If it happens, it will be nothing less than a court-sanctioned murder committed by her "husband". I'm not especially religious, but there is a God watching this happen and perhaps prayers will help.

Can the Schindlers turn around and sue Schiavo and Felos for unlawful death, or manslaughter or anything? Not that it would make loosing their daugher any easier, but it might stem the tide of this type of thing happening again...

THANK YOU KEVIN!!!! for posting this!

More information can be found at BlogsForTerri, where Richard from Hyscience, Tim from ProLife Blogs, John Bambanek, and I are posting.

Anyone reading this, please go to BlogsForTerri and PLEASE help spread the word! She is NOT "brain-dead" or a vegetable, just see the videos and sworn affadavits for yourself and you will see that if she is starved to death, it's no "mercy killing", it's MURDER.

You'd think that the hell that this world lived through as a society during the Holocaust would have *FINALLY* taught us a lesson.
A woman who cannot speak for herself has no one legally representing "her interests". In every other court system in every other state, people who are too young or too ill to speak for themselves are given a representative that speaks for *ONLY* them -- but not in Florida.
A "husband" who has not acted like a husband in years and has no interest in being a "husband" is speaking for a woman that he does not give a shit about. In Florida, someone who stands to financially gain from the death of a woman is allowed to decided her fate.
There are hundreds -- no thousands -- of children in the world who stand to be affected by this OFFENSIVE/HORRENDOUS act. Children who have been brain-damaged by vaccinations. Children who have been brain-damaged through the birth process or through horrendous diseases.
One would think -- no, one would *PRAY* that we as a society would learn from what was done to people during the Holocaust that we need to protect the most vulnerable among us.
Sadly, we have not learned a damn thing.

Let the woman pass on in peace. Would YOU want to kept alive in such a state?

Totally agree with V --- just let her pass in peace and may God bless her soul

For the life of me I can find no valid reason to allow this person to just languish absorbing resources while in a state of utter vegetation. People need to move past this pathetic clinging to life at all costs mindset and embrace the notion that death is part of life and not something to fear. I for one would never want to put this kind of multi-year hardship on my family, and I see no legitimate reason to keep this woman "alive" any longer. In the battle of quality of life vs. qunatity, I choose the first. What purpose does life serve hooked up to a tube? This is in no way "murder" as so many of the alarmist shills will have you believe. Its a simple reality of allowing a life to end that should have done so years ago.

I would feel more sympathy for Terri Schiavo's parents if they hadn't stooped to slandering her husband Michael. They have allowed their grief to fester into something very ugly.

If there is a lesson to this, it's that we should all get busy on our living wills - Terri was only 29 when she went into her coma.

V and Die In Peace, you obviously don't know the facts about Terri. And YES, I WOULD want to be kept alive and given the chance to rehabilitate! Her bastard husband has DENIED her rehab, despite being awarded over $1 million in a lawsuit to be used for precisely that purpose.
Susan Scantlin suddenly woke up one day and said "Hi Mom" after NOTHING for 20 years, and Terri Schiavo can ALREADY say "Mama", "Mommy", etc., without any rehab therapy at all!

See THIS VIDEO and tell me if she's a vegetable.

To V and Gabriel,
This woman can talk and move and blink. What makes you think that she wants to die? She is NOT a vegetable. She is NOT brain dead. She is in the EXACT same position as the woman who started talking after 20 years. She will feel the horrible pain of dying from starvation.
She will not die in peace.
Who can say that she doesn't want to live???

This whole case is just court sanctioned murder.

Her husband was all for rehabilitation, when he was filing lawsuits, but looks like he saw dollar signs, as soon as the check was cut, and decided murder was a better option. And the courts cooperated with him.

In addition to her husband the trial judge in this case is about as evil.

Gabriel, you are wrong, period. She is NOT in a state of "utter vegetation." Get the facts and then decide.
Spartakus, you don't need to have sympathy for the parents, have sympathy for TERRI and for the millions of other brain damaged people who are being told that their lives are worthless because they aren't fully functioning. Do we want to become a society where we just exterminate those who aren't physically or mentally normal? What kind of Nazi shit is that?
Anyway, if you knew the facts about the case, you might not think so highly of Michael Schiavo either. I won't bother with the allegations because Terri's life is more important, but if you (all of you who think she should die) feel strongly enough to comment on the case, you ought to learn ALL THE FACTS about it first.

Terri is not a brain-dead vegetable. She laughs, cries, speaks. Is that not a human being that deserves to live?

You SAY you wouldn't want to be in her state. Either you don't know her state, or you are assuming something that you really wouldn't know until you are faced with it yourself. And YES, I have faced the possibility myself and when doing my advance directive (living will) I specifically said DO NOT remove a feeding tube if it's the only life support (as it is with Terri). She's not on ANY other machines keeping her alive, just a feeding tube.

PLEASE, look at Terri's side of the issue. I am convinced that when you see the evidence that supports her right to live, you will change your mind. Every other person I've heard from who has seen it has done exactly that, even after having the opinions you have.

Finally! Liberals see nothing wrong with the death penalty! Of course, they're putting an innocent person to death instead of a guilty one in this case, but details, details. This throws the doors wide open to getting liberals to support putting criminals to death. Just make sure those who are sentenced to death have an "accident" that leaves them brain damaged. Then you can kill them any way you want, no matter how gruesome.

just let her pass in peace

Uh, excuse me? "Let her pass in peace?" "In PEACE???" Death by starvation/dehydration is anything but peaceful, my friend. As I wrote on my blog recently, "it is a slow (it could take up to two weeks), painful, ignoble death that even animals are protected from by law. But this is a human life we're talking about. These days, human life is worth less than the lives of the pests that invade our homes."

This case just illustrates to me the importance of leaving a living will. I for one would not want to live on in such a state (yes, I've watched the vidoes), and would certainly not want my parents to keep me around for 15+ years. Since Terri left no living will it is hard to know what should be done here. However Gov. Bush clearly overstepped his bounds in 2003 with Terri's law. For all those who support Terri's parents in this, do you think that our parents should have this authority over our spouses? I for one would trust my wife first and foremost with this kind of decision.

Btw does anyone know when those videos were shot? None of the websites hosting them seem to say.

Try comparing apples and apples. Sarah Scantlin's coma was a result of trauma Schivo's was not. There are totally different cases. The video "evidence" is unconvincing, since I can't see the full picture. I’m not willing to accept it as proof of much other than a response to stimulus that is undetermined. As I said above, quality vs quantity. In the dozen or so years there has been little to no improvement of change in her situation.

Sarah Scantlin's coma was a result of trauma Schivo's was not.

Most sane people would consider a heart attack "trauma."

In the dozen or so years there has been little to no improvement of change in her situation.

Considering that Michael has blocked any sort of attempts at rehabilitative treatments, this is unsurprising.

Btw Beth and Barbara, what does this have to do with Nazis again? The Nazis did not systematically exterminate their brain-damaged spouses one by one. And Jinx, didn't you have enough to go on with liberals supporting abortion and opposing the death penalty? This one's a stretch.

I respect the opinions of those who wish to prolong their own lives by artificial means should they find themselves in such a situation. But that is not to say that I agree with them. I don't.

Gabriel raises an excellent point. Our society is obsessed with living as long as possible, no matter what the condition of the person or what the cost. Nothing could be more unnatural. Death is not something to be feared. It is just a step in the life cycle.

Spartukus also raises an excellent point: this case illustrates just how important it is to have a living will.

V.

JUST IN! Temporary stay issued until tomorrow:

http://www.terrisfight.org/updates/

The only issue here is do you or I have the right to refuse a feeding tube under certain circumstances, such as terminal illnesses or being in a PVS?

The answer is yes, and that is the only thing this multi-year court battle has been about.

Terri's parents and her husband disagreed, so 2 court trials were held to determine her wishes.

All trial and appellate courts found she would not wish the feeding tube in her state, which is indeed PVS, with no hope of recovery.

Terri's parents were afforded several years to challenge that decision, and were never able to overturn it.

Indeed, her parents were specific in their sworn testimony that they would NEVER remove the tube, even if Terri had herself told them she did not want it.

They even went so far as to testify that they would literally amputate her limbs, were that necessary to keep her alive.

That was their testimony, under oath!

So, since they lost the initial rounds of the court battle the case got nastier and nastier, like all long-fought custody battles.

The parents finally descended to the point of accusing the husband of physical abuse as cause of her collapse.

This despite an entire trial in 1992 where her bulimia (and associated purging) were well-documented.

Plus the fact that the injuries they allege are so severe Terri would not have even been able to walk had they occurred ( were there any photos of Terri in a cast we'd have seen them by now)

The NINDS says: "Individuals in such a state have lost their thinking abilities and awareness of their surroundings, but retain noncognitive function and normal sleep patterns. Even though those in a persistent vegetative state lose their higher brain functions, other key functions such as breathing and circulation remain relatively intact. Spontaneous movements may occur, and the eyes may open in response to external stimuli. They may even occasionally grimace, cry or laugh. Although individuals in a persistent vegetative state may appear somewhat normal, they do not speak and they are unable to respond to commands."

This explains most of the "video" evidence, which are just small snippets of what is most reasonbly days and months of inactivity or response.

In a June 6 opinion that touched on the medical evidence in the Schiavo case, the 2nd District Court of Appeal wrote" "Although the physicians were not in complete agreement concerning the extent of the daughter's brain damage, they all agreed that the brain scans showed extensive permanent damage to her brain. They only debate between the doctors was whether she had a small amount of isolated living tissue in her cerebral cortex or whether she had no living tissue in her cerebral cortex."

Move past the dogma and look at the science.

I know some videos were done in 2001, but I don't know when the one I linked above was done.

When I had to sign an advance directive/living will (I've done it, as I've had major and dangerous neurosurgery six times and updated the paperwork each time), I left my mother in charge of any decisions that needed to be made, NOT my husband. This despite the fact that my grandmother suffered in a hospital for two years on a feeding tube before she died, so my mother DID know (and so did I) what happens. I do not believe that a person who can get insurance/malpractice suit money should be the one to decide! Sure, you trust your wife, but for how long if you were disabled and became a "burden" to her? Be honest--do you REALLY know how another person will react to a major life event like this? I thought I did, but after about five operations, my husband couldn't handle it any more, and I could still function, although I had a lot of pain and some difficulty when walking for some time. Some people just can't handle adversity and decide they don't want it in their lives any more (yes, I'm divorced from the weakling now). You just don't know who those people are until the shit hits the fan.

I don't believe that if a mind is functioning, a human should be "put down" (like a dog?) just because they're disabled or sick.

You're right, there was no living will. When there is a conflict as to what her wishes would be, why err on the side of death? Is that fair or ethical? Absolutely, positively NOT, IMHO.

Now that I've given TMI (sorry), I'll ask again, is this REALLY what you think is the RIGHT and ETHICAL thing to do?

To Jim who stated" Most sane people would consider a heart attack "trauma."

Well they would still be wrong. Trauma is a reslut of serious injury or shock to the body, as from violence or an accident.

Here is a link to those who watched the entire video (all 4 hours, not just the 4 minutes posted online):

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/10/Tampabay/Schiavo_tapes__snippe.shtml

According to nurses and Terri's parents, she DOES speak. She has said "mommy," "help me" and "pain," among other things.

http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/CIyerAffidavit090203.htm

Terri's condition has been evaluated by several doctors. Most of her cerebral cortex (the part of the brain that handles human cognition) is dead or gone. Terri herself is gone; it's just that her body does not know that. I wish that the people in this forum could see for themselves what a persistent vegetative state is like before waxing so enthusiastic over keeping Terri alive.

Forget the legal implications. What about a new version of Operation for Terry Schiavo?

"Take out her feeding tube for $500."
***BZZZZZZTTT***
"Too late! Second District Court says you can't!"

Sure, you trust your wife, but for how long if you were disabled and became a "burden" to her? Be honest--do you REALLY know how another person will react to a major life event like this?

Well, first off, in accordance with my living will I would be dead long before I could become a burden (although I would probably not want to starve to death; I would rather be given a lethal injection, but that's illegal now, isn't it?). And yes, I would trust my wife to react as I would react in this situation. While I love my parents, my wife and I are of a like mind when it comes to this (and most everything else), and I would not trust my parents not to freak out and want to keep their child alive despite my or my wife's wishes.

I'll ask again, is this REALLY what you think is the RIGHT and ETHICAL thing to do?

Hard to say. It seems to me it is the legal thing to do (to allow her husband to make the decision). Is it right? Right and wrong seem pretty relative to your outlook on this one. If your particularly religious and believe all human life should be preserved no matter what, then no, it's not right. If you are not of that mindset, maybe it is. Ethical? If Terri did in fact express to her husband that she would not want to be kept alive in such a state, then yes, it's ethical. However we have no proof of that and thus find ourselves in a gray area. The decision becomes a strictly legal one, where we ask who should make the decision here? I think the law is clear on this.

"For all those who support Terri's parents in this, do you think that our parents should have this authority over our spouses?"

Actually, it would probably be a wiser move.

Look at Terri's husband. During the lawsuit, when she won millions and he won hundreds of thousands of dollars, he was all about her getting better, and needing the money for all of her therapy.

He won his suit, they cut his checks, and the dollar signs took over, because if Terri died then, he could pocket even more money.

At least a parent doesn't have money involved in the equation when making a life or death decision.

I do agree that this case definitely indicates the neccessity of writing a living will, if she had put her wishes in writing (and I have my doubts that she even had those wishes) then all of this would have been unneccessary.

I'm with Just Me. Mostly.
If she is to die, there is a more humane way of euthanasia than starving/dehydrating her to death. And at the point of her death, all the money "she" got in settlements goes back to the insurance company.

I have my doubts about the cause of her heart attack myself. The husband has done nothing to show he's anything but a luckier version of Scott Peterson.

About the Nazi's: The first gas chamber was designed by professors of psychiatry from 12 major German univeristies. THey selected the patients and watched them die. With government approval they continued until the mental hospitals were empty. Then they were joined by some pediatricians who began by emptying the institutions for handicapped children in 1939. By 1945, almost 300,000 pure blood Aryan Germans had been killed. By then human life had become so cheap that they were killin ged wetters, children with misshapen ears, and those with learning disabilities. (Taken from Wertham, The german Euthansia Program, Hayes Publishing Co., Cinn, 1977. p.47. After using this eugenic killing of "defective" Aryan Germans, Hitler then began using their gas chambers to eliminate defective" races. He destroyed an entire race of Gypsies, six million Jews, and perhaps almost as many captured Poles, Russians, and central Europeans. (ibid, p. 47)

Terri's condition has been evaluated by several doctors.

Personally handpicked by Michael out of many, many more. If you don't think he was shopping around for doctors who agreed with him while rejecting the ones that didn't, I've got a bridge in NYC to sell ya.

Jinx, five doctors evaluated her: 2 chosen by her parents, 2 chosen by her husband, and one chosen by the judge. The doctors decided 3 to 2 that she was PVS. Of course I don't have to tell you which doctors thought she wasn't. If you don't think her parents shopped around for doctors to find ones that agreed with them, well I think you might like this bridge we have here.

This is going to sound mean, but its the truth. Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. Nature isn't nice.