Wasserman Schultz was “face of Florida’s push” for Schiavo death
by Kelli
Looking back at the appeals and legislation surrounding the Terri Schiavo case makes my head spin. At the time, my family and I followed every twist, every turn, and every detail of her family’s struggle to keep her alive….
One person I remember well from that time is Long Island’s own Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who decided to stay in Florida after earning her Political Science degrees there (along with a certificate in political campaigning that would serve her well)…. Wasserman Shultz was the public face of Florida’s push to let Schiavo die….
Wasserman Schultz seemed to soak it up, hopping from interview to interview. When she told everyone she had “just gone through this with her husband’s aunt” – not her own child or blood relation – I cringed. Her motives seemed more blatantly political than personal to me….
She seemed less concerned with Terri Schiavo than making a name for herself. And for all the airtime time she copped during the legal mess that was the Schiavo case, I can only find one video of Wasserman Schultz speaking about it during that time. Every appearance she made leading up to the death of Terri Schiavo seems to have been scrubbed from the internet….
Wasserman Schultz repeatedly criticized Terri’s Bill as “overstepping Congressional authority.” She ranted about “separation of powers” and “states’ rights.” “When I ran for Congress, I didn’t ask my constituents for the right to make these decisions,” she said. “We’re not God.” I can only imagine how spitting mad she would have been if George W. Bush had forced the Affordable Care Act on her constituents.
~ Susan D. Harris, American Thinker, March 9
[Photos via HollywoodRepublican.net and allvoices.com]
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.
What I probably will never forget about this case was Terri’s so-called husband’s insistence that Terri must die even after her family, her parents and siblings said they would take care of her, he could divorce Terri, no longer have any responsibility for her care, go on about his life, live with or marry his “other woman/mistress” (who if I remember correctly, they had children together although he and Terri were NOT divorced). He wanted no part of that agreement Terri had to die, he refused to divorce her and turn her over to her parents. Does anyone know what he had to gain by her murder by starvation? Did Terri have a large insurance policy he wanted to get his hands on? I understand the adulterous other woman was insistent that Terri die too. She could not even imagine herself in Terri’s place if she became brain-damaged or severely injured. If he would do this to his first wife what made her think that he would not do the same thing to her? I remember thinking if there are any two people that deserve to reap what they have sown, those were 2 people were it. I repent and ask God’s forgiveness but this case was so horrific what he and ”his woman” did to Terri, starving and dehydrating her to death. This is a very painful, horrible way to die. I would not have treated a dog like they treated Terri. I remember Fr. Frank Pavone going to visit Terri and saying someone had put a bouquet of flowers in a vase in her room on the night stand to keep them alive but her ex had the court order armed guards at her bedside to make sure NO ONE GAVE TERRI A DRINK OF WATER. God help her. Rest in peace sweet Terri in the arms of the Savior. No one should ever be treated like that, no one.
As a LTC nurse for many years Im stayin outta this one this time. Sorry thats not living its existing.
I side with Michael Schievo.
Terri Schiavo was dehydrated to death, which has to be one of the most agonizing ways imaginable to die. This case was one of the most INhumane I’ve ever seen.
Michael Schiavo’s insistence that Terri wouldn’t have wanted to live that way was sketchy and totally unprovable. What’s to stop any abusive, cheating spouse from cutting off life support from their spouse in the event that something tragic occurred, on the mere insistence that “they told me once they wouldn’t want to live that way”? I mean, hey, even a loving husband can “off” his wife and preborn child on that basis, just like Marlise Munoz. Gives me the shivers.
And Heather… your argument on “living” vs. “existing” is the same one we hear all the time, except it’s pro-aborts saying it so they can kill the preborn. And since you side with Michael Schiavo, it looks like you didn’t exactly stay out of this one.
Kel with a natural death a person will lapse into a coma and die. Do you agree that I should have to perform CPR on a 105 year old man? My living will states no Tube feeding and no life support! Terri did not want to live that way so her husband respected her wishes. He is now an RN
When a person has a peg tube it is generally because they are on an NPO status which means nothing by mouth. You cant give them food or water or they will choke to death. The swallowing mechanisms no longer work. They will get asparation pneumonia.
Sorry aspiration pneumonia. Nobody in my family wants life support. We are given a life span for a reason. Thats why I switched to hospice. Its for people who are terminally ill and they have decided to allow nature to take its course.
Heather…do we or do we not believe that GOD is the author of life? Terri was ALIVE. They didn’t simply take her off life support and let her die. They KILLED her in the most inhumane and cruel way possible.
It doesn’t matter if WE think her life had value or not. She was a human life. She had value simply because she was a human being. I feel like you’re bringing forth the same arguments used by pro-aborts to defend late term abortion “he will suffer if we don’t abort him. He’ll merely exist. It isn’t a life”…
A human being doesn’t have to achieve some arbitrary standard of living in order to have value as a human being. It doesn’t matter if WE think her life wasn’t worth living. That was HER life and it was her own and she was alive. Our wishes and thoughts beliefs do not steal the value of someone else’s life away. Thats what mothers who abort try to do. “I don’t want this baby!!” so now the baby has no value because the mom doesn’t want it. Even if no one on this earth wants that baby that baby’s life has value because our inherent worth as human beings doesn’t come from others wanting us. It doesn’t come from us having an active lifestyle, or a high-functioning brain or a great standard of living…our worth comes because we are human beings created by GOD Who gave us these rights that NO ONE has the right to take away. These rights are not granted to us by our parents or by the government. Rights are given by GOD not political parties.
Matthew 25:34-46
Pay special attention though to these last verses–I’m copying and pasting:
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
And Kel a lot of those reports about Michael S were proven to be false. Terri had an eating disorder and the lack of KCL caused her heart to fail. She did NOT want to live this way. I would have done the same thing her ex husband did. Respected my spouses last wishes!!!
It doesn’t matter if WE think her life had value or not. She was a human life. She had value simply because she was a human being. I feel like you’re bringing forth the same arguments used by pro-aborts to defend late term abortion “he will suffer if we don’t abort him. He’ll merely exist. It isn’t a life”…
That’s because that’s exactly what Heather is doing here. Using a pro-abortion argument to defend the killing of a person who had not explicitly expressed a wish to die in such a situation. Unless you believe the person who stood to benefit most from her death.
Do you agree that I should have to perform CPR on a 105 year old man?
If the 105 year old man has not written a DNR, then yes. I believe that would be your job.
My living will states no Tube feeding and no life support!
And that is your choice. You HAVE A living will, and I assume that knowledge is shared by all of your family members and/or medical providers. If Terri had a living will or a DNR, do you think the Schiavo case would have even been an issue? She would never even have been on life support if any legal documentation were in place.
Terri did not want to live that way so her husband respected her wishes.
And you know this how? Her parents – her entire FAMILY other than Michael Schiavo – were unaware of these “wishes.”
He is now an RN
Well, Kevorkian was a doctor, so we’ve got creeps in all areas of medicine, I guess…
I really dont want to argue with pro lifers but maybe years in LTC has jaded me. All I can say is I am anti life support unless there is hope for recovery.
And Kel a lot of those reports about Michael S were proven to be false.
What reports? All I heard was speculation. There were plenty of facts on Michael Schiavo, however, some of which were laid out by Prolifer L, above.
Terri had an eating disorder and the lack of KCL caused her heart to fail.
I have seen information that this was a possibility, but other reports state that the cause was unknown.
She did NOT want to live this way. I would have done the same thing her ex husband did. Respected my spouses last wishes!!!
What “last wishes”? She lapsed into a coma! She did not have a living will. The only person who “knew” what Terri supposedly would have wanted was the man who stood to benefit most from her death.
http://catholicherald.com/stories/The-Schiavo-Case-Right-to-Die-or-Right-to-Kill,3362
Thats not really fair. There are a lot of doctors and nurses who do NOT want life support. In fact I dont think Ive ever met one.
A situation like that is so tough, but the quote prompts me to ask: how dangerous are these precedents for all of us? Do people exploit the vulnerable for their own political gain, with no care for who it will hurt in the present or future? Absolutely.
Thats not really fair. There are a lot of doctors and nurses who do NOT want life support. In fact I dont think Ive ever met one.
How many of the medical professionals you know have actively fought, in the absence of a living will or DNR, to have their loved one removed from life support after that loved one received a large settlement for care?
As the article I linked to states, Terri’s case was NOT a “right to die” case.
And when people are kept alive in a PVS its a HUGE pay day for the doctors and the nursing home. The nursing home takes everything you own so that you can lay in a bed for 20 years. Allow me to paint the pretty picture. These people get sores they defecate on themselves or in a diaper they get infection after infecton their mouths get crusty their teeth rot. They have a catheter. They get bag after bag of tube feed or it is continuous. No Thanks!
Terri was not in the process of dying nor was she on life support – they were feeding her and she was responsive (limited). What they decided to do was starve and dehydrate her to death. If she was close to dying, she would have died on only a day or two. It took at least 12 days, which means that her body was not close to death, and was not going to die immediately.
This is the key issue here. If you are not close to death, you can not do something or omit something that would cause one’s death. And yet that was allowed here.
The fresh flowers in her room got more water than she did. This was a deliberate act. In the process of dying, yes one can turn down CPR and other extreme heroic measures, but food and water (no matter how administered) is considered normal. Her body did not reject food – but she did have trouble with swallowing and (if I recall correctly) that is why she had a feeding tube. But with the court decision, she was not allowed food and water that way either.
She was a severely disabled woman, who was not in the process of dying, but was purposefully denied food and water so she would die.
I read every disposition in the case. It was ghastly.
We don’t plan on breaking a leg, or being in a car crash or suddenly becoming disabled. But when it happens, we are owed good and compassionate care. Her family offered to take over all of her care and her medical bills. They offered her husband to be able to walk away, get a divorce and marry that other woman. He would have none of it. And Terri paid the price.
May we have loved ones that want to take care of us, even if we are disabled, instead of insisting that we are starved to death. We all deserve better than that.
Ask a doctor or nurse. Ask Mary or Jill if they would want to live this way. Also since doctors get a fat pay check for keeping people alive this way then you should include them in the creep department…dont forget the nursing homes.
heather,
You didn’t try hard enough to “stay out of it.” :)
I have experience in that area, Heather, and I feel sad that you would rather die of starvation than let me help you live out your natural span.
If the folks working at the facility where I volunteer were looking for a big payday, they would be in a different profession. But what scares me is the effect of the ulilitarian view on my life. We do NOT know all there is about human conciousness. And what effect will that have on my care? In a facility where 90% of the employees respect the dignity of each person I’m going to get a different quality of care than in a place where 90% of the employees think I’m a waste of resources and one slippery slope away from the Soylent Green factory.
Wow, Michael Schiavo is now an RN? I hope he never takes “care” of me or anyone in my family!
Ask a doctor or nurse. Ask Mary or Jill if they would want to live this way.
AGAIN, you continue to miss the forest for the trees.
Mary or Jill have the choice to decide now what they want. They can inform their families and they can write up a living will and DNR. Terri Schiavo had none of those things… and SUDDENLY, MAGICALLY, after suing to get money for Terri’s care, Michael Schiavo “remembered” that once during a conversation years before – which he failed to recall prior to the winning of over $1M in the lawsuit – Terri said she wouldn’t want to live like that. How very, very convenient for him, since he had gone and had kids with a woman on the side while still married to Terri.
You are blind to the facts of this case, Heather, because you are inserting your own desires about your end of life care into this scenario, when you don’t know what Terri’s desires were, and neither did her cheating husband. He invented them after he won the settlement and already had a relationship with someone else. Jill personally knows Bobby Schindler, Terri’s brother, the head of her foundation. A foundation that fights to save the lives of people like Terri who did not have end of life directives and are at risk of being treated as non-persons with no right to life.
Also since doctors get a fat pay check for keeping people alive this way then you should include them in the creep department…dont forget the nursing homes.
Are you claiming that despite DNRs and living wills that doctors are keeping people alive AGAINST those end of life directives, Heather?
Republicans reflect the way that most of America thinks.
But Americans don’t vote with our heads. We vote with our emotions.
And Democrats like Debbie Wasser-name are masters at tugging the heartstrings with emotional appeals. (Notice how quickly debates about the rights of the unborn get spun into rants about raped women?) Democrats are also masters of promises of free stuff (never mind that we will pay a premium for the privilege of buying for each other).
This is why Democrats will continue to rule over a sheepish America that is never satisfied with our rulers.
“Republicans reflect the way that most of America thinks.”
Except that’s not true for all Republican policies, particularly not in my generation and particularly not the current incarnation of the GOP. Any poll will tell you the same so I’m not interested in argument about. If you really, really believe that the reason Dems win some elections is because people secretly agree with the Republicans but don’t vote for them for… weird reasons, then there’s not a poll in the world that will convince you otherwise.
“If you are not close to death, you can not do something or omit something that would cause one’s death. And yet that was allowed here. The fresh flowers in her room got more water than she did. This was a deliberate act. In the process of dying, yes one can turn down CPR and other extreme heroic measures, but food and water (no matter how administered) is considered normal. Her body did not reject food – but she did have trouble with swallowing and (if I recall correctly) that is why she had a feeding tube. But with the court decision, she was not allowed food and water that way ”
Yeah see, and she had no living will like Kel pointed out. She wasn’t brain dead, severely brain damaged and not near death. It’s natural to stop eating and drinking at the end of your life but according to my ex who worked in long term care that usually only takes three or four days at the most when it comes to someone naturally dying, not a couple weeks. If she had chosen to write a living will where she stated she didn’t want a feeding tube and such that would be fine with me, but that’s not what happened here.
Hi heather,
I can certainly understand your perspective. At one time patients such as this could not have been kept alive. People died. Technology has its dark side and forces many heartbreaking decisions. We were both just sick about the fact that little girl’s parents decided to keep her artificially alive. We know exactly what this entails, and only postpones the making of some very difficult decisions.
At the same time we have to be very careful and consider situations on an individual basis. If Terri’s parents wanted to care for her and her husband was free to live his life, why not? No one was asking him for anything other than letting Terri live. When my grandfather developed pneumonia in the nursing home, the nuns called and asked my mom if she wanted him transported to a hospital. She was adamant. NO! Have a priest with him, keep him comfortable, and let him remain in a religious environment. The poor man has wanted to die for years, and he will at least leave this world the way he would want and with some shred of dignity. She has never second guessed her decision.
Its like organ transplant. From what I have been told candidates are selected, and denied. I was surprised that a young woman who foolishly overdosed on tyelenol and trashed her liver could be denied a liver transplant 20 years down the road because she is not seen as deserving as someone with liver cancer. I have never worked transplant service so I got this info second hand, and of course there may be exceptions. But it does show that tragic and difficult decisions must often be made.
I can only suggest that people put in writing very specific directives. A friend of mine has directed that if she is comatose and unresponsive for 48 hours, let her go. No tubes, life support, nothing. I don’t agree but its her decision.
Mary says: “artificially alive”
No. Just no. Providing nutrition and hydration to someone that can’t feed or drink on their own is NOT keeping someone “artificially alive”. Or every person ever born was kept “artificially alive” for the first years of their life.
Lrning,
I was making reference to a little girl who was declared brain dead, and is being kept artificially alive on life support. By that I mean a respirator and tube feedings. I’m sorry but the little girl is dead. She should be in her grave and sooner or later her parents will have to make some heartbreaking decisions.
I would advise anyone who wishes for someone to live in a PVS to become a nurse. Then get back to me. Sorry Carla couldnt help myself.
Heather, first of all, you’ve already HAD one medical professional on here disagree with you (9ek). Did you even read what she said? I’m guessing that by the repetitive and redundant nature of your latest comment, probably not. But you’re still missing the point.
It’s not about what anyone else wished, besides Terri. Let me type that in all caps. IT ISN’T ABOUT WHAT ANYONE ELSE WISHES OR WISHED.
Terri never made her wishes known. Never had a directive. I have ZERO issues with anyone choosing to create a living will or a DNR. ZERO. But Terri didn’t have that.
What Terri had was a husband who kept her in that state until he got money from a settlement. THEN he suddenly “remembered” that one time years before, Terri had said she wouldn’t want to live that way. Her parents knew nothing of this supposed “wish”. NO ONE except Michael Schiavo knew anything about it, and how very convenient of him to suddenly recall it AFTER he got some cold, hard cash. Many of us here believe that’s because he MADE IT ALL UP. No official directives were ever made or given to the medical professionals involved, or THIS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE.
Please READ what has been typed here. I’ve typed in caps due to frustration, but seriously… please READ what the rest of us have taken time to say instead of spouting the same line over and over again. HEAR what we are saying.
Nobody here is saying “HEY! We want other people to live in a PVS!” Seriously, Heather, to even type that proves to me that you aren’t reading. You just aren’t.
Kel I dont need to read it. I am anti life support unless there is bope. Ive worked it for 26 years. Its horrid!!
Heather – you’re anti life support meaning that no one should be able to choose it? Who decides when there’s enough hope? Who decides what degree of life is worth living? I thought you were just projecting your own emotions to assume that no one would want that, but now it sounds like you’re saying that they shouldn’t be allowed to choose it even if they do want it.
Heather–she wasn’t on life support. I’m okay if they switch off life support and the patient dies a natural death. They withheld food and water…that is cruel, inhumane…EVIL. We wouldn’t kill a dog that way yet we did that to a fellow human being. That is the point here. We’re not talking about life support. We’re talking about is it okay to starve and dehydrate a fellow human being because we think their life has less value than ours?
CT people can choose it but Terri never wanted it.
I once told a story of a hispanic woman with dementia. Her son put a TF in her. She screamed day in and day out in Spanish. She pulled her GT out numerous times. I asked a Spanish speaking STNA “What is she saying”? The aide told me “She is saying let me meet my maker”!!! We had to put her in wrist restraints and medicate her. It was awful to see her suffer because her son thought at 93 a tube would be a great idea. The poor woman finally died! With NO say so or dignity!
A tube feed is a form of life support does anyone remember the Karen Ann Quinlin case? She laid in that bed for about 20 yrs.
And it was in the news that Terri had a strained relationship with her family. She did not want life support. Her husband didnt beat her into the state she was in. It was his wife and he respected her wishes. He buried her where SHE wanted to be buried and her family tried to fight him on that too! Sheesh.
Hi heather,
Karen was on a respirator and her parents fought to have her removed. She was, then continued breathing on her own, much to everyone’s surprise.
Her parents accepted maintenance care if she breathed on her own, which she did. They only wanted her off the ventilator.
Hi Mary its nice to see you! I know they did take her off the vent but did they put a tube feeding in her?
Good grief heather.
Put down your phone.
Give it a rest already.
Well obviously she must have had a tube or she would have died.
Carla I was speaking to Mary.
Give it a rest? Sorry but that was rather rude of you.
Hi heather,
I recall she lived several years with a tube, but her condition remained unchanged. Her parents could accept this if she survived off the vent, and gave her humane maintenance care.
Mary working in LTC can be very depressing. Many of these families need more education on what a tube means. I have seen some people have their tubes removed and some do eat again. I love to see people rehabilitate and go home! However many get stuck with the tubes their families put in and the nursing staff must hear of how they would rather die. Sorry but tbis is the reality of a nursing home. I have admitted people only to have them die a month later. They didnt want the tube.
You “don’t need to read it”?
Well, by all means, then, just keep on talking and posting multiple times.
Guess you’re only talking to yourself here.
CT and Sydney, don’t bother. Heather has admitted she isn’t reading any of our posts. She’s just posting over and over and OVER again, in typical fashion, ignoring everyone else’s points. Good grief.
Actually Kel I wasnt talking to myself. I was talking to Mary.
And Kel if you think Im lying then get an STNA license and go work in LTC. These people also get contractures and one guy was a car accident victim was in a fetal position. He had a trach and all he could do was flicker his eyes. Also had a tube. Mary can tell you that a person like this will continue to decline. They are in and out of the hospital. And if the nursing home is so short staffed you never know how long that person will lay wet until an STNA or nurse can change them.
You’re not listening to what we have had to say, Heather. You haven’t read our comments or anything we’ve posted about the Schiavo case. No one here has been talking about people in general who are in a PVS, except for you. We have been discussing the specifics of the Schiavo case. But you wouldn’t know that, because you decided not to read our comments.
I think I’d rather talk to Reality from now on, and for me, that’s saying quite a bit. At least when I talk to him, he READS what I have to say long enough to twist, warp, and snark about it.
Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall, and I’m done now.
Fine Kel the feeling is mutual
I was stunned to see this post about Terri Schindler Schiavo, nearly 9 years after her horrific death at the hands of Michael Schiavo, George Felos, George Greer, and everyone else who was complicit in her death. The reason I was stunned is because the case of Terri seems to have faded into the background, when in fact we need to keep it in the forefront so that we never “get used” to the idea of the disabled being killed. Not surprised to read this about DWS — and I’ve always had my suspicions about Charlie Crist’s involvement, too. Re: many of the above posts, I cannot believe the amount of misinformation out there. Do not go simply by what you read in the media, people — especially nearly a decade after the fact. Read some of the *investigative* material out there, such as Diana Lynne’s The Court-Ordered Death of an American Woman and Mark Fuhrman’s Silent Witness. There are gaping inconsistencies and disturbing unanswered questions in this case. In all likelihood they will never be answered, unless Michael Schiavo has a date with sodium pentothal. And sadly, he was sly enough to destroy the evidence — his wife.
“And it was in the news that Terri had a strained relationship with her family. She did not want life support. Her husband didnt beat her into the state she was in. It was his wife and he respected her wishes. He buried her where SHE wanted to be buried and her family tried to fight him on that too! Sheesh.”
You’re correct that Michael did not do anything to put Terri into that state. There’s been no proof, at all, that was his doing. The evidence points to her eating disorder being the cause of her health issues and eventual brain-damaged state.
But, that’s not really the point here. The point is that Terri had no living will, no advance directive, never signed a DNR for herself, etc. The only person who claims that she wanted to die in the state that she was in was Michael. Her parents had other ideas about what Terri’s last wishes were. I’m not going to say who was right about her last wishes, because I don’t know any of the parties involved. I will say that when there isn’t any solid proof of what the ill or disabled person wanted, we should err on the side of not removing life support like feeding tubes, unless they are genuinely brain dead (which Terri wasn’t). I do get where you are coming from but I don’t know why you are so certain that Michael was right and the Schindler’s were wrong. We’ll never actually know.
I have a daughter born with epilepsy. We didn’t know if she would improve or die next week. She had a NG tube for 11 months due to a sudden intense food aversion. At her therapy clinic there are many tube fed children.
My daughter did improve and is now walking, eating by mouth, learning to color and cut. Even if she hadn’t improved, withholding food and water would have been inhumane and horrific.
Frankly tube feeds just aren’t that big of a deal. It’s a hassle, it can be painful to drop a tube, but it’s not much different than say an insulin pump.
Everyone says, oh no! Not a tube feed, seriously, I see people tube feed in Costco, no biggie.
Actually it is not definitive that Michael was not responsible for Terri’s collapse. We can’t say that he definitely did something — but we also cannot say that he definitely did not do something. The book Silent Witness suggests some hypothetical scenarios involving Michael that *could* have led to Terri’s collapse. But we’ll never know. There was even less evidence for an eating disorder. The “smoking gun” was her potassium levels — but those levels were affected after her collapse by the resuscitation efforts and the drugs given to her. No one actually knows WHAT her potassium levels were prior to the bloodwork done when she reached the hospital. My heart goes out to those who work with brain-injured patients; if their condition disturbs you to the point where you can no longer see them as human beings, perhaps caring for them is no longer your calling. In his book The Power of the Powerless, author Christopher deVinck paints a very different — and very loving — picture of his brother Oliver, who was blind, mute, unable to walk or feed or otherwise care for himself. Oliver’s family loved him and cared for him and never lost sight of Oliver’s humanity, no matter what anyone thought of his “quality of life.” And really, who can judge that but the individual? Maybe Terri and Oliver and all the others who cannot speak for themselves have a better quality of life than we can imagine. Maybe *we’re* the ones who aren’t living but are just “existing.”
P.S. ElizabethG, my son has epilepsy, too.
Sorry, but I can’t let misinformation stand:
“Strained relationship with the family” –I have NEVER read this anywhere. Never. I’d appreciate knowing the source of this.
“Didn’t want life support” — again, what is the source of this? There was little evidence of any specific wishes, other than her comment in defense of Karen Ann Quinlan (“Where there’s life, there’s hope”), but there’s even less evidence that Terri did not want life support. Even Michael himself was quoted as saying, “How the h*ll do I know what she wanted? We never talked about it!” Then, amazingly, he “remembered” that she had said she “wouldn’t want to live like that.”
And Michael did not bury Terri — he buried what was left of her after he got rid of the body (at lightning speed) and refused at first to tell her family where her ashes were.
Is it really so difficult to get the facts straight? Apparently so.
Hi deluded..i see your point. However my husband never had a living will but as husband and wife we had discussed it. He told me he wanted to tubes vents nothing. He just wanted to die. Im glad it never came to that so chances are that if TS expressed she never wanted to live that way then it was probably true. Most people when they are younger always believe they can put off a living will because they are too young and then WHAM it happens!
Well to be fair I couldnt find anything saying that she had a strained relationship with them. Heard it somewhere though. Perhaps on the news…right along with people saying MS had beaten Terri into a coma.
Ive inserted NG tubes. Its tough on some patients to swallow them down. My dead husbands former brother in law died in Dec of 2012. His brother started CPR but by the time hed reached the hospital he was placed on a vent. His girlfriend of 20 years and his brother decided to let him go. He had severe COPD and pneumonia. Marcy leaned over and said “I love you Mitch.” A tear trickled down his eye. The vent was pulled and he died.
There was no evidence of a beating or any kind of physical assault. In fact, when someone insinuated (I think it was a caller to Larry King Live) that Michael might have caused Terri’s collapse, Michael responded by saying something along the lines of, “Well, now, if I *did* do something to Terri, wouldn’t you think there’d be proof of it?” I’ll have to look for the actual reference and link to it. The way he said it, it sounded like he was taunting the caller and daring him to prove something. In the book I mentioned, the author — a homicide detective — says that there are ways to cut off circulation without leaving any marks. He doesn’t say that that is what happened — only that it’s not outside the realm of possibility.
“In the book I mentioned, the author — a homicide detective — says that there are ways to cut off circulation without leaving any marks. He doesn’t say that that is what happened — only that it’s not outside the realm of possibility.”
If you cut off air flow and circulation to cause unconsciousness and brain damage (and eventually death) people usually end up with petechiae (red spots in the eyes or on the skin) from that, even if they have no bruises on their neck (people smothered with pillows or things like that end up with petechiae but no bruising). There was no evidence that this happened to Terri . I’m not saying it’s impossible he did something, but there seems to be no evidence that he did.
Here’s what Michael said on Larry King Live:
“The Schindlers made accusations that I strangled Terri. It confuses me, because before any of this came to light, don’t you think the doctors at solitary, when it first happened, would notice marks around her neck? And if I strangled her to the point of unconsciousness, her trachea would have been crushed.”
Lucy I dont buy that. An autopsy would have shown that. The man would not be allowed to practice medicine if the coroner had seen anything of the sort. There was so much gossip flying around after that ordeal who knows? But a coroner isnt going to miss something like that.
I think we have to be very very careful of speculation. People can say anything. We could be at the receiving end of it!
We can put together any number of possible scenarios we want. Without evidence speculation amounts to nothing.
It’s just too bad no one did screen captures of Wasserman Schultz’s interviews or other links about her wanting to pull the plug on Schaivo. Wasserman Schultz is such a self serving moon bat….she’s disgusting.
As for the Schaivo case, itself :
I only wish to address the legal aspect of this……not what the different opinions are about what’s ethical, or moral….And not get into Terri’s husband’s conduct during all that time….(He should have known he would look like an Ass continuing on with another woman)…Back to the Law - If you are not happy with the law stating that the husband has the last word, then set about Changing or Altering That Law.
There were so many variables muddying up what Terri’s actual condition or what her mental capabilities were, I’m not going there. We may never have known for sure, regardless.
As I understand the way the law was set up in Florida, it would be the same in Texas…..Technically speaking, the spouse has the last word, not anyone else….Complicating this case was that Terri never put her wishes in a living will. Even so, IMO, this never should have made the news, assuming it was true that she had previously told her husband she did not want to live by artificial means, or however that would be worded. If I remember correctly they were both EMT’s when that first happened to Terri. ….All I could think was What if I had told my husband that I did not want to live by artificial means or was in a coma, and could not Effectively communicate with anyone….but I did not have that in a will yet, or even in print with witnesses’ signatures including My own ?……I can tell you that I would want him fighting tooth and nail to honor what I had told him, and Not do what any relative or friend wanted.
Legally, it would Not be their decision to make Anyway…..only his.
Had Terri and her husband been divorced, (not separated or anything else) then her parents likely would have succeeded in getting what they wanted…I’m guessing..
But since Terri and her husband were still married, he legally still had the last word. If you’re going to follow the Law, already in place, I don’t think this ever should have seen a court room or been in the legal system.
Let’s hope that Terri’s case at least resulted in a Lot of people getting Wills drawn up, if only for the reason to state their wishes if they are incapacitated by injury or disease. Make it easier on your spouse and/or relatives and have a Will or Legal Document drawn up specifying your wishes.
SB Smith great post. When my husband died ( I found him dead on our floor) I told the coroner to do an autopsy. My brother in law called the morgue and told them ” I do not want you to cut his head open. The morges reply was “Sorry his wife has the final say so.”
Sorry morgue
No, the autopsy wouldn’t have caught it — especially since the autopsy was fifteen years after Terri’s collapse. This is a homicide detective who wrote this — he has decades of experience in looking at crime scenes. If he says there are ways to cut off circulation without leaving a trace, I believe him — but you can read the book and decide for yourself. As for petechiae, that sign may or may not have been there. Diana Lynne’s book says that the rescue team and the hospital personnel were so focused on getting Terri’s heart started again that they admitted they may have missed certain key details about her condition; they had no idea they might be dealing with a crime scene.
Mary, I thought I chose my words very carefully. I’m sorry if anything I posted comes too close to an accusation against Mr. Schiavo; that was not my intent. My point is simply that having “no evidence” that something happened does not rule out that something *did* happen. Certainly, Mr. Schiavo is innocent until proven guilty. But there are countless disturbing questions in this case that were never asked or sufficiently answered, and for many of those questions it is too late. Terri Schindler Schiavo deserved better, in so many ways.
Hi Lucy. Your input is just fine. It seems as though everyone has written a book. MS and Terris family. I just dont agree that he had done anything to her. Terri was bulimic at 200 pounds. She was drinking tea and water. She was eating very little food. She shed the pounds but her electrolytes were off and she suffered a fatal arrhythmia.
Hi Lucy,
You have chosen your words very carefully and given an interesting perspective. I’m afraid I speak as the sister of a very experienced police officer who has taught me much.
I agree people such as yourself present some very interesting perspectives and information, and you and/or they may be completely accurate, but without evidence all we can do is speculate. Also, we can create any scenarios we want.
I was very troubled by the fact Terri’s family was not just allowed to keep and care for her. Michael could go on with his life. But the man did nothing illegal, as much as we don’t like his decision here. In the end it is what it is.
But Heather, the *only* evidence that she *might* have been bulimic was the lowered electrolytes. Drinking a lot of iced tea does not an eating disorder make. The electrolytes were measured *only* when she was taken to the hospital after her collapse — so not only do we not have any idea what they were prior to her collapse (maybe they were fine), but Diana Lynne’s research indicated that the resuscitation efforts themselves could be the reason for Terri’s lowered electrolytes. We know she lost a lot of weight several years before; we know she drank a lot of iced tea; we know her heart stopped on the night she collapsed; we know she had very low electrolytes when she got to the hospital. But you cannot take those four things, put them together, and say, “Aha! She was a closet bulimic!” Is it possible? Sure. Anything’s possible, as we’ve already discussed. But 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 isn’t 6. You need a couple more ones to make it a valid equation. As for her eating very little food, the statements of her friends and family contradict that. In fact, she enjoyed a nice meal with her family the night before she collapsed. In addition, the medical examination at the hospital revealed no signs, other than the electrolyte levels, consistent with bulimia. I understand wanting to come up with answers — you want to go with the bulimia theory, while I want to go with the Michael Schiavo theory — but neither one of us has the proper numbers to come up with a valid equation. And I think that’s part of what makes this case so sad and so frustrating.
Mary, I don’t think we can say definitively that Michael Schiavo did nothing illegal. He has not been FOUND to have done anything illegal, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t. And I’m not even talking about what he did or didn’t do to Terri. I’m referring to his testimony under oath that he wanted to use the medical malpractice settlement to care for Terri for the rest of her life — and then, once the check was cashed, his sudden recollection that she wouldn’t want that. He says his about-face was due to the death of his mother, but he had contacted George Felos before that time. If he lied on the witness stand — and that’s a big IF — that was definitely illegal. Just another question we’ll never have an answer to.
NO ONE except Michael Schiavo knew anything about it, and how very convenient of him to suddenly recall it AFTER he got some cold, hard cash. Many of us here believe that’s because he MADE IT ALL UP.
I’ll defer to your superior knowledge of making things up, but it’s not true that no one else knew about it. Michael Schaivo’s brother and his wife testified that they discussed it following the death of the Schaivos’ grandmother.
The money clouded everything, given that the Schindlers expressed no concern about Michael Schaivo’s guardianship until he refused to give them a cut of the award from the malpractice suit. Court documents are here, for those interested.
Returning to people making things up: in the same way that no one who thinks Erik Munoz “offed” his wife has ever explained why he called 911 instead of leaving her to die, no one has offered a plausible reason why Michael Schaivo would call 911 after attempting to kill his wife, and then call her brother and her parents over to witness the result of his alleged crime before the ambulance arrived.
Lucy,
What I meant was that he did nothing illegal in maintaining his legal guardianship of his wife and went to court to get her tube pulled. As much as we don’t like or agree with what he did, that part was not illegal.
Until there is evidence, then if he did or didn’t do something to harm her will remain only speculation.
Lisa, of course the Schindlers had no quibble with Schiavo’s guardianship before the malpractice case was settled — up to that point, he was still saying he wanted to use the money to help Terri. They were partnering with him in Terri’s care; at one point she was actually living in their home and they were caring for her, but it became too expensive and she had to be put back into a rehab center. The plan was for them to continue to participate in her care once the malpractice monies were available. But Michael changed all that when he refused to allow them access to funds to help Terri, and he made it clear *he* was not going to help her, either — except to help her out of this world. It was at that point that they questioned his guardianship.
Re: Michael’s call to 911, how and when that call took place has and always will be the subject of debate. Michael says (in some accounts — he gives widely varying times in varying accounts) he called very quickly, within a few minutes, and then called Terri’s brother. The Schindlers say he called Bob Schindler (Terri’s dad), who told him to call 911 *immediately*; Bob Schindler then called Bobby Schindler (Terri’s brother), who ran over (he lived in the same apartment complex). The phone records are, sadly, no longer in existence. Of concern, too, is the wide variation in Michael Schiavo’s accounts of how long it took him to make the first call. Maybe Michael’s telling the truth. But given his shifting stories and 180-degree turns in this matter, I have more reason to believe the Schindlers than I do Michael Schiavo.
And I don’t think Michael tried to kill her. My theory — and it is only a theory — is that they had an argument over something and it got physical.
There is no use speculating on what might or might not be true in this case. The sad fact is that it’s apparently legal to starve and dehydrate to death a mentally disabled person. Terri was not dying. Nutrition and hydration are not life support, they are standard care. You can’t starve and dehydrate your dog, but your disabled wife, yep.
Tube feeding, bottle feeding, breastfeeding, what’s the difference? Just because nutrition cannot be taken by mouth doesn’t mean food and water are life support. Food and water = standard care.
If someone cannot urinate by himself, he will die unless there is a way for the urine to get out of his body. Does that mean that a catheter is life support?
Several nurses testified that they fed Terri jello or pudding by spoon and that she was able to swallow. Michael refused to allow a swallowing test to verify whether Terri could swallow or not. I guess that if she no longer had the feeding tube in, his “she wouldn’t want to be on ‘life support'” argument would no longer hold up.
Does anyone else find the words MS put at the bottom of Terri’s grave marker ghoulish? He starts off well enough — “Beloved wife” — but at the end, it’s all about him — “I kept my promise …” And what promise was that, Michael? “… to let you die a barbaric death by dehydration and starvation because baby, that’s just the way you wanted it.” But I guess all the rest wouldn’t fit on the marker.
At some point in all of this, Michael euthanized Terri’s two cats. I don’t know if they were elderly or sick or a reminder of Terri or he wasn’t a cat person or what. It just strikes me as the bitterest of ironies that they were probably put down more humanely than Terri.