry for the loss of your grandmother, embryonic stem cells have cured no one of anything , ever. To put faith in something like that is quite sad, when there is much more promise in Adult Stem Cells.
Adult stem cells seem to be doing very well helping people live longer lives! There are over 70 cures from using adult stem cells…none from Embryonic cells…and the only thing they have done is create huge tumors in rats.
So it is definitely not the fault of the pro life advocates that your grandmother did not live a longer life, JK.
I ‘think’ that is what it is…
Hey – I went on your site to look at your drawing. Gorgeous! You have a very wonderful gift. I’m so glad your husband encouraged you.
Valerie, thanks so much, you are very kind!
James, thank you for your post.
Why are you so touchy about me changing subjects?
This is an anti abortion blog and we are talking about Terri Shiavo. Ironic.
Wrong again…this is a pro-life blog. Unborn babies aren’t the only people we pro-lifers are concerned with.
umm…..10 cures, 70 is the party line.
If you care about life then discussing the Iraq war is right on point, many more innocent Americans and Iraqis die than terrorists. You should care about them.
I am tired of these circular debates. Goodbye!
umm…..10 cures, 70 is the party line.
Better than zero? Yes or no?
I am tired of these circular debates. Goodbye!
Sniff?
It’s mind-boggling how Bethany and others refuse to accept the results of the autopsy/medical board.
The examiners were there. They saw what was left of Terry’s brain. It was less than half the size it should have been for a woman her age/size, and what *was* there was damaged beyond repair. The brain stem was about the only thing not completely damaged beyond repair, and that is what controls basic body functions. There was no more “Terry” after that massive brain damage occurred.
It’s also phenomenal to me that you people think it isn’t playing God to keep people alive. If God decides it’s your time to go, who are you to fight with Him about it? You must be terrified that you won’t go to Heaven when you die if you are brazen enough to reject God’s call.
It’s also phenomenal to me that you people think it isn’t playing God to keep people alive. If God decides it’s your time to go, who are you to fight with Him about it? You must be terrified that you won’t go to Heaven when you die if you are brazen enough to reject God’s call.
If you think feeding someone to sustain them is playing God, you are just completely confused.
Oh but it’s just the people you don’t personally see value in.. that’s right.
The only thing keeping Terri alive was food and water, just like everyone else, for 14 years.
And her family took care of her and loved her that whole time. You may not like it, but she was a living human being who deserved a dignified life, and a natural death, not death by starvation.
Scoff all you wish. She was alive, she was a person, she was loved, she had worth. She did not deserve to be starved to death.
You know, it’s really amazing to me that the very people who said “You pro-lifers don’t care about women or anyone other than a fetus”, are the same people who are condeming myself and others for not wanting a full grown woman to die unjustly.
Talk about irony.
What do you mean “unjustly”, Bethany? If anything, pulling the plug did Terri a favor.
There was no “pulling the plug”, Justin. They removed her source of food and water.
They DID pull a proverbial plug. The tube that sent food into her stomach.
Not the same.
Sounds the same to me. It was her life support system, and when it was removed, she died. Explain the difference.
Justin, It was her life support system in the same sense that your dinner is your life support system.
If someone took food and water out of your life, you’d die in 14 (or possibly less) days too, most likely.
Speaking of dinner, I need to start cooking something for tonight. Have a good evening.
Below are distrubing verfiable facts of the Schiavo case.
1. Michael Schiavo has given 3 separate and conflicting accounts of Terri’s collapse. Terri’s collapse remains unsolved to this day. No heart attack. No Eating disorder. In fact, Michael accounts of what happen that night changed almost by the hour.
2. Michael had the vet euthanize Terri’s 2 beloved cats. He also melted down her wedding rings.
3. Terri’s was locked away in hospice for nearly 3 years. Any and all attempts to allow to leave her room were denied. This included attending social functions such as a bird show, attend church services, and to even go outside to feel and enjoy the sun. Terri could leave her room. She just needed a wheelchair which Michael refused to provide.
4. Court hearings were actually conducted to get permission to raise the blinds in Terri’s room.
5. Michael refused to mention Terri in both of his parent’s obits. Instead he mentioned Jodi as his fiancee.
6. Terri felt pain. Numerous Numerous testimonies and medical documentation bear this fact.
“Justin, It was her life support system in the same sense that your dinner is your life support system.”
Uh, nice try. I’m fully conscious and eat dinner at will. Terry had to be fed through her STOMACH. Try again.
“If someone took food and water out of your life, you’d die in 14 (or possibly less) days too, most likely. ”
Yeah, but I’m not confined to my bed, incapable of movement or thought. Nice try.
“2. Michael had the vet euthanize Terri’s 2 beloved cats. He also melted down her wedding rings.”
That’s bad, but I fail to see how it’s relevant to anything.
“This included attending social functions such as a bird show, attend church services, and to even go outside to feel and enjoy the sun. Terri could leave her room. She just needed a wheelchair which Michael refused to provide.”
Are you retarded? HER BRAIN DIDN’T work. She wouldn’t have been able to perceive anything, and needed to remain in bed. Oh, and she was blind, too.
“4. Court hearings were actually conducted to get permission to raise the blinds in Terri’s room.”
I fail to see the relevance to anything.
“5. Michael refused to mention Terri in both of his parent’s obits. Instead he mentioned Jodi as his fiancee.”
So?
“6. Terri felt pain. Numerous Numerous testimonies and medical documentation bear this fact.”
So?
Justin -
One of the greatest minds of our times, Stephen Hawkings, should not be alive according to your reasoning.
He is incapable of movement. He needs to be fed because he cannot feed himself. He cannot talk without the help of a computer.
As a matter of fact, if it wasn’t for the vast scientific advances we would have considered him to be just like Terri.
People who are not perfect have the right to live. She was not perfect, but she was still able to give love to the people who were there for her.
Starving and Dehydrating someone to death regardless of the person’s condition (not dying) and whether the practice is done by the removal of feeding tube or by natural means is a cruel inhumane process ON ITS FACE.
When I say ON IT FACE, I mean the whole sense of it.
Starvation and Dehydration is something that we can’t do to a dog, a deathrow imate or terrorists.
And yet the practice of starvation and dehydration was done to Terri.
The fact that feeding tube was simply removed changes little.
Terri was denied food and water.
Terri’s death was caused by starvation and dehydration.
It should also be noted that the provision of food and water is a basic humanitarian right.
Children in other countries die from lack of food and water.
Billions of dollars are sent each year to give these children food and water.
The provision of food and water is also a basic need under Maslow’s hiarchitory of Needs just like shelter.
So ON THE FACE OF IT, starvation and dehydration whether it be by removal of a feeding tube or by natural means is a inhumane process.
Terri’s was subjected to this inhumane process.
Terri was not dying and would have lived another 10 years.
Terri was deprived of the basic humanitarian right to food and water (feeding tube or natural means).
This is not the same as witholding a ventilator or kidney dialysis as those are true life support and person’s death are caused by organ failure.
In addition, starvation and dehydration is rather prolonged process as we have seen.
Terri death by a removal of feeding tube fell under the preumbra of starvation and dehydration, an act that is cruel and inhumane.
On a final note, There is nothing in the legal record to indicate that Terri ever wanted a feeding tube removed.
The decision was made on a “Quality of Life” accessment in which court took Terri statments and based on her quality of life assumed that she would not want a feeding tube.
The veracity of Terri’s wishes never indicated she didn’t want a feeding tube or to be starved and dehydrated to death.
Why Terri’s death was a form of Euthansia:
Euthanasia Expert Shows Reasons Terri’s Death was Euthanasia rather than Natural Death
LONDON, March 31, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Special to LifeSiteNews.com by Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.
The death of Terri Schiavo – Euthanasia or Natural Death?
The tragic death of Terri Schiavo has reignited the Euthanasia debate in the United States and Canada.
Everyday we witnessed new media reports about Terri Schiavo. We heard conflicting commentary from bio-ethicists, physicians, and religious leaders as to whether dehydrating Terri was euthanasia or simply allowing natural death to occur.
To intentionally dehydrate and starve Terri Schiavo to death was euthanasia and I will clearly explain why.
Euthanasia is an intentional act or failure to act which causes a person
Everyone knows that KAQ was disconnected from her ventilator on behalf of her parents.
They went to court and the court gave permission and the ventilator was disconnected.
Some people do not know that when the ventilator was disconnected from KAQ, she did not die.
In fact, KAQ lived for another 10 years before dying.
The goal in the KAQ case was to eliminate burdsome medical treatment but not to kill the patient.
The doctors allowed KAQ to breath natural air and she lived for another 10 years.
In the Schiavo case, the goal was to kill the patient not to eliminate the burdsome treatment.
Terri was denied natural food and water. This was in spite of a fact that Terri hadn’t had a swallowing test in 12 years. Terri hadn’t had swallowing evaluation in over 5 years. The Schindlers provided numerous experts that could have worked with Terri to get her to swallow but were all denied even the chance to explore this possibility.
What even fewer people know was that KAQ actually had a feeding tube.
KAQ lived with a feeding tube for 10 years.
When the family was asked about removing the feeding tube, the family responded “It’s her nourisment.”
Fortunately the KAQ family was not completely corrupted by the death docs and bioethists and saw reason enough to know that starving and dehydrating a loved on to death would be cruel and inhumane.
It is so good to hear some words of reason in this thread. Thank you,thank you.
Dr. Cranford on Dehydration:
After seven to nine days [from commencing dehydration] they begin to lose all fluids in the body, a lot of fluids in the body. And their blood pressure starts to go down. When their blood pressure goes down, their heart rate goes up…. Their respiration may increase and then … the blood is shunted to the central part of the body from the periphery of the body. So, that usually two to three days prior to death, sometimes four days, the hands and the feet become extremely cold. They become mottled. That is you look at the hands and they have a bluish appearance. And the mouth dries a great deal, and the eyes dry a great deal and other parts of the body become mottled. And that is because the blood is now so low in the system it’s shunted to the heart and other visceral organs and away from the periphery of the body …
Kate Adamson on Dehydration:
O’Reilly: When they took the feeding tube out, what went through your mind?
Adamson: When the feeding tube was turned off for eight days, I thought I was going insane. I was screaming out in my mind,”Don’t you know I need to eat?” And even up until that point, I had been having a bagful of Ensure as my nourishment that was going through the feeding tube. At that point, it sounded pretty good. I just wanted something. The fact that I had nothing, the hunger pains overrode every thought I had.
O’Reilly: So you were feeling pain when they removed your tube?
Adamson: Yes. Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. To say that
I would not want to be kept on life support because I’m not a selfish attention-whore. I don’t want to be a drain on society and a burden on my family. Who would want that? And are you that afraid to die? I don’t believe in death anyway. As a Christian I believe in an everlasting life.
In July of 1997, Michael’s mom dies (Michael in his book get this wrong and says June of 1997). Michael claims this was the trigger for seeing through Terri’s wishes (But this was not true, as Michael started to follow out Terri’s wishes nearly 2 years before in late 1995.).
He says that after her death, sometime in the August or September of 1997, Michael goes and talks to Felos and tells him he wants carry out Terri’s wishes.(Again, this is false. Michael was communicating with Felos through Bushnell nearly 2 years before and later was signing contracts with Felos).
Felos tells him to talk to other family members about Terri wishes. Michael really doesn’t do this because he feels his claims are adaquate.
A little later Felos, sends a letter to Bob Schindler informing him that Terri’s life support is going to be removed in due time. Felos makes a key point that he is presently performing an investigation on who may have an insight into Terri’s wishes regarding the feeding tube.
In May of 1998, Michael presents his formal petition to disconnect Terri’s feeding tube based upon wishes known only to him.
Lets back up. 3 important points have illustrated. First Michael was told to talk to his family members. Second Felos was performing an investigation and third there is no word from Scott and Joan. From apparently the timespan of August 1997 to May of 1998 (nearly 10 months) Scott and Joan Schiavo must have been completely silent and obilvious to Terri’s situation. Even though Joan claimed she was Terri’s best friend, she appears to be a black sheep at this point.
Scott’s claim that he didn’t tell Michael because he was in denial doesn’t seem to make sense here. It appears Michael had taken severe legal actions to end Terri’s life but both Scott and Joan seem to be out of loop for 10 months and never feel the need to speak to Michael about Terri’s wishes.
GAL Pearse conducts his investigation and is told by Michael Schiavo that he is the only one that knows Terri’s wishes. Pearse submits his reports and says Michael’s claims are not credible.
So from May of 1998 to December of 1998 (7 months) Scott and Joan still seem to be completely obilvious of the situation and are silent on the Terri matter.
In September of 1999 nearly a year later, Michael finally reveals that Scott and Joan know Terri’s wishes.
This is after nearly 10 months after the GAL told Michael his claims were no good. Michael reveals that he just found these wishes a few weeks before his depo and that they actually told Felos their insights in Terri’s wishes.
Judging from the timeframes. It appears that Scott and Joan were completely obilvious to the events surrounding Terri Schiavo. It seems that Michael had not contacted Scott and Joan in nearly 2 years.
Scott and Joan’s claims sound very suspect given the timespans involved.
No proof was ever provided to prove these claims and it was all hearsay.
Both Scott and Joan were never disposed by the Schindler’s lawyer and their testimonies seemed unfair given this fact. The lawyer didn’t have any basis in which to impeach the witnesses.
While the court claimed it had clear and convincing evidence, the court never had any corlaborative proof to Michael, Scott, or Joan’s claims.
No single claim was ever backuped by more than one person.
Scott and Joan apparently should have voiced their insights in Terri’s wishes at critical times but didn’t.
1993 – UTI incident refusal – Michael writes in his book that he had made the decision to let Terri go. Where were Scott and Joan?
1994 – All through the early guardianship battle, Scott and Joan never say anything even though Michael has given hint that Terri would not want to live in her present condition.
1995/1996 – Again a another UTI refusal takes place but again the nursing home stops Michael. Scott and Joan still remain silent on Terri’s alleged wishes.
1997 – Micheal’s mom dies – He says this what made him proceed with tube removal – Where were Scott and Joan then?
1998 – Michael submits his petition to remove Terri’s feeding tube – Again where were Joan and Scott?
December 1998 – GAL Pearse says Michael claims aren’t credible – Where were Joan and Scott?
1999 – Suddenly Joan and Scott pop from no where and state they know Terri’s wishes.
What’s important to remember is that Scott and Joan both admitted under oath the they never revealed or talked with Michael about their insights to Terri’s wishes over the 9 year period.
While, it perfectly logical to assume that Scott and Joan never mentioned anything to court until they were called as witnesses in the 2000, giving from the timeline that we have seen is makes no sense that Scott and Joan did not mention anything to Michael over the years even instances after instances of life ending actions and decisions were made by
Michael in attempt to honor Terri’s so-called wishes.
Michael was even told to ask Scott and Joan but didn’t.
Felos was even looking for people who might have known Terri’s wishes in 1997.
Finally, Both also admitted that both they stayed informed of what was happening with Terri. Michael even stated under oath that he had talked about Terri’s situation with his inlaws.
They are also very suspect based on comments made by Scott Schiavo in various interviews:”One doctor said,’Mike, you know what? There’s nothing else we can do
Here are some interviews, people might interested in listening to:
http://www.emmanuel-newington.org/church/mp3/2006_10_22_PM_The_Untold_S
tory_Of_Terry_Schiavo_DG.mp3
This is David Gibb’s sermon on his role and thoughts on the Schiavo case.
It good sermon and I will agree that David Gibbs tends to put a little spin on some things but it really lays out the basic concept of what happen in the Schiavo case:
An innoncent disabled woman who was not dying was starved and and dehydrated to death by our government because her life had no value and based on the will of her husband that she die.
http://www.christianradiomagazine.com/audio/crm20061202.m3u
It has been suggested that 9 out of 11 neurologists who examined Terri determined her to be in PVS state. This is a fallacy. There only 7 neurologists who examined Terri and deemed her PVS and most of those neurologists are questionable:
Dr. Garcia DeSousa
Dr. Thomas Harrison
Dr. James Barnhill
Dr. Jeffery Karp
Dr. Melvin Greer
Dr. Ronald Cranford
Dr. Peter Bambakidis
That is 7 neurologists.
Dr. Thomas Harrison – He only interpreted Terri’s EEG. It is unknown if Dr. Harrison examined her. It is also unknown if Dr. Harrison ever examined Terri again.
Dr. James Barnhill – Was Felos’s personal Death Doc. Examined Terri for about 1 hour the first time. Examined Terri the second time for about 10 minutes. Ordered no tests.
Dr. Jeffery Karp – Examined Terri for about 1 hour. Deemed her PVS. Never examined Terri again.
Dr. Ronald Cranford – Examined Terri for about 45 minutes. Very biased. Did very few tests except for some balloon tracking trials.
Dr. Melvin Greer – Examined Terri for about 30 minutes. Deemed her PVS. His examination seemed incompentent. Didn’t remember the color of her eyes and couldn’t answer some of his own examination questions.
Dr. Peter Bambakidis – Examined Terri for 30 minutes. Deemed her PVS. Although neutral, there is evidence to suggest that Bambakidis was selected by Felos and biased toward the Schindlers.
Total examination time with 7 neurologists:
About 5+ hours over a 10 year period.
Dr. DeSousa is about the only neurologist who can be deemed credible in examing Terri as he is probably the only neurolgist who examined the most over the years.
Suprisingly, Dr. Desousa was never asked to testify in the 2000 trial.
Now lets look at the Schindler’s side:
Dr. Hammesfahr – Examined Terri for over 3 hours and deemed her MCS. Hammesfahr’s examination was longer than Cranford, Greer, and Bambakidis combined. Hammesfahr’s examination was much more extensive.
Dr. Cheshire – Observed but did not exam Terri for 90 minutes. Based on his observations and review of her medical records, and the video tapes, Terri was MCS.
Dr. Jacob Greer – Reviewed her medical records (or at least some of them) and the video tape from the 2000 trial. Deemed her MCS. The reactions shown on the video tape were not consitent with PVS.
Dr. Alexander Gimon – Did an extensive anlaysis of the 2002 video tapes. Deemed her MCS. Reactions on the video tapes not consistent with PVS. Also reviewed audio recordings of Terri. Not constitent with PVS.
Dr. William Russell – Reviewed her medical records and the video from 2000 trial. Deemed her MCS. Also reviewed Dr. Barnhill’s testimony and refuted it.
Dr. Beatrice Engstrand – Believed Terri to be MCS based on her expertise in the PVS state. Studied under Fred Plumm – the pioneer of the PVS state.
Dr. Lawerence Huntoon – Viewed the video clips of Terri Schiavo. Deemed her MCS. Reactions in the videos were inconstitent with PVS. Refuted Autopsy.
Dr. James Kelly – Questioned Terri’s PVS diagnosis. Reactions shown in news reports were not constitent with PVS.
Dr. Philip Kennedy – Urged further testing.
Dr. Thomas Mark Zabiega – Urged further testing and therapy. Refuted autopsy.
Dr. Laurie Barclay – Viewed the video clips. Not constitent with PVS. Believed Terri to MCS. Studied under Fred Plumm.
* all mentioned Doctors are nuerolgists.
“Starvation and Dehydration is something that we can’t do to a dog, a deathrow imate or terrorists.
And yet the practice of starvation and dehydration was done to Terri.”
Would you rather they stabbed her with a knife, or something?
Compelling Stories of people in similiar situations like Terri Schiavo.
Only one difference – They weren’t starved and dehydrated to death.
http://www.floridabaptistwitness.com/1896.article
http://www.aish.com/spirituality/odysseys/Carrots_Dont_Cry.asp
http://www.debramoretta.com/detailed-story.asp
“An innoncent disabled woman who was not dying was starved and and dehydrated to death by our government because her life had no value and based on the will of her husband that she die.”
1. It’s cute that you link to a Christian site after that. Like I’ll even THINK about taking that seriously.
2. Wasn’t dying, but there was no way she was coming out of that state. Would you rather she lived in a state of complete unconsciousness and oblivion for years on end? My god, you’re a sick, cruel person.
3. I hate to say it, but at this point, her life really did have no value, if there was no way she was coming out of her situation. And if she had a working brain, I’d bet she’d want to die. She was completely and utterly screwed, and life would have been torture.
4. Yeah, based on the will of her husband. You know, a family member. Would you prefer if some stranger made the decision?
The Best Schindler Doctors
1. Dr. Jacob Greene Ph. D. – A neurologist from Jacksonville, Florida. Submitted his affidavit in May of 2001. He examined her medical records and the video (from the 2000 trial) not to the so called edited ones. Disputes PVS based on the video and her medical records. Submitted another affidavit in February of 2005 in which he Believed she was MCS (became recently known) and recommended further tests. Believed she should have had an FMRI which Terri never received. Did not examine Terri. Greer threw his affidavit out and he was not given the chance to examine Terri. Greer ignored credible medical testimony and advise from credible medical sources (medical records and video tapes). He wasn’t even disposed.
2. Dr. Alexander Gimon. – A PHd Neuropsychologist from Florida. Has studied the video clips presented at the October 2002 Medical Evidentiary Hearing. Gives an in dept analysis on each one of the videos. Also reviewed the audio recording. Disputes Terri is PVS. Offered his expert medical opinion based on the tapes and audio clip. Is credible testimony. Greer threw his affidavit out. He was not given the chance to examine Terri. Greer ignored credible medical testimony and advise from credible medical sources (video tapes and audio tapes). He wasn’t even disposed.
3. Dr. Richard Neubauer – A specialist doctor from Florida. – Viewed the actual video tape (From 2000 trial).Recommended hyperbaric Therapy for Terri. Seems to be credible medical information. Greer did not consider. He was not given the chance to examine Terri. Submitted his affidavit in May of 2001. Submitted another affidavit in March of 2005 and urged that Terri be given a chance at HBOT.
4. Dr. William Russell – A retired neurologist from Florida – Has reviewed the medical records of Theresa Marie Schiavo, a videotape of her (From 2000 Trial), the trial testimony of Dr. Barnhill, the affidavits of Drs. Carpenter and Young and that of Bishop Larkin filed in her guardianship court file, the motion for rehearing, and various letters from Ms Schiavo?s family members. Disputes PVS. Believed Terri to be more aware than Ronald Reagan. Was not given the chance to examine her. Greer did not consider. Greer ignored credible medical testimony and advise from credible medical sources (medical records, video tapes, medical testimony, affidavits, and info from family members). Vouched for Dr. Hammesfahr. Submitted his affidavit in May of 2001.
5. Dr. Webber – A specialist doctor from Florida – Has looked at her medical records covering the period from 1991 to 1999. Also, has studied the videotape of Terri and her mother, apparently taped in 1999 or 2000. Disputes PVS. Not given the chance to examine Terri. Greer dismissed credible medical testimony and advise from credible medical sources (medical records and video tapes). He wasn’t even disposed. Submitted his affidavit in May of 2001.
6. Dr. James Avery – A medical doctor from Florida – Observed Terri for 30 minutes. Questioned PVS diagnosis. Recommended swallowing tests. Greer ignored credible medical testimony from a credible medical source (observation). Submitted his affidavit in February of 2000.
7. Dr. Cheshire – A neurologist from Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida – Observed Terri for 90 minutes, Reviewed her medical records and the video tapes (not the edited ones). Disputes
PVS. Submitted a lengthy affidavit in March of 2000 and believed Terri was misdiagnosised and was MCS. Greer ignored medical testimony from credible medical sources (observation, medical records and video tapes).
8. Dr. John Young – A medical doctor from Florida. – Observed Terri for 30 minutes. Questioned PVS diagnosis. Recommended swallowing tests. Submitted his affidavit in February of 2000.
9. Dr. Sara Mele – A Ph.D. speech pathologist from Chicago – Reviewed her medical records along with all of her records about her therapy at Mediplex. Also reviewed the video tapes and audio recordings. Gives an in-dept analysis of the videos. Disputes PVS. Was not given the chance the to examine Terri. Greer ignored credible medical testimony from various sources.
Submitted her affidavit in 2004.
Other Schindler Docs
10. Dr. Ralph Akenman – A psychiatrist from Ohio. Specializes in treatment of brain injured patients. Did not observe or examine Terri but says his therapy could possibly help her. Submitted her affidavit in March of 2005. Just a helpful affidavit in my opinion.
11. Dr. Beatrice Engstrand – A neurologist from New York. Did not examine Terri or her medical records. Did state that she could help Terri because of similar patients she has delt with. Disputes PVS. However, she did study under Dr. Plum, the pioneer doctor of the PVS state, so her conclusions may be credible. Urged for a PET scan and fMRI. Submitted affidavit in March of 2005.
12. Dr. Alyse Eytan – A psychairtrist from Chicago. Has followed the Teri Schiavo case in the news. Basically a doctor offering her expert opinion based what she has read and seen. Sounds like a moral POV affidavit. Submitted her affidiavit in March 2005.
13. Dr. Goldsmith – is a regular doctor. Has not examined Terri but has seen the video tape. Questionable on PVS. Believes his therapy could help Terri. Encourages further testing and therapy.
14. Dr. Carolyn Heron. Is a regular doctor from Chicago. Has followed the Teri Schiavo case in the news. Basically a doctor offering her expert opinion based what she has read and seen. Has seen the video tapes. Disputes PVS based on her expertise. Urged additonal testing.
15. Dr. David Hopper – A psychologist specializing in brain injury. Disputed PVS. Recommended further tests.
16. Dr. Lawrence Huntoon – A neurologist from New York. Did view the so called edited video clips. Disputes PVS based on his expertise and knowledge and on the video clips. Believed Terri to be MSC. Stood by his affidavit later by refuting the autopsy results.
17. Dr. Hyink – Speech Language Pathologist from Colarado. Did view the so called edited video clips. Offers her expert medical opinion based what she knows of the case. Urged communication therapy. This patholgist is Laura Shepherd’s patholgist, the disabled daughter of Linda Shepherd.
18. Dr. Jill Joyce – Speech Language Pathologist. Did view the so called edited video clips. Disputes PVS based on her expertise and thevideo clips. Offers her expert medical opinion based what she knows of the case. Urges additional therapy.
19. Dr. Phillip Kennedy – A neurologist. Offers his expertise in the case. Urged Terri to undergo a fMRI.
20. Dr. Ricardo Senno. A regular doctor from Illinois – Offers his insight on what he has seen and his expert medical opinion. Only saw photos of Terri on the internet. Conclusions based on this sound weak. It more of moral stand he takes. Urged further testing.
21. Dr. Stanley Terman – A neurologist from California – Reviewed info on Terri including the Wolfson GAL Report. Recommends further testing such as fMRI.
22. Dr. Michael Uszler – A doctor from California. Questions testing done on Terri.
23. Dr. Richard Weidman – A doctor from Washington D.C. Disputes Terri is PVS based on what he ha seen and heard. Urged more testing.
24. Dr. Thomas Zabiega – A neurologist from Illinois. Viewed videos of Terri and other info. Also reviewed the audio recording of Terri. Said the following about the audio recording of Terri Schiavo: believe she is making verbalizations on the tape. In fact, around 45 seconds, when she is asked “How are you doing” she definitely changes her voice and says “good”. She appears to say “yeah” several times… then at the end of the tape when she is asked “do your ears hurt” she definitely says “no”. Even if none of the words were discernible, the fact that her voice changes during the tape to different questions suggests she is understanding what is being said to her. A patient in PVS does not respond and does not have any changes in verbal output. Disputed PVS. Urges for further testing.
25. Dr. Peter Morin – A neurologist from Maine. Studied info about the case. Raised many moral questions.
26. Dr. Peter Luca – A doctor from Michigan. Addresses his moral POV of view regarding Terri’s situation.
27. Dr. Paul Harch – A doctor from Louisana. Sided with Dr. Neubeur to have Terri undergo HBOT treatment.
28. Dr. Peter Brunner – A speech patholgist from Florida. Urged Terri to undergo Vitalstim treatment.
29. Dr. David Coulter – A doctor from Boston. Urged more testing for Terri.
30. Dr. Kyle Lakas – A speech patholgist from Texas. Urged Terri to undergo Vitalstim tretment.
31. Dr. Rodney Dunaway – A neurologist from Texas. Viewed videos. Disputed PVS. Urged further testing.
32. Dr. George Isajiw – A doctor from Pennsylvania. Viewed videos. Disputed PVS. Urged further testing
33. Dr. Leonard Rybak – A doctor from Illnois. Viewed Videos. Disputed PVS. Conferred with Dr. Hammesfarh’s diagnosis. Urged Further testing.
34. Dr. Myra Stinson – A speech patholgist from Florida. Viewed videos from 2002 trial and audio recordings of Terri. Disputes PVS. Urged for more swallowing tests.
James,
I was debating whether to go to stations of the cross tonight…after reading your report, I feel that I already have.
Contrasting Terri’s death to Pope John Paul II’s really shows you how beautiful death can be when it is allowed to happen naturally, and how horrible it can be when it is forced.
The word forced gets thrown around alot on this site: as in you cannot “force” a woman to have a baby. It doesn’t seem to work in the reverse very well tho, as you apparently can “force” a woman to die.
We have also been accused of only caring for the unborn. Apparantly, many in this group don’t care for the unborn or the undead. Unbelievable. Welcome to the 21 century and the culture of death.
Thank you James, Thank you so very much…
I’m sure Terri thanks you too.
MK
Justin, 6:00p: Start speaking with respect or I’ll delete your posts. In fact, I’m cracking down on the venomous posts. Speak civilly, all.
The Great Bambakidis
Michael’s book Pg. 203
“Each of the five doctors examined Terri individually. All but Dr. Greer allowed their examinations to be videotaped, and the unedited videotapes were provided to the court”
Pg. 208
“The judge tooka full month to evaluate all the doctor’s testimonies and, as he did in the previous trial, he carefully reviewed the videotapes that accompanied all but Dr. Greer’s presentation.”
Michael Schiavo makes two separate remarks that indicate the Dr. Bambakidis videotaped his examination with Terri Schiavo.
However, in court Dr. Bambakidis testfied the following:
1 Q. But, in any event, it was not
2 videotaped?
3 A. It was not.
Dr. Bamabakidis testified he had no objection to his exam be videotaped. Ultimately it was not according to Bambakidis.
Obviously someone is lying! It’s either Michael Schiavo or Dr. Bambakidis.
I think it is probably Dr. Bambakidis. Its clear from many of his answers that he was biased toward the Schindlers and was likely he was selected by Felos even though he was supposed to be a neutral doctor. Observe some of Bambakidis’s troubling answers.
Q. Who initiated that first conversation?
3 A. Well, Mr. Felos contacted me.
4 Q. I see.
It seems Felos was contacting a neutral doctor.
22 wanted somebody for — I believe his comment was
23 that they wanted somebody who worked for the
24 Cleveland Clinic.
25 Q. Who is they?
277
1 A. I don’t know. You would have to ask
2 the judge.
A very troubling answer. Just who is “They”?
23 Q. And do you recall that I asked you at
24 the conclusion of the hearing if you wanted to go
25 back down to Hospice in the presence of the
389
1 parents?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And you had to make your flight?
4 A. That’s correct.
5 Q. Now, the arrangement had been for Mr.
6 and Mrs. Schindler to be present during your
7 examination, correct?
8 A. That’s correct.
9 Q. And the way you knew that was that you
10 had a copy of my letterhead, correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So you could have called me, right?
13 A. Well, I could have — my anticipation
14 when I went to Hospice was that they were there
15 and I fully intended to take a history from them.
16 Then it turned out that they had gone. Was I
17 supposed to call you at that time?
18 Q. After July 10th, after you had returned
19 to Cleveland, you could have taken a history from
20 them over the telephone, couldn’t you?
21 A. I could have.
22 Q. And why didn’t you call me to get their
23 phone number?
24 A. Well, you know — I mean, I didn’t know
25 what their particular perspective would have been
390
1 with regard to this whether they were able to or
2 not. Certainly if they expressed a desire to do
3 that I would have gladly done that.
4 Q. They did, they expressed a willingness
5 to be present during your exam?
6 A. Ms. Anderson, I mean, this is I could
7 have called them, they could have called me. I
8 would have been happy however it could have been
9 done to obtain a history from them.
Obviously Dr. Bamabakidis wasn’t willing to accept the responsibility of what he was called to do.
It’s also been reported that Dr. Bambakidis’s brother knew Felos. Dr. Bambakidis’s brother, Gust Bambakidis belonged to same organization that George Felos belonged to.
I think a videotaped examination was conducted. It probably provided proof to Terri’s cognitivness which why is was sealed by Judge Greer and not shown in court.
This is supported by the letter sent to Bob Schindler on August 20, 1997 by George Felos.
The written including the following important information:”In addition, I am also trying to gather information regarding what Theresa’s wishes would be in this situation, if she were able to express them.”
I wonder where Scott and Joan Schiavo were at this time and why Michael or Felos didn’t seek them out?
This is a key question.
2 years later after the GAL investigation and report stating that Michael’s claims were questionable, Scott and joan suddenly come forward.
Apparently Scott was elicited by George Felos by simple phone call.
To all who complain that Terri’s feeding tube was invasive, a speech pathologist testified she had taught people to eat by mouth who had far worse disabilities than Terri’s.
Terri’s accident was in 1990. It?s in a medical document she received no theapy or rehabilitive care from 1992 on, not even range of motion. Michael abandoned her. Is it no coincidence that all therapies stopped from 1993 when he met the woman who is now his wife. His loyalties shifted.
If you do not provide disabled people therapy or rehabilitation, they will regress.
The therapist also believed Terri was trying to communicate by the guttural noises she was making. If you listen to the tape and hear my dad ask questions, Terri wasn?t just randomly going on. She would speak. She would stop when he started to speak. Then she would speak again.
The doctors who examined Terri thought it was actually remarkable she was as responsive as she was after being warehoused so long.
Michael has said on 2 occasions at public events that Terri was his personal property and she was to do with as he saw fit.
The first incident was when Michael appeared at the biased Terri Schiavo symposium in PA this past May.
Michael was approached by Brandi Swindell, a strong pro-life advocate.
Brandi Swindell of Generation Life went into the conference to ask a question of Michael Schiavo but was not recognized during the question time. Brandi approached Michael after the conference to ask him about statements he has made about Terri being his property. Michael told Brandi that
Below is a reply I got from a doctor who submitted an affidavitt on behalf of Terri’s life. I recieved it a couple of months ago. I not revealing the doctor’s identity for privacy reasons. But, I can tell this was valid correspondence.
1. Terri was NOT a dying patient, and providing food and water
for her was part of normal care appropriate to her condition, it
was NOT heroic treatment. Without food and water, all of us
would die. Thus, Terri’s cause of death was NOT her condition
(brain damage), but intentional dehydration, which could have
easily been prevented. If you killed your cat or dog by the
same kind of slow dehydration — you would go to jail!
2. From the information and the video’s that I had seen of
Terri, it is clear that she was not unconscious, and it appears
that she was able to follow some instructions and responded to
other people in the room — thus whether her diagnosis was
correct is still a big question — but it is completely false to
say that the autopsy confirmed ANY diagnosis except the fact
that there was significant brain damage and brain atrophy.
However, it is impossible to correlate the appearance of the
brain with the degree of functional impairment. Some patients
with even greater degrees of brain damage (either posthumousely
verified by autopsy or prospectively by MRI imaging) are awake
and responsive.
3. However, the important point is that id DOESN’T MATTER
whether she was truly in the “persistent vegetative state” or
not, it is perfectly clear that she was NOT DYING (not terminal)
and that providing food and water for her was ordinary care and
the intentional removal of food and water (without even ever
trying to find out if she could be fed by mouth) was clearly
intended to cause her death — and thus, to put it simply, was
HOMICIDE. Even worse, it was a homicide committed with the
complicity of the medical profession and the judicial branch of
government.
4. You cannot “allow someone to die” who is not otherwise dying.
Thus this was NOT a case of “end of life” decision making
involving the removal of treatment which could only prolong the
process of dying, i.e.”heroic” treatment — it was a case of
willfully and intentionally “ending her life”.
“To all who complain that Terri’s feeding tube was invasive, a speech pathologist testified she had taught people to eat by mouth who had far worse disabilities than Terri’s.”
Who cares? Terri was fed through her stomach. The pathologist’s testimony is a moot point.
Who cares?
A lot of people, apparently.
Terri was fed through her stomach. The pathologist’s testimony is a moot point
In your opinion.
Justin,
The woman’s brother was just on here. The dead woman’s brother. Do you get that? Do you understand that this was a human being? Do you have any idea how immature, rude and ignorant you sound?
Not only are your statements ridiculous, but you have just shown the world that you are a callous imbecile!
For God Sake man! Act like a human being!
If this was your mother, or sister or HAMSTER, no matter how I felt about the situation, I WOULD SHOW RESPECT TO THE DECEASED’S FAMILY!!!!!!!!!!!
You should be ashamed of yourself AND you should apologize to Terri’s brother.
Who cares? WHO CARES?
sniveling little brat!
mk
Whoa, MK chill out, you took Justin’s post WAY out of context. His response of “who cares?” was directed at the speech pathologist who had taught brain dead people to feed themselves, not at Terri. Jeez…
http://www.books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN1412061407&id=fPKrDYkmdawC&pg=PP1&lpg=PP
1&ots=6A01RvI492&dq=Cheryl+Ford&sig=4gRXUeUDj3V3D
yW40G7p-8a36MU
This is a preview of Cheryl Ford’s Book Fight4Terri.
It has numerous excerpts from the book.
It takes a long time to download. This link is best viewed with DSL or Broadband.
Q, Justin: Do you have any idea who you were dissing, you fools? Terri Schiavo’s brother.
In 1993, Michael sought to have Terri killed by refusing treatment for her UTI after he promised the courts and the Schindlers that he would take care of Terri for the rest of his life. It only took one doctor’s advice to convince Michael Schiavo to take that action. Of course, Michael fails to point out in his book that he would have inherited $750,000 of Terri’s money and makes no mention that he was going to donate it to charity. He didn’t even tell the Schindlers of his plans to end Terri’s life.
In 1998, after several failed attempts to end Terri’s life, Michael submitted his petition to court to pull Terri’s feeding tube claiming that is what Terri would want despite his sworn testimony in the mal trial. At this point there still almost $750,000 that Michael would have inherited upon Terri’s death. Michael said he wasn’t interested in the money but makes no effort to offer any charity donation of the Terri’s money.
GAL Pearse conducts his investigation and finds Michael is severely conflicted on the financial end due to Terri’s outstanding trust fund. Pearse, not Michael, suggests that he setup a charity offer.
Knowing that he is caught up in financial conflict of interest, Michael and Felos devise a legal tactic by setting up a charity offer with very special stipulations.
First, Michael makes the offer valid for only 10 days. Second, Michael says he will only donate the money if the Schindlers side with him and give up the fight.
It appears that Michael puts a stipulation in his offer that knows that Schindlers will not accept and that goes against the Schindlers core position on Terri’s feeding tube removal. It is clear this was legal ruse in effort to create the illusion that he was not after the money.
However, in 2001 when Terri’s feeding tube is removed, Michael knows he will not have to donate a penny because the Schindlers refused his offer. If Terri had died in 2001 (a very real possibility since the Schindlers got extremely lucky in finding Cindy Shook) Michael would have inherited hundreds of thousands of dollars of Terri’s money knowing that he had no legal obilgation to donate it to charity.
Michael continued to make his offer always having the stipulation that Schindlers must accept it otherwise he wouldn’t donate the money.
It was clear his offer was bogus. Michael would always make the offer to Schindlers and not the court.
If Michael really was going to donate the money he could made an offer in the following way. I am sure the court would have accomadated this offer.
The the Court:
As the inheritor of Terri’s trust fund, if this court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the petition to remove Terri”s feeding is granted, the inheritor of Terri’s Trust fund shall pledge the fund to go toward charity.
Jill I was never dissing Terri’s brother, and gangsta language does not become you.
In 1997 Clara Schiavo, Michael Schiavo’s mom died. Her obituary is shown below:
Clara M. Schiavo
Former Levittown Resident
Clara M. Schiavo (nee Henkell), passed away Wednesday, July 2, 1997. For the past five years she was a resident of Seminole, Fla., living formerly for 30 years in Junewood, Levittown. She was the assistant personnel manager for the Gimble Department Store, formerly located in the Oxford Valley Mall, for ten years. She was a member of Hope Lutheran Church in Levitttown for 30 years. She was the beloved wife of William F. and the devoted mother of William F. Jr. and his wife Joan of Mayfair, Stephen O. and his wife Pamela of Fairless Hills, Brian J. and his wife Donna of Newtown, Scott E. and his wife Karen of Indiana and Michael R. and his fianc� Jodi of Fla. She was the dear grandmother of William J., Aleen C., Steven G., Kelly M., Scott R., Lisa M. Thomas M. and Ryan A. She is also survived by her sister, Joan May Enoch of Delran, NJ. Relatives and friends are invited to her viewing Mon., 10:30 a.m. until noon and to her funeral service at noon in the Campbell & Thomas Funeral Home, 905 Second St. Pike (at Old Bustleton Pike), Richboro. Her interment will take place in Sunset Memorial Park.
You will see that Terri Schiavo is not mentioned in the obituary. Jodi Centonze is mentioned instead as Michael’s fiance. Michael claims his dad wrote this obituary and her knew nothing about until later. But I do not believe Michael! I think Michael knew exactly that Terri wasn’t going to be in the obituary but had his father write it up to get him off the hook.
This seems quite logical when one looks at Michael’s dad’s obituary in 2002, 5 years later and sees that Terri is still not mentioned. Michael was primary trustee and executor of his dad’s estate and inherited over $30,000 when his dad died. The dad’s obituary is shown below:
Philadelphia Inquirer, The (PA) and Philadelphia Daily News (PA)- April 18, 2002
Deceased Name: William F. Schiavo Sr.
PA United States SCHIAVO WILLIAM F. SCHIAVO, SR., April 15, 2002. For the past 10 years he was a resident of Seminole, FL, living formerly for 30 years in Junewood, Levittown. Engineer Associate at AT&T for 35 years and was a member of Hope Lutheran Church in Levittown for 30 years. Beloved husband of the late Clara M. Schiavo (nee Henkell), devoted father of William F. Jr. and his wife Joan of Mayfair, Stephen G. of Fairless Hills, Brian J. and his wife Donna of FL, Scott E. and wife Karen of Levittown and Michael R. and his fiancee Jodi of FL. Loving grandfather of Margaret M., William J., Aleen C., Steven G., Kelly M., Scott R., Lisa M., Thomas M. and Ryan A.; also survived by his sister Helen Hillman and brother Richard Schiavo. Relatives and friends are invited to his service Sat. April 20, at Hope Lutheran Church in Levittown, 2600 Haines Rd., cor of Haines Rd. and Millcreek Pkwy at 9 A.M. Interment Sunset Memorial Park.
Philadelphia Inquirer, The (PA) and Philadelphia Daily News (PA)
Date: April 18, 2002
Record Number: 298823
Copyright (c) 2002 The Philadelphia Inquirer
You still see Jodi listed instead of Terri. Many have claimed that this was an oversight as the obituaries are virtually identical in structure and that is was a simple copy and paste the funeral home did.
This not entirely true as one can see the obituary has been updated to reflect new information. Observe:
1997 – Stephen O. and his wife Pamela are mentioned but in 2002 Pamela is left off. Stephen’s middle initial is also changed to G.
1997- Brian and his Donna lived in Newtown, but in 2002 it was changed to FL.
1997 – Scott and Karen lived in Indiana but in 2002 that had changed to Levittown.
It seemed that the funeral home did go out and seek new information to update the obituary and yet Terri was never mentioned in either one.
What a kind and loving husband Michael Schiavo would mention Jodi over Terri in both obituaries.
post this post from time to time to allow new lurkers to see it. It is important to understand to evilness of Michael’s actions and behaviors by studying his famous Malpractice trial testimony. This testimony is basically the root of Michael’s evilness and served as basis of fact in many future motions in the attempt to save Terri’s life from the clutches of Michael Schiavo. Under heavy emotional stress, Michael made 4 critical promises at the malpractice trial. These promises were made to jury, to the Schindlers, and most importantly to Terri. After the conclusion of malpractice trial, Michael didn’t fulfill even one of these promises and proceeded on his quest to have Terri killed. Observe:
Promise #1 – 25 Q. Why did you want to learn to be a nurse?
1 A. Because I enjoy it and I want to learn more how
2 to take care of Terry.
Michael promised to become a nurse for the goal of taking care of Terri. Michael really did not do this. Shortly after he made this promise, Michael sought to have Terri killed by refusing her treatment for UTI infection. This happened when Michael barley gotten started in his nursing career. Eventually he did become a nurse, but only after repeated attempts to have Terri killed.
Promise #2 – 8 Q. Where do you want to take care of your wife?
9 A. I want to bring my wife home.
10 Q. If you had the resources available to you, if you
11 had the equipment and the people, would you do that?
12 A. Yes, I would, in a heartbeat.
Michael never brought Terri home. Michael later coped out saying it was too much work. Michael failed to point out that he had $750,000 for Terri’s care and another $300,000 that Michael recieved. Addition, Michael also had $250,000 from an earlier settlement and $10,000 that he squirreled away. Finally, both the Schindlers and Schiavos could have contributed which would helped out in the cost. Later, Michael used his money instead to help Jodi purchase a house for both of them. According to Michael, his reason that taking care of Terri was too much work, was reached before the avent of the Malpractice trial. Go figure.
Promise #3 – 13 Q. How do you feel about being married to Terry now?
14 A. I feel wonderful. She’s my life and I wouldn’t
15 trade her for the world. I believe in my — I believe in my
16 wedding vows.
Yet another promise broken by Michael. Shortly after the malpractice trial, Michael found Jodi and started an intimate realtionship with her. Later in 1994 Michael proposed to Jodi and started calling her his finacee. Even later, Michael didn’t have the decentcy to mention Terri in either of his parent’s obituaries. Even worse is when he was making this promise, Michael was having intimate relations with Cindy Shook.
Promise #4 – 25 A. I believe in the vows that I took with my wife,
1 through sickness, in health, for richer or poorer. I
2 married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the
3 rest of my life with her. I’m going to do that.
This is by far the most important promise that Michael broke. Shortly after he recieved the money, Michael posted a DNR on Terri’s chart and later tried to kill her by refusing her treatment for a UTI.
No where did Michael make the promise that Terri was to be killed in accordance with her wishes not to be kept alive artificially. In fact, Terri was supposed to live another 30 years. Even more distrubing is when Michael was asked about removing the feeding tube from his doctor he stated “I couldn’t do that to Terri.”
Justin, read the name of the person who wrote the post you tore apart.
Q and Justin:
Jill I was never dissing Terri’s brother, and gangsta language does not become you.
Neither does disrespect for the dead. The things that have been said on this blog about an innocent, beautiful woman…it’s just shameful.
You can have an opinion, but you cannot talk about people the way some of you have on this site.
I’m sorry I blew up. I meant the context, but should have chosen different content.
I’m tired and this has been another uphill battle.
Maybe a good night’s sleep will help.
Just try to remember, that Terri was a person. And so is her brother. Just show some respect.
MK
I have always wondered what happen to the 20 minute Terri Schiavo video that was shown at Mal Practice trial in 1992.
It is interesting that that video was never mentioned again and was never used in the 2000 or 2002 trial as video evidence. The video is never mentioned again in any future affidavit or motion that I could find.
The video was very important for several reasons. Based on the testimony by Michael Schiavo, it showed that Terri was alert, aware, could feel pain, and could swallow.
In it the video shows Terri swallowing at times. It shows Terri reacting to pain. And it shows Terri has feelings and is alert and aware. This all based on Michael’s testimony. Observe:
1992 Testimony
A. Right here, basically, you can see she’s dressed,
11 she’s already had her shower and everything. We would get
12 her dressed, put her shoes and socks on. I’m trying out her
13 hands there. You have to keep the inside of the hands,
14 since she’s contracted, you have to keep them dry because
15 infection can set in, and I usually do a little bit of range
16 of motion with her.
17 Q. And while you’re doing that, do you talk to her?
18 A. Yes, I am talking to her right now telling her
19 it’s okay.
20 Q. She doesn’t like that very much?
21 A. No, she doesn’t. She does feel pain.
Q. (BY MR. WOODWORTH:) Does she like that kind of
5 treatment very much?
6 A. No, she does not. Here I’m trying to bend her
7 leg.
Q. I notice, Michael, you’re holding her head back.
25 why are you doing that?
___
19
1 A. Because she’ll fall forward, and if she falls fast
2 she gets excited. It’s — I was told by a doctor she was
3 getting the feeling she’s falling.
Q. You hoping he can get her to the point where she
15 swallows?
16 A. Yes. You see here rubbing the bottom of her
17 throat, that’s, I don’t know what the word is, gets them to
18 swallow when you rub the bottom of their throat. She just
19 swallowed that time.
Q. Does she express discomfort when some of these
9 things are happening to her?
10 A. Yes. Yes, she does.
11 Q. How does she do that?
12 A. She’ll moan and groan.
I like to get her outside for fresh air.
This is a video that was never released but shown at the Mal Trial. It showed 4 things about Terri to seems to refute PVS based on Michael’s testimony.
1. It shows Terri reacting to pain.
2. It shows Terri has feelings.
3. It shows Terri alert and aware.
4. It shows Terri can swallow to some degree.
Addition, if Terri condition progressed over the years, one can assume that was because of Michael’s neglect to get Terri further therapy and rehabilitation.
Michael sarcasticly writes in his book that Schindlers went looking for doctor after doctor until they could find someone that would give Terri a chance.
Finally, Michael remarks that he would bring Terri outside for fresh air. By the time Terri arrvied at hospice, Terri was pretty much jailed in her room for the last 4 to 5 years of her life.
Michael threatened to arrest anyone who attempted to bring her outside or have her attend any social function.
Of course Michael claims he was protecting Terri’s right to privacy but I don’t buy it. Michael hired a private security guard to protect Terri. Michael could have taken her anywhere and her body guard could have been there to protect Terri’s privacy.
MK you were right to get angry for the way they were talking….seems like so few people have respect for anyone or anything anymore. It’s just terribly disheartening to see how rude and inconsiderate people can be… but you know what, at least this does expose them for who they are, so more people can be made aware of how they treat others!
These people can talk about how “caring” they are for women and all of that(while claiming we are the heartless ones) , but we know because they have made themselves into a mockery by their words on this very site, and how hypocritical they are.
They brag about their compassion for women, and caring for women…but here is a woman, here is a living breathing woman who could have lived a longer life, and who was loved by her family, and did not deserve to die, and yet was starved to death cruelly, for 14 days until her body couldn’t fight it anymore…. And they don’t care!
It’s obvious. These people don’t care one bit about women (or anyone in general). They only care about the ones who agree with them (while it lasts)…only the ones who are good enough for them (while they’re still good enough). Anyone else can just ‘bite the dust’ in their opinions. It’s no matter to them.
They claim to be openminded, but do you ever once see any of them opening their mind to the possibility that they might even be the slightest bit wrong about Terri’s situation? Of course not. Pro-”choice” people are the most closed minded people there are.
Even we who are pro-life second guess ourselves sometimes about different things. But the pro-choice crowd believes they know everything there is to know about life. They are so filled with pride and deceit, they can’t even see in proper perspective.
It’s really saddening because the saddest part is that they can’t even see their own hypocrisy.
Yes, I’m generalizing and I realize some of you are going to try to pick it apart and say ‘well this part doesn’t pertain to me”, or “I’m offended you would insinuate this or that or the other”… but take a look at it from another perspective, would you? Read this whole page and try to see it from a pro-life perspective, where life is precious and sacred and has meaning and worth… and see if you would see yourself as a compassionate hero for women after that.
Reasons why Congress intervened
While I won’t deny that some involved themselves purely for political purposes, below are some of the reason why Congress felt that they should have involved themselves in the Schiavo case.
When it was discovered that an innocent, disabled young woman was going to be starved and dehydrated to death by the order of a court, Congress decided to step in. Upon entering the arena many discovered some disturbing facts that prompted Congress to create federal involvement from the court level.
1. Some realized that Terri wasn’t dying. She wasn’t being kept alive artificially. She was receiving the provision of food and water because she had trouble swallowing (remember she could swallow but docs feared aspiration so no attempts were made). This wasn’t a right to die case. Terri was disabled. Many looked at this from a disability POV.
2. Some looked at the video tapes claiming she was PVS, Comatosed, or brain dead. After seeing evidence of an aware person and consulting neurologists who examined her and consulting the Schindlers and dozens of doctor affidavits, Congress clearly become concerned. There was more the shadow of doubt to doubt Terri’s PVS diagnosis.
3. When Congress saw that a human was going to be starved and dehydrated to death and realized that death row inmates were protected from this by the 8th amendment, Congress really became concerned. They further became concerned when they realized that this act couldn’t be done to an animal without persecution.
5. Many became concerned based on Terri’s wishes on the fact that there was nothing in writing. They became concerned when a adultorous husband was making the decision and the parents only wanted to care for her. Further troubling were caregivers affidavits claiming that Michael was not as sincere as we were lead to believe. Further troubling was fact that when Michael had submitted his 1998 petition to remove Terri’s feeding tube, he poised to inherit $750,000 and was poised to marry his financee Jodi.
6. Many became concerned when they discovered that Terri had no lawyer and that Judge Greer acted as the Judge, Jury, and Executionor in the case. They realized that even death row inmates were entitled to legal representation. Terri never had any legal representation. The Schindlers were represented, Michael was represented but Terri was never represented.
7. Congress became concerned that Terri was being sentenced to death when a great deal of doubt was there concerning her condition. Some were disturbed by the cursory examintions by docs claiming she was PVS (1 hour or less). Others realized that Terri wasn’t recieving the best medical tests available (no fMRI or PET scans). Further they saw that Terri hadn’t been examined in 3 years. They also took note that Terri never had a swallowing test in over 10 years even though GAL Pearse and many other strongly urged Terri to undergo swallowing tests.
8. Some realized the care of Terri was horrible liking being lock up in a hospice room for 3 years.
9. Congress also realized that Terri never recieved a federal review or a trial by jury, 2 things entitled to death row inmates.
Just some reasons why Congress probably got involved.
GOOD GOD!!! I DID NOT SAY ONE FRIGGIN DEROGATORY THING ABOUT TERRI SCHAIVO OR HER BROTHER PEOPLE, GET OFF MY A**!!!!
The worst of these cases of which I am aware is the tragic dehydration of Marjorie Nighbert. Marjorie was a successful businesswoman until a stroke left her disabled. She was unable to swallow safely, but not terminally ill. She was moved from Alabama to a nursing home in Florida where she would receive rehabilitation to help her relearn how to chew and swallow without danger of aspiration. A feeding tube was inserted to ensure that she was properly nourished during her recovery.
Marjorie had once told her brother Maynard that she didn
“One of the greatest minds of our times, Stephen Hawkings, should not be alive according to your reasoning.”
1. I’ve never heard of Stephen Hawkings. Though, it sounds kind of like the astro-physicist Stephen Hawking.
2. He’s sentient, you idiot. Schiavo was not. She was completely and utterly screwed.
” Terri was fed through her stomach. The pathologist’s testimony is a moot point
In your opinion. ”
Uh, not in my opinion. Who cares what the guy said? I doubt he could even FIND anyone in worse condition than Schiavo. Sounds like a liar to me.
Q,
GOOD GOD!!! I DID NOT SAY ONE FRIGGIN DEROGATORY THING ABOUT TERRI SCHAIVO OR HER BROTHER PEOPLE, GET OFF MY A**!!!!
If you didn’t say anything to offend anyone, and as far as I remember, you didn’t, then there is no need to get defensive. Obviously, we didn’t mean you.
As Bethany said, read the posts from beginning to end, and you will realize that a lot of disrespect was going around…but if you weren’t involved, that’s cool.
okay?
It was a long, hard day and night and we were all just getting a little fed up with immature behavior.
So, peace,
mk
Justin,
Like the coward that you are, you have probably made your statements and run away…
I doubt we’ll see much more of you.
Verbal “Ding,Dong,Ditch” if you will.
But if you do come back, let this be a warning.
Either begin to be respectful, both of the dead, the owner of this blog and everyone who speaks on here or you will asked to leave permanently.
I would hate to have to do that, but I’m pretty sure you have to be over 2 1/2 years old to blog on here.
mk
Justin
I’m pretty sure you’ll be either banned or deleted once Jill sees your posts. Your posts have nothing intelligent to offer…all you post have been insults (and not even good ones at that), and swearing. You have nothing worthwhile to contribute here, so I wish you a fond farewell!
Bethany,
I’m off to the clinic in 20 minutes…How about a quick OLP for a good day, both here and there?
Oh, and good morning!
mk
Good morning to you too, MK
I would not want to be kept on life support because I’m not a selfish attention-whore. I don’t want to be a drain on society and a burden on my family. Who would want that? And are you that afraid to die? I don’t believe in death anyway. As a Christian I believe in an everlasting life.
Wanting to live is a whorish act?
Have you kept up with the conversation at all? Terri was not attached to artificial life support.
What does fearing death have to do with anything? If you are a Christian you should know that the Bible does not provide justification for murder of an innocent in any case.
In fact, “hands that are quick to shed innocent blood” is one of the 7 abominations.
Yes, I actually would be very scared of eternal life after death if I was a person like you, supportive of shedding innocent blood.
If God is able to see each sparrow fall to the ground, is He not more able to see innocent people dying? And do you not think that He will reward this wrong justly? God does not condone murder.
Since you say you are a Christian, consider this:
“Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done? (Proverbs 24:11-12).”
Below are numerous accounts that showed that Terri was aware of her environment in a very primitive way.
In 1991 PT session Therapists reported that Terri was saying word “stop”
In the Mal Trial video, behaviors where shown to the court that showed Terri was apparently discomforted to some of things that happening to her.
Carla Iyer reported that Terri would say help me, mom, pain numerous times.
Heidi Law reported that Terri would follow her around the room with her eyes.
Fr. Molanowski and Frank Pavone reported Terri was very receptive to prayer.
Numerous caregivers reported that Terri would often laugh at jokes.
David Gibbs saw Terri try to say “I love you.” to Mary Schindler.
Bobby Schindlers reported that Terri smiled and laughed when he mentioned he attended a Bruce Springsteen concert.
Tom Broderson discovered that Terri has distinct likes and dislikes to certain types of music.
Some caregivers reported that Terri would fuss if the radio station was changed to music she did not care for.
Terri reacted different to Mary than she did to Bob Schindler and would often put on a “Lemon Face.” for Bob.
Suzanne and Barbara Weller reported that Terri tried to say “I want to live.”
Terri tried to get out of her chair when she was told on the phone that she was going to be starved to death.
Terri followed Dr. Hammersfahr’s commands to open her eyes.
Terri laughed when she was told about her “Lazy Eye”
Michael seems to have altered the testimony of both Scott and Joan Schiavo in his book. I assume this was done to give his book just right impression he wanted and possibly to get additional sympathy.
Scott Schiavo:
pg. 144 Michael writes:”Scott recounted what he told Judge Greer had happened back in February 1988….”"Basically, she was gone, and we had to sit there for – it was Friday, and it was almost two days that we sat there and watched this machine blow air into her and suck it out, until she passed away.”
However, Scott Schiavo actually testfied to the following:
Q. How long was your grandmother on the ventilator?
A. From the early morning hours till mid afternoon of the same day.
That’s certainly not 2 days. Maybe, several hours. Flaw #1.”We went to lunch afterward at a restaurant called the Buck Hotel.”
But Scott testfied to the following:
A. Yes, there was. At the luncheon that we had, you know, my family, friends, and stuff.
Q. Kind of describe that for us.
A. We went to a, its called a country club but we went there for a luncheon afterwards.
Buck Hotel is not a country club. Flaw #2
“And Terri was sitting right to the left of me, and she turned around and looked me right in the eyes, and she said,’Not me, I would never want to be left that way. Don’t ever let them do that to me.’”
However Scott testfied to the following:”And Terri made mention at that conversation,”If I ever go like that, just let me go. don’t leave me there. I don’t want to kept alive on a machine.”
Joan Schiavo:
Pg. 159
“Joan and my brother Bill lost their first child, a little girl, who was born with the umbilical cord around her neck. In that same conversation with Terri about the patient in the movie, Joan began talking about their experience with the death of the baby, and it’s a story she also told Judge Greer.”We were just sitting and talking about the baby. If she had stayed alive – because of the cord being wrapped around her neck – she probably would have been brain dead, and my husband and I would have to make that decision, if we were faced with it, if we wanted to keep her alive like that or not. And as we were talking, I said that as hard as it would be, it would be a decision where we’d probably pull the plug, because I couldn’t stand to see her like that.’Cause it wasn’t a life for her, she only a little baby. And Terri agreed with me.”
This is a complete fabrication filled half truths.
Observe what really happen. Joan testified to the following:
A. A friend of mine and her husband had a baby. It was their first baby, and the baby was born sickly. They had to put the baby on a ventilator or machines to keep the baby alive. And they had to make that decision if they wanted to take the baby off the tubes and all.
Later joan testfies the following:
Q. The movie on television was that, that occurred before or after the — did you testify that occurred before the conversations you had about the baby? Let me ask it again. The conversation you had with Terri about a TV show and the diver not wanting be on life support, was that before or after the situation came up with your girlfriend?
A. After.
This definitely reflected in George Greer Ruling:”Into the former category the court places statements regarding Karen Ann Quinlin and the infant child of the friend of Joan Schiavo.”
Five Different Stories
Michael has given 5 different stories regarding Terri’s collapse. Lets look at each story.
Story #1 1992 Depo
Michael says he came home around 12:30am or 1:00am. He says that Terri was not up and woke up when he climbed into bed. Terri says good night to him. Next Michael claims he was getting out of bed FOR SOME REASON around 5:00am and hears Terri collapse. He runs to her sees her lying ON HER BACK. Michael says he was holding Terri trying to wake her up but couldn’t. Michael goes and calls 911. He goes back continues to hold Terri. Next Michael calls Bobby Schindler andhe arrives few minutes later. The paramedics arrive shortly after that.
Story #2 1992 Mal Trial
Michael says he came home around 11:30pm or 12:00am. Now Michael claims he doesn’t recall whether Terri was up or not and whether he talked to Terri or not.
Story # 3 2000 Trial
Michael claims he came home late. Now Michael claims that Terri woke up and heard him. Terri says good night to him. Next Michael claims he was getting out of bed FOR SOME REASON and he hears Terri fall. He goes over to her and he says she is ON HER STOMACH. He rolls her over. He can’t wake her up. Michael goes and calls Bobby Schindler and then goes back to Terri. He holds Terri. He rocks her. A few minutes later Bobby Schindler shows up.
Story #4 Larry King Interview 2003
Michael claims he came home around 2:00am. Michael climbs into bed. Terri wakes up and says good night to him and gives him a kiss. Next Michael claims around 4:30am, he woke FOR SOME REASON and he hears Terri fall. He goes over to Terri and rolls her over. He holds her in his arms and tries to shake her up. He calls 911. He calls Bobby Schindler. A few minutes later the paramedics arrive.
Story #5 Michael’s Book
Michael claims he arrives home around 12:30am or 1:00am. Michael climbs into bed. Terri wakes up. Terri says Hello and says “I love you.” She kisses him and says good night. Around 5:30am, Michael wakes up TO USE THE BATHROOM. He hears Terri collapse. He goes over to her. He rolls her over. He goes and calls 911. He goes back to Terri. Now Michael claims HE CALLED TERRI’S PARENTS. He goes back to Terri. Next Michael calls Bobby Schindler. He goes back to Terri. A few minutes later, Bobby Schindler shows up.
During that time I gently spoke to her, built rapport and trust, sang
to her, played music for her, and encouraged her to vocalize. Over the
twenty days or so that I visited with Terri, I observed that, while
Terri is distrustful of strangers, she gradually warmed up to me (and
not so gradually after Bob, Mary and I sang “Those Were the Days” to
her as a trio!). Terri responds to a variety of stimulii, including
responding to both her mother’s and my voices, both in person and over
the phone, by fixing her attention and frequently by laughing. When I
sang to her, she often VOCALIZED, in her best effort to sing along with
me. She recognizes and takes great pleasure in certain singers and
songs which ARE her favorites (most especially John Denver
singing “Country Roads”). She learned to love several songs I sang to
her with which she didn’t seem to be familiar with, but others she
never learned to appreciate (just not her cup of tea, obviously). She
responded to gentle requests if given time and patience, such as
lifting her right leg (three times out of four requests, the other time
she lifted her left leg instead). While she does not have consistent
control over her eyes to blink or look this way or that, she has
excellent control over her breathing, diaphram and voice, and will
vocalize
in various patterns if asked. While trying to work out a yes/no system
with sounds, Terri initially answered the question “Terri, are you ten
feet tall” by moaning twice, which is the response for “No,” then she
spontaneously whispered the word “No” in response to the question
“Terry,
are you purple?”. At that point I abandoned the sounding system and
started
trying to teach her to say “Yeah” as best as she could. Bob Schindler
has several recordings of her sort of saying the word “Yeah” shortly
after that.
Unfortunately, I was then taken off Terri’s visitors list, but on
successive occasions (as recently as last October, approximately two
years since I last saw her in person), when her father placed
a phone to Terri’s ear so I could talk to her, she laughed as soon
as she heard my voice, andtried to sing along with me when I sang
to her over the phone.
Terri is not just “in there,” she is very responsive, she loves music,
and she is my friend.
Under Felos’s examination, Joan testified to the following:
A. Yeah, We watched a movie one time on television. It was about somebody. I don’t remember. I don’t remember the movie.
Joan testfied that she and Terri watched a movie but Joan says she doesn’t remember the movie.
Given that Joan Schiavo suddenly remembered the movie memory after 9 years, this is not suprising.
However, in the testimony paragraph, Joan seems to give contradictory statements regarding her statement that she said she didn’t remember the movie
“It was about a guy who had an accident and he was in a coma. There was no help for him”
This statement directly follows her statement that she didn’t remember the movie. This sound contradictory.
Later when being questioned by Campbell, Joan’s memory suddenly starts to improve despite her repeated claims that she doesn’t remember the movie
Q. Can you describe the scene in the movie with the man and the tubes?
A. He was a younger man. I don’t remember the movie. If I’m not mistaken, it was diving accident in the pool. He passed away at the end of the movie of the movie. I don’t remember the movie. I really don’t remember the movie.
Joan repeatly claims she doesn’t remember the movie and yet she can recall the it was a diving accident and the man died at the end. Joan also recalls other details about the movie
A. In the movie he was in a hospital setting.
Q. Do you recall where the tubes were coming from?
A. His mouth. He had some in his arm.
Joan just testified she didn’t remember the movie. I find very convenient and suspect that Joan could only recall the part where Terri made her alleged comments. This was after 9 years.
http://www.centerforajustsociety.org/uploads/terri012905.mp3
This is an old interview in which Ken Connor talks to John Sipos. 20 Minutes long. Very Good
Talking Points
- Terri has not recieved due process equal to that of convicted mass murderers and yet has recieved a death sentence.- Terri Schiavo never recieved independent counsel
- Terri death sentence is cruel and unsual punishment that would be unconstitutional if given to a death row inmate.- The Florida Supreme court never reviewed to case related to removal of the feeding tube (Judge Baird Order related to it) only the constitutionality over Terri’s Law – They were trying to protect their own turf.- Ted Bundy recieved more due process than Terri Schiavo.- Terri never had a GAL at the time the decision was made to remove the feeding tube.- Judge Greer served as advocate and adujucaitor in the Guardianship court – The Schindler’s lawyers weren’t able to challenge or cross examine Judge Greer.
Connor ends on the note that Terri Schiavo never received independent counsel or a trial by Jury.
http://theempirejournal.com/extras/siposanderson052905.mp3
Pat Anderson Speaks after Terri Schiavo’s death. About 30 minutes long.
http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/resolve.asp?rafile=wo_02182005.rm
David Gibbs and Bob Schindler are interviewed in February 2005. About 1 hour long. Very good.
http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/resolve.asp?rafile=wo_06172005.rm
Bobby Schiavo and Lawyer Michael Gayor discuss Terri after she dies and the legalities and problems with it.
“Like the coward that you are, you have probably made your statements and run away…”
Uh…excuse me? I’m terribly sorry, but it was 5 am when I commented, so I went to bed after that. Don’t be such a little sissy bitch.
Oh, and FYI, it’s pretty easy to insult me when you’ve prevented me from posting. Suddenly I need to sign into Typekey, now? Give me a break.
And what do you mean, respect for the dead? I’m showing respect, and saying that taking out Schiavo’s feeding tube was the best option for her. The ones who are being idiots here are the ones who call it “evil”. Yeah, that isn’t a loaded statement at all.
“I’m pretty sure you’ll be either banned or deleted once Jill sees your posts. Your posts have nothing intelligent to offer”
Except for maybe calling out the pathologist on BS for having the gall to claim that he’s helped patients in WORSE condition than Schiavo eat – like a worse condition even exists.
Also, I noted that the feeding tube is literally her life support system, and you were dumb enough to say that it has no relation to a more standard life support system, and removing the tube is different than “pulling the plug”. If I’m going to get banned for being crass, you should be banned just for being ignorant.
David Bryer was a patient in Pinellis County, Florida who exactly like Terri Schiavo. He was PVS and I believe his wife went to court to remove the feeding tube.
In 2002, David Bryer died. I do not know if his feeding tube was removed or he died of natural causes.
Apparently though, there was trial on this matter in front of Judge Seth Walker (now retired).
Judge Walker was a pro-life judge and refused to remove his feeding tube.
Diana Lynne in her book Terri’s Story presents a piece of his opinion.”You feed goldfish.”"This court must give deference to human life, no matter its state. The lack of medical ["probability"] of neurological improvement is insufficient to command its termination. We must feed David Bryer.”
I don’t know if the Clear and Convincing evidence was met in that case but it should be noted that Felos believed the feeding tube should have been removed anyway from Terri Schiavo in light of best interest (In case the Clear and Convincing evidence did not exist.)
It should also be noted that Judge Seth Walker was known for his pro-life religious views. Judge Walker was in the St. Petersburg Division.
In 1997, Felos sought to get case taken out of the St. Petersburg division and placed in the Clearwater Division.
This probably because Felos did not want to take a chance of Judge Walker preciding over the Schiavo case.
Felos was successful and ultimately the case was heard in front of Judge Greer instead of Judge Walker.
Too bad for Terri Schiavo.
She may been spared if Judge Walker heard the case.
James, you are awesome!
Some of the information you have posted so far I already knew, but there is so much more that I never knew before. I appreciate so much having all this information. Thank you!
I have ALWAYS believed that Michael had something to do with Terri’s coma, and I believe he is a murderer and deserves to rot in prison… it’s sad that he is praised for being a devoted husband when he was nothing of the sort, in my eyes. He was a controlling and abusive husband who would stop at nothing till his wife was dead.
And I agree, wouldn’t it have been nice if a judge who respected life could have only heard her case.
Except for maybe calling out the pathologist on BS for having the gall to claim that he’s helped patients in WORSE condition than Schiavo eat – like a worse condition even exists.
A worse condition than Terri’s does exist…it’s called the Persistent Vegetative State, remember?
I’m very sure there are varying degrees of bad conditions in between what she had, and the PVS.
” A worse condition than Terri’s does exist…it’s called the Persistent Vegetative State, remember?”
Sounds kind of like what Terri was in…
“sounds” and “kind of like”….very scientific arguments…I’m impressed.
Terri’s wishes – Everyone is saying that there was Clear and Convincing Evidence that Terri Schiavo would have wanted the feeding tube to be removing. However, reviewing these facts put heavy clout on Terri’s so-called wishes.
1. Terri Collapses in 1990.
2. In 1992, the Mal Trial is held.
3. Michael testfies the following – “I believe in the vows that I took with my wife,
___
28
1 through sickness, in health, for richer or poorer. I
2 married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the
3 rest of my life with her. I’m going to do that.”
4. It during this time Michael states to 3 different people (Trudy Capone, Cindy Shook, Fran Casler) that he does not know what Terri’s wishes are or even what he should do with her (what are his future plans).
5. Michael is awarded $300,000 LOC and Terri is awarded $750,000.
6. Michael and the Schindlers have a fight.
7. Michael goes to Terri’s doctor. He says she isn’t going to recover.
8. Micheal gets a new girlfriend and is the inheritor of Terri’s $750,000.
9. Michael now believes that Terri Schiavo doesn’t want to live in her condition and orders a UTI refusal pursuant to her death (Under the doctor’s advice).
10. When Michael is asked about removing Terri’s feeding tube, Michael responds – “I can’t do that to Terri.”
11. Between 1993 and 1995 the first guardianship suit occurs.
12. Days after the suit ends in 1995, Michael does the second UTI refusal. He is unsucessful.
13. At the end of 1995, Michael contacts George Felos through his attorney Deb Bushnell.
14. For the next 1.5 years, legal actions are taken. Michael signs a contact with Felos.
15. July 1997 – Michael mom dies.
16. August 1997 – Felos sends a letter to Bob Schindler about Terri’s feeding tube removal.
17. May 1998 – The first petition is submitted.
18. GAL Pearse investigates – He askes Michael; “We there others”(Terri’s wishes). Michael says no.
19. December 1998 – GAL Pearse submits his report. Michael is conflicted and his claims are not credible.
20. June 1999 – GAL Pearse is discharged on advice from Felos. No other GAL is appointed.
21. September 1999 – Scott and Joan Schiavo come forward and state they know Terri’s wishes after being contacted by Felos.
22. 2000 Trial – Scott and Joan and Michael testify to Terri’s wishes. Scott and Joan claim they never told Michael anything over the 9 year period.
The Following is review of the Clear and Convincing Evidence used to condemn Terri to death:
Michael Schiavo:
Train Trip wish – Terri told Michael when she was 22 years old that if she ever became a burden (disabled), she wouldn’t want to live like that. The substance of what Terri’s actually said, varies from the different testimonies Michael has given.
TV Wish – A couple of times when watching TV, Terri said to Michael – Who would want to live like that (referring to life support programs.)?
Scott Schiavo:
Terri shared her opinion at a luncheon with Scott that she objected being ever put on ventilator is she at the end of her life (she is dying).
Joan Schiavo:
Was watching a TV program with Joan about a man in coma after diving accident a reportly voiced objection about being allowed to live in such a state. Interestingly, while Joan claimed to discuss elements of the movie, Joan testifed 3 different times that could not remember the movie.
This is all the Clear and Covincing Evidence that there was.
Terri never made any mention of not wanting to be kept alive in PVS state.
Terri never asked for a feeding tube to be removed.
The Clear and Convincing standard is very high.
The Doctors and Terri Schiavo
At time of Terri’s death, the Schindlers had nearly 40 doctors on the record who stated that Terri wasn’t PVS or new testing was needed to confirm her diagnosis.
Many of these doctors relied soley on the video tape clips and their own personal experiences and expertise in brain injury and PVS.
However, several doctors did manage to examine Terri or at least observe her and many did see her medical records (at least some of them). Take Dr. Sara Mele for instance who was able see Terri medical records from Medaplex.
Michael and his confederates undercut the Schindler’s 40 docs by stating that many of them never examined Terri and only relied on the video tape clips.
However, Michael neglects one critical fact that was never pointed out; Michael would not let any doctors to examine Terri (Schinder docs).
In fact, Michael got a court order which prevented any Schindler doc from examining Terri or conducting any tests on her.
This was part of Michael and Felos’s plan to prevent the Schindlers from upsetting the PVS diagnosis (which was critical in insuring Terri’s death) and getting her treatment.
Michael could always use the defense and he did, that they didn’t examine Terri when in fact Michael prevented them from examining Terri.
Dr. Hammersfar and several docs wanted to examine Terri in 2001, but Michael prevented it and Dr. Hammersfar was only able to examine her when the Appeals Court ordered it (during that time Michael petitioned 2 times to have Terri killed).
But when we examine the examination factor, we see that it is quite weak. Observe:
Dr. Barnhill – Examined Terri for 10 minutes one time and I believe for 1 hour another time.
Dr. Karp – Examined Terri for 1 hour.
Dr. Cranford – Examined Terri for 45 minutes.
Dr. Greer – Examined Terri for 30 minutes
Dr. Bambakidis – Examined Terri for 30 minutes
Dr. Gambone – Examined her for 1 hour once and 10 minutes every 4 mouths after that.
Total Time of examinations over 4 or 5 year period – A little more than 5 hours.
The earlier docs did examine her (Dr. Barras, Dr. De Sousa) much more extensively in the early years, but back then the MCS wasn’t widely known and was never revisited by those docs.
I will agree the early docs probably had great deal insight into Terri’s condition. After Dr. Barnhill, examinations of Terri were quite weak and the MCS diagnosis became much more well known. However, Terri was never given to most advanced tests to confirm this diagnosis and the autopsy (Dr. Nelson reported it) did say that Terri could have been MCS.
Several Doctors did observe her and deemed her not PVS or questionalable PVS:
Dr. Cheshire – Obeserved Terri for 90 minutes. Saw her medical records and uneditted video tapes.
Dr. Avery – Obeserved Terri for 30 minutes.
Dr. Carpenter – Observed Terri for 30 minutes
Dr. Young – Observed Terri for 30 minutes.
2 Doctors did run examinations on her:
Dr. Hammersfahr – Examined Terri for over 3 hours.
Dr. Maxfield – Examined Terri for nearly 3 hours. Some argue the Dr. Maxfield was a radiologist conducting a neurological examination. However, Dr. Gambone wasn’t a neurologist either and conducted a neurological examination in much less time. Both had full disclosure to Terri’s medical history.
Between Hammersfahr and Maxfield Terri was examined longer than all of Michael’s other doctors combined.
Also the following caregivers were able to make observations too:
Carla Iyer
Heidi Law
Carolyn Johnson
Trudy Capone
You also have the following people who questioned PVS:
Fr. Molnowski
Bob Schindler, Mary Schindler, Suzanne Schindler, and Bobby Schindler
Pat Anderson, Tom Boderson (speech therapist) and David Gibbs
Michael resisted any testing needed to further confirm her diagnosis even though the Schindlers pleaded adamantly that Terri needed further testing based on dozens of affidavits from doctors accross the country.
Later, Michael claimed he wanted an autopsy to prove to the world the extent of Terri’s brain damage.
Michael resisted any and all efforts to have Terri further diagnosised but after she was dead had no problem have different tests performed on her to prove her diagnosis.
Some Argue that Terri’s CT Scan showed clear evidence of Terri’s PVS Diagnosis. While a CT scan does show structural damage, a CT scan can only provide little into functional ability of a damaged brain. A bad CT scan does not automatically mean a person is PVS.
Some argue that Terri had 3 EEGs and they were all flat. Terri’s EEGs were not flat but were abnormal. Several of EEGs may have not been completely accurate because of artifact.
Some argue that the autopsy proved Terri’s brain was mush. While autopsy did report severe brain damage,it did report the cognitive areas of Terri’s brain were intact. Dr. Thogmartin also could not determine what effect 13 days of dehydration had on the shrinkage of Terri’s brain or her brain damage.
It should also be noted that Karen Ann Queilan was also PVS. However, her brain damage was focused on her thalmus and not the cerebral cortext. With Terri it was reversed. Terri’s cerebral cortex was damaged, but Terri’s thalmus was fairly intact (there was still damage). Scientists are beginning to understand that the Thalmus might play more active role in human consciousnes.
In a final note, Terri was never examined again after the 2002 trial even though radical new testing had become available that could have answered many troubling questions experts voiced about her condition.
“”sounds” and “kind of like”….very scientific arguments…I’m impressed.
”
What, so she wasn’t in a persistent vegetative state? Well, what was she in, if you’re so smart?
Justin,
If you bothered to actually read anything that James has been posting you’d know…
This is not a website for children…perhaps you should go to Nick.com. Sponge Bob seems much more your speed. If you need any help getting the jokes, come back and we’ll explain them to you.
mk
lol ;D
We have seen the Clear and Convincing Evidence that used to condemn Terri to death. Of course there some very trouble facts surrounding these alleged wishes:
Michael waited 8 after the fact before stating that Terri Schiavo would not want a feeding tube.
While Michael did say in 1993 depo that Terri wouldn’t want to live in such a condition, at around the same time Michael was asked about the prospect of removing the feedinh tube. Michael’s response was “I couldn’t do that to Terri.”
Michael’s claims were in direct contradiction to Michael’s sworn testimony and commitments said at the 1992 Mal Trial.
Although, Michael claims he still had hope at the time Terri might recover, Michael was suing for 20 Million dollars.
The the value of suit based on the doctor’s failure to diagnosis Terri correctly was derived from expert witnesses on Michael’s behalf that estimated that Terri would live to around the age of 50. To that end, her condition would require purchasing a special house and van for her needs. Terri would also need expensive rehab and nursing care too. All of this was caculated to be around 20 Million dollars.
When Michael submitted his 1998 petition to remove the feeding tube, Michael had made his intentions clear that intended to marry Jodi.
It was also determined that around $750,000 existed in Terri’s trust and Michael was sole heir of it when she died.
GAL Pearse investigated, and discovered Michael’s financial conflict. GAL Pearse, not Michael Schiavo suggested he set up a charity offer to separate himself from the conflict.
Michael set up the charity offer but it had special stipulations.
It required the Schindlers to drop their suit and side with Michael.
This was something that Schindler simply would not do and went against their core believe on the removal of the feeding tube.
Michael would not donate the money to charity unless the Schindlers sided with them.
If the court made the decision, which it did, Michael was under no legal obilgation to donate the money.
At the time the decision was made in 2000 (This is a fundemental key point), Michael was set to inherit $750,000 with no legal obligation to donate the money.
Neither the Schindlers or Michael knew the case would last another 5 years. Michael even wrote that he was suprised to learn that the Schindlers could appeal the decision.
As why Michael refused money bribes in 2005…..
To many people became involved in the case and it was about pushing the agenda.
Felos even told Michael when he considered giving up, that case wasn’t about Terri anymore…it was about the agenda.
adult dvd rental