« Why is Terri Schiavo a Partisan Issue? II | Main | Keynote Video From The Politics Online Conference »

Live Blogging the Killing of Terry Schiavo 

If the Dems want to kill her then by golly, I'll make sure everyone that reads Wizbang knows. I'm now going to live-blogging the Democratic party of the United States trying to kill a sick woman.

rep_schultz.jpg

This goofball woman said (paraphrased): "Where will it end.. Next week people will want their brother or their sister to be kept alive." -The nerve

franks.jpg

Barney Franks and taken to the floor multiple times to make sure Terri Schiavo was killed. He really is passionate about it...

rep_wu.jpg

David Wu (D) Oregon somehow made it a gay rights issue???? [Maybe that explains Franks' passion -ed]

rep-jimdavis.jpg

Jim Davis (D) Florida Says it is a civil rights issue... hmmmm Who exactly is about to have their civil rights violated? Her husband? It is scary how clueless this guy is. -- Now is is outright lying. He says (strongly implies) Terri said in her living will that she wanted to die. Shameless.

rep-rushholt.jpg

Rush Holt (D) New Jersey: "By the way... Why are debating this case, i don;t want to be too cynical but could it be because the TV cameras are rolling?" -- No you moronic twit, we are arguing the case because you idiots want to kill this woman. I WANT the cameras rolling... That's why I'm live blogging. I want the WHOLE WORLD to know what you did tonight you shameless idiot. Do you have something to hide?

Barney Franks REALLY wants to kill this woman... He keeps yielding himself more time. Do you think he would give her the lethal injection?

Jim Mooran (D) Virginia is talking about people on life support... This is not a life support issue... They want to stop feeding her and starve her to death. Now he is rambling about tax cuts for the rich... What an idiot.

Bitch Slap of the night-- No pun intended-- Barney Franks gets up and whines that one of the Republicans was playing doctor on TV. Said Republican, Phil Gingrey of Georgia, got back up to say that he didn't know if he was on TV or not... But that he was not "playing doctor" because he indeed was one. Franks was a tad deflated.

Eleanor Holmes Norton (d) DC Wants Terri dead... I wonder if Terri was a convicted drug dealer who killed 3 people which side of the argument she would be on.

Oh GAWD Here is Barney Franks again... Just his whining is enough to make me take the other side.

I've got to give it to the Dems... they are making the case that the entire republic will crumble if this woman is not killed. When they go all out, they go all out.

(blogosphere diversion) Bill at the Rooftop report (see trackback) says that killing a sick woman is OK if you "nuance" the debate... Now there's a position I'm sure more people will get behind.

Rep. John Lewis Democrat from Georgia said he wants Terri dead... or I think that is what he said, I couldn't understand a word the man said. Either he wants Terri dead or he wants us all to be saved and him him an AMEN....

OK I don't have time to do all the pictures... I'm going to try to spend more time on the goofy things they say.

Brian Baird (D) Washington -- Interesting argument... Since she will never be 100% we should just kill her... He claims he wants to take the partisanship out of it... Somehow he's not convincing. OH! I get it... He is apologizing for the Dems "We are all Pro-life" He must not read the papers.

No Dems embarrassment would be complete without Jerrold Nadler waddling up to the camera. All we are missing now is Wexler... I tuned in late, I probably missed him.

How come the Dems don't want to give this woman a day in Federal court? goodness knows they are always whining that criminals should get every appeal but Terri should not? hmmmm

Best argument of the night Rep Joe Schwarz (R-MI) made a stunningly powerful argument. He reminded the House that this woman was not on life support. That she could breath et al on her own. That the only thing that they were doing was feeding her... Then he asked the 64 million dollar question... What is to become of all the thousands of people on feeding tubes in the nursing homes and hospitals in this county?... Are we going to kill them all?

grrr I might have missed something, both tuners on the Tivo went to record things and I missed some.

John Conyers (D) Mars, is doing his usual job of reciting Dem talking points... no matter now bogus they are... Again and again the Dems hint that she is is on life support.

Rep Capuano from Mass. is making a stunningly passionate speech about the how the government should "LEAFVE THESE PEOPLE" alone. "STAY OUT OF THIER LIVES." hmm so I guess he is for private social security accounts huh?

Rep- Mel Watt (D) Scumbagonia- "This vote is costing us money".... "How many children could we feed with that money?" Then why did the Dems call it then dipshit? OOOOOH Now get this... This is a racial issue. Black people don't get the same healthcare that white people get so Terri Schiavo does not deserve compassion. What a pig! What a FREAKing (insert harsher word here) pig. I guess Oliver Willis will sent the guy 20 bucks but he is a pig. Where can I get a transcript of this pig?

Quote of the night Sensenbrener "In Florida they have a statute #828.12 that says that if you don't feed an animal, you can go to jail for a year and be fined 5000 dollars. So in Florida, an animal has a higher right than this woman. And that is a wrong priority." -- I just made that point 2 minutes ago to Allah in the comments

How did Julia Carson of Indiana run a campaign??? The woman is about 100 years old, she can hardly walk, and she can hardly talk... But she did manage to whine about Medicaid... For some reason in her mind since she is unhappy about the state of Medicaid, Terry Schiavo should die. OOOOOK.

For about the 100th time, a Dem has said we are a land of laws and not men.... Yeah, tell that to Clinton when he committed perjury.

Getting ready for the vote. Dems demand a roll call... Dumbasses, then their fingerprints will be on this... They are so politically tone-deaf it is amazing.

Republicans have a quorum and (surprise) it is passing.

It passed by a mile!


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Live Blogging the Killing of Terry Schiavo :

» Rooftop Report linked with Thank You

» Myopic Zeal linked with Democrats Move to Kill Terri Schiavo

» No Easy Answers linked with Taking Names

» BIG DOG's WEBLOG linked with Terri Shiavo's Death Sentence

» CollegePundit linked with Partisan Politics and Saving Lives

» Another Rovian Conspiracy - St Wendeler linked with Terri Schiavo Audio

» The American Mind linked with House Voting Begins

» annika's journal linked with Dura Lex Sed Lex

» Jeff Blogworthy.com linked with Democrats for death

» blogical conclusions linked with Moonbat Logic

Comments (109)

Well, it looks to me like t... (Below threshold)

Well, it looks to me like the Dems have decided that their obstructionism extends to obstructing the protection of life. They truly are the party of death. In addition to the elected dems, you also have Oliver Willis and the other Lefties calling for her death.

St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy

Sad that a family tragedy a... (Below threshold)
MikeAdamson:

Sad that a family tragedy attracts such nauseating political gamesmanship from both sides.The best evidence has been presented in court and the husband has been empowered to make the decisions. It's one thing to say that life should never be taken...I could respect that view even if I disagree with it. Transferring this matter to a Federal court for more review is cynical at best.

Easy for you to say, Mike: ... (Below threshold)

Easy for you to say, Mike: it's not your daughter.

Mr. Adamson: You say "Trans... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

Mr. Adamson: You say "Transferring this matter to a Federal court for more review is cynical at best."

When the convicted rapist/murderer of a young girl has his case transferred to a Federal court for review (and endless appeals) will that be cynical?

ABC News obtained talki... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

ABC News obtained talking points circulated among Senate Republicans explaining why they should vote to intervene in the Schiavo case. Among them, that it is an important moral issue and the "pro-life base will be excited," and that it is a "great political issue — this is a tough issue for Democrats."

According to an ABC News poll released earlier this week, 87 percent of those surveyed said they would not want to be kept alive if in Terri Schiavo's condition, and 65 percent said a spouse should have the final say in what happens to a patient, as opposed to parents.

Sorry Mike,

This is all the manipulation of the Republicans for political gain!

And tell me Paul, when are you going to start calling the overwhelming majority of Americans, killers?

How low can you stoop?

Disgusting.

Wow, unreal... The... (Below threshold)

Wow, unreal...

The repercussions of the "Dems" winning this battle and allowing, nay, FORCING Terri's murder could be extreme.

And they should be.

Thanks for liveblogging this, I'm really disappointed in Charles Johnson and LGF for avoiding this whole issue... it could set a precedent that we *really* don't want set.

I am sorry, but if a man ta... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

I am sorry, but if a man takes up with another woman, and makes babies with her, he no longer is in a position to make life and death situations, especially when he stands to get a lot of money.

The civil rights issue in this case is her right to live and the fact that she hasn't ever had any type of continuous representation. And the GAL in the case actually recomended against removing the tube.

Terri is no longer a person to the people who want her to die, and it makes me cringe to think at what point they will start deciding who else among the disabled shouldn't get to live either.

Paul, your rhetoric here is... (Below threshold)

Paul, your rhetoric here is *really* obnoxious. It's entirely possible to have a principled position on this -- for example, Jonah Goldberg's federalism objection. I think Jonah's 100% right.

I agree with you that abortion is the ulterior motive in many minds and I assure you that if I were a member of the Fla. state legislature I'd have sided with the pro-life camp. But to say that a legislative action that subordinates human life to some other interest is tantamount to murder is as lame as Oliver Willis dismissing the Iraq war and its supporters as "filthy" because of the number of U.S. troops killed in action. (Query: Does Willis, who, if memory serves, backed the war in Afghanistan to the hilt, consider himself responsible for Pat Tillman's death? An issue for another thread, I guess.) Long story short, you're demagoguing this issue big time.

[Paul Replying to Allah] Ok then why is the Dems always are on the side of death? I'm not being a smart ass... It is a legitimate question. You say: "But to say that a legislative action that subordinates human life to some other interest is tantamount to murder is as lame I NEVER called it murder. Here is why I disagree with this point.... This is NOT a right to die issue... This is an issue where one human being is going to actively take an action to kill another. I don't care which side of the issue you are on... They want her killed, not allowed to die That is a fact not just me being a demigod er uh demagog.

Note also that I never got involved until the Dems tried to play procedural games... see previous posts.

Hold the phone:<br... (Below threshold)
tmcatamney:

Hold the phone:


DRUDGE RADIO to present audio of Terri Schiavo responding to her father on Friday, immediately following the removal of her feeding tube.... Check local listings...

Word is that she mouthed a strained "no" when told that they were going to remove the tube.

This woman is NOT in a PVS. Too much evidence to the contrary.

By now most people who ... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday.

SHE IS NOT BEING KILLED - S... (Below threshold)
firstbrokenangel:

SHE IS NOT BEING KILLED - SO CUT THE CRAP!!!

Cindy

Gee Cindy, what a compellin... (Below threshold)

Gee Cindy, what a compelling argument.

also she is not being starv... (Below threshold)
firstbrokenangel:

also she is not being starved to death either.

FOR ALL THOSE OF YOU WHO DO NOT KNOW WHAT BRAIN DEATH, VEGETATIVE STATE AND BRAIN STEM DEATH IS, CONTACT ME. I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS PERSOLLY MYSELF AND IF THEY REINSERT THAT FEEDING TUBE AGAIN, THEY ARE DOING HER AND UNJUSTICE.

SO GROW UP PEOPLE AND LEARN THE LEGALITIES OF THE TERMS - IT'S BEEN 20 YEARS TOO LATE.

Cindy

Well, it looks to me lik... (Below threshold)
Bill K:

Well, it looks to me like the Dems have decided that their obstructionism extends to obstructing the protection of life

Are you kidding? Bush created a law in Texas that states feeding tubes MUST be removed from people in the same condition if they don't have the means to pay for it.

And, how is the party of small government actually backing INTERVENING into a one human's life by creating a law that goes against their express wishes. They subpoenaed a brain dead woman. Seriously. Usually I can buy the stupid blind party following, but this is too far.

I have thought a great deal... (Below threshold)
MikeAdamson:

I have thought a great deal about this case. Based on the facts as I know them I likely would transfer guardianship to the parents were I in the husband's place. I would do so based on the knowledge that my wife has no environmental awareness and thus would feel neither happy nor sad should her life end today. Her parents are clearly distressed and that distress would outweigh whatever promise or "indication" I gave my wife before the tragedy occurred.

I'm not in his place though and he has to do what he thinks best. What I resent is the misappropriation of her case for political/ideological considerations and its this misappropriation that turns people off of the political process.

As a member of the "right" ... (Below threshold)

As a member of the "right" I find myself on the "other side" on this issue.

I just don't see it. She's simply not going to recover. All she is doing is placing an emotional and financial strain upon her husband and those around her (even those trying to keep her alive are emotional invested in the issue) and death will bring about closure and allow all the parties involved a chance to grieve and more importantly to move on.

Given that it is possible that it is her wish not to be kept alive, I see no harm in allowing her to die. Further, I see a great deal of harm in the government forcing her to live.

I'm an avid motorcyclist and I have a DNR that I carry with me in my wallet (and a copy in my helmet) that says if I'm going to end up a vegetable, don't bring me back. My wife is also aware of my wishes, and should anything happen to me and my DNR's become lost I would fully expect her to be believed.

I have a good life insurance policy (I've often joked that I'm worth more to my family dead than I am alive) that will set up trust funds for my wife and my children in the advent of my death.

I would never wish the emotional and financial burned upon my family of having to keep me alive. My larger concern is that if the government does get involved suddenly the insurance company can claim my DNR is "murder or suicide" and not have to pay on my policy further contributing to my families difficulties.

I want the right to die when my brain does, and not be trapped in some parasitical state.

"SHE IS NOT BEING KILLED... (Below threshold)
BurbankErnie:

"SHE IS NOT BEING KILLED - SO CUT THE CRAP!!!"

Cindy

No, she is being denied life.

Looks like DU sent a bus lo... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

Looks like DU sent a bus load of trolls over here. Yuk!

Allah- good to see you-- I ... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Allah- good to see you-- I was so happy I put my reply in your post.

She is not in a PVS, that h... (Below threshold)
tmcatamney:

She is not in a PVS, that has never been established, nor is she "brain dead". She smiles, eats, has demonstrated congitive function, and according to a broadcast tonight, she actually mouthed "no" as they were pulling the tube.

Enough for a recount. Case closed.

Shortly after saying his de... (Below threshold)
tmcatamney:

Shortly after saying his determination to end Terri's life was about her wishes, Schiavo changed his story in the King interview. Asked if he understood her family's feelings, he said: "Yes, I do. But this is not about them, it's about Terri. And I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want. ..."


hmmmm, changed his story, "We didn't know what Terry wanted"....

Here's what Jonah Goldberg ... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

Here's what Jonah Goldberg really said:

"I have to say I'm disgusted with the faux moral outrage from liberals who are stunned by the idea that the federal government might get involved in issues like this. This is the party which danced a jig over the Violence Against Women Act and which has defined a vast swath of its political raison d'etre around the idea that the federal government should jealously guard the right to abortion and the right to appeal a death sentence in federal courts. And it is now scandalized that the Republican Party is trying to prevent a state court from killing a woman. It's okay for Washington to meddle when a husband slaps his wife, but it's outrageous when Washington tries to stop a husband from killing his wife? It's mandatory that a federal judge make sure a minority isn't passed-over for a promotion, but it's a rejection of the rule of law for a federal judge to make sure that a woman isn't wrongfully starved to death? Thanks to the hard work of Democrats states can't set their own drinking age or voting age, but suddenly state judges should be The Word of God when it comes to slowly killing citizens. I don't get it."

I don't get it either. Rape and murder a young girl and you get a lifetime full of endless appeals. Gimme a break .

I find your attacks on Cong... (Below threshold)
Zev:

I find your attacks on Cong. Schultz to be highly anti-semetic. To claim a Jew wants to kill a Christian, especially duing Holy Week, is blood libel Shame!

Excuse me, but why is this ... (Below threshold)
Anonie Mommie:

Excuse me, but why is this any of Congress's business?
The woman has no Cerebral Cortex.
She cannot swallow.
Her brain continues to deteorate.
She does not smile or talk or laugh or any of those things you have been fed - she cannot. She has no brain to do that.
Short of involuntary moans, she says nothing.
Please do better research before believing tripe.
And, I'll be DAMNED if I want to let Congress tell me how to take care of my family, particularly after they've cut anyway in which to do it.
Go ahead and blog about the "liberal bloggers," but, please, try to explain the facts of the case when you do.
This isn't about one woman - it's about Congress overstepping its bounds and playing judge, jury and non-executioner.

I'm not surprised that all... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

I'm not surprised that all of you ignored my comment posts, although I know you read them!!

Because you all spend your daily existence in the CEC and only watch Fox, I can understand you're failure to grasp how such transparent, partisan bad planning really hurts your President and your Party.

On behalf of the Democrats, I thank you.

Clive so you expect me to j... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Clive so you expect me to jump up and down and say that was a good law just because Bush signed it as governor?

If I was a citizen of Texas I would have opposed the law no matter who was signing it.

Clive so you expect me ... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

Clive so you expect me to jump up and down and say that was a good law just because Bush signed it as governor?

Acknowledging the fact that he's a hypocrite will do, Just Me!

There are societies in the ... (Below threshold)
troglodyte:

There are societies in the world (or there have been) where a husband had the right to terminate his wife when she became "inconvenient". (Read, e.g., Browning's "My Last Duchess" for a European perspective, or review the history of certain Eastern cultures.) There was a time when we prided ourselves on not being one of those.

There are societies today where the starving of an animal that is "of no futher use" is regarded as acceptable animal husbandry. We pride ourselves (or I thought we did) on not being one of those.

There are congessmen who believe we should not realign ourselves with those morally rejected experiments in human behavior, and there are those who do not.

How come the Dems don't ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

How come the Dems don't want to give this woman a day in Federal court? goodness knows they are always whining that criminals should get every appeal but Terri should not? hmmmm

Every appeal has already been made, that's the point. Congress wants to reject the judicial process and engage in trial by legislation.

Old Coot -- Yes, and Jonah'... (Below threshold)

Old Coot -- Yes, and Jonah's absolutely right about that. They're rank hypocrites. But he's also right on the federalism point that you didn't quote. This is a matter for the Florida legislature, not Congress.

Paul -- You're right, you haven't used the word "murder" but you have used the word "killing" and implied pretty strongly that the killing being done here is wrongful and intentional. Those are the standard legal components of murder.

As for why liberals are always on the side of death, I'm sure Willis would respond that he wasn't on the side of death when it came to Iraq. (Although, by that logic, he *was* on the side of death with respect to Afghanistan. But I digress.) I think it's less a question of supporting death than supporting choice -- specifically, the choice of one person to extinguish another's life in the interest of convenience so long as the victim's cognitive ability (esp. their ability to feel pain) is sufficiently impaired. It's entirely consistent with with their position on abortion, which is what this case boils down to. It's really just a debate over whether Michael Schiavo has the right to abort what is, for all intents and purposes, an adult fetus.

The point is, if Schiavo turned around and said, "You know what? I do want her to live," I'm pretty sure the Dems who are on his side right now wouldn't suddenly shift their positions. They're committed to giving choice precedence over life, and if he exercises his choice in favor of life, so be it. I think those priorities are despicable, but I also think it's a stretch to say they're pro-killing.

[Paul Replies Again] I see your point, but I hope you see mine... This is a commissive act that will take the life of another human being. This is, by any definition, called killing. It's a dirty word but that is because it is a dirty task.

You know as well as I that under no other circumstance would the Dems agree to staving someone to death... What if we put people on death row to death by starvation? What if a prisoner in Guantanimo misses lunch? The Libs would want Bush drawn and quartered.

Starvation would be found against the 8th amendment in a heartbeat.... but it is OK to kill Terri via starvation? This is no less killing than lethal injection... In fact it is far more barbaric.

Seems to be a lot of simila... (Below threshold)

Seems to be a lot of similarities between your posts on this subject and my conversation over the past weeks. Only difference being that my posts were a couple of hours or days earlier than yours ...

Let me know if you'd like to combine our efforts instead of duplicating... and highlight the cruelty that is the illiberal Democratic party today.

St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy

The Party of Death, Part II
Schiavo
The Party of Death

I think John Conyers is on ... (Below threshold)

I think John Conyers is on life support. Jeeze this man sounds like he has had about 5 gin and tonics.

Between this and Chris Shays who is arguably even more repugnant than Kerry i need to vomit. Visual and Audio Ipecac.

I also agree, Barney Frank is enjoying this way too much.

Between this and Boston Legal tonight I feel like I need a shower after listening to all this shit.

Here we go again....<... (Below threshold)
ginabina:

Here we go again....

CINDY....

TERRI IS NOT BRAIN DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GOT THAT?

(btw, yelling is intended for Cindy only.)

Get over your guilt and let those who love and care about Terri make decisions for her.

And Scott, your response was heartfelt, but a DNR is not the point now. She was brought back and is, for time being, alive. She was being fed and now she is being starved.

If you had an injured dog, you wouldn't be allowed to starve him until he died. Euthanization (sp?) is not an option for those who love Terri, because of religious objections. Therefore, they chose to feed her.

Her "husband" does not love Terri any longer. He loves his new wife and children.

Wonder how much he'll get for his book deal and movie rights? Heck, he can probably run for Congress on the Democratic ticket.

Scumbag.

Starving for compassion,
ginabina

Oh yeah...Allah's ... (Below threshold)
ginabina:

Oh yeah...

Allah's in the house! woo hoo!

The point is, if Schiav... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

The point is, if Schiavo turned around and said, "You know what? I do want her to live," I'm pretty sure the Dems who are on his side right now wouldn't suddenly shift their positions.

At this point Allah, just such a petty and hysterical comment would illicit laughter, instead of outrage from a Democrat! But, I'm sure you'll find an excuse somehow for why an overwhelming majority of Americans who side with the Democrats, are not killers, too.

Old Coot wrote:Wh... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Old Coot wrote:
When the convicted rapist/murderer of a young girl has his case transferred to a Federal court for review (and endless appeals) will that be cynical?

The convicted rapist/murderer of a young girl, when the system plays itself out, will be given a quick, peaceful death by injection. Yet Terri is being forced to endure a slow, lingering death. So apparently you don't advocate giving brain-dead people all of the rights afforded to rapist/murderers. How's that for cynical?

AllahConsidering t... (Below threshold)

Allah

Considering the obvious conflict of interest Michael has in this case, and that Terri's parents have been willing to take over her care, why is his choice absent any evidence of her willingness to choose euthanasia so important that any exculpatory evidence that refutes the medically inaccurate description of Terri is PVS must be suppressed?

As I've followed this case it feels like one of those nesting Russian dolls..you assume certain things then when you open that layer you are surprised at what you find underneath.

This is not a case of a right to die via living will but a case to euthanize a eugenically inferior being because she is an inconvenience to the Michael and a postergirl for eugenics advocates Felos and Cranford.

Wonder how much he'll ge... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Wonder how much he'll get for his book deal and movie rights?

Whatever he gets from those deals, he'll owe it to Jeb Bush. Were it not for Jeb, this case would not have received any publicity whatsoever, and Terri would just be one of the anonymous hundreds(?) who are allowed to die with dignity each year.

CliveIf that "over... (Below threshold)

Clive

If that "overwhelming majority" of Americans have been getting their "facts" on the case via the MSM (like I did until a couple of months ago) they are basically unaware that Terri is NOT PVS, Michael has a huge conflict of interest, and there has been no standard medical testing of Terri.

And that's only 3 basic points of this case.

Hey, Dems want to be the new American Eugenics Party..knock yourself out.

The good that has come out ... (Below threshold)
Once a upon a beautiful mind:

The good that has come out of this is the open discussion with families about DNR.

If I was trapped in my mind and was unble to respond for 15 years, take me outta the game. The torture of being kept alive for the hope and or promise that I one day would come out of it is cruel.

My brain and who I was are long gone, let my body go. Give me something that would let me sleep and pain relief for when my body shuts down. Don't fight for the 25% of quality of life that I have. I would not want to hear the conversations debated over and over again without my ability to respond. Which will never come.

Would any of you like to be trapped in your own mind, with nary the glimmer of every being a functioning human being again. Rolled over twice a day, changed and fed through a tube for the next 40 years?

I ask you this now with knowing you can make that choice of sound body and mind, is that what you would want as your exsistance?

BrianTerri is not ... (Below threshold)

Brian

Terri is not dying, she's being put to death.

Not a lot of dignity in being dehydrated and starved and laying there in pain as you skin starts to crack and bleed and choking on the mucus that becomes thick as your body tries to protect itself.

Whose life is not valuable enough to let them be fed and hydrated, Brian? The severely autistic? Low-functioning Down Syndrome? Crack babies?

What Eugenics Board do YOU want instituted?

Ya know just because you wo... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Ya know just because you wouldn't want to be like that, it doesn't mean you have the right to determine that she wouldn't or that anyone else wouldn't. If you don't want to be that way, then make sure you put it in writing.

I have already made it clear, I don't want to be starved to death. And with the advent of this case, I have also made it clear that if my husband chooses to move on with his life, then I want him to divorce me and give my sister control over those decisions. I don't want a man who has already moved on with his life making life and death decisions about me and my care.

Darleen, And, Tom ... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

Darleen,

And, Tom DeLay said on CNN today that Schavio 'talks'. Do you concur?

Once UponWhat if i... (Below threshold)

Once Upon

What if it was reversed. What if you were a mind trapped in a body with only minimal ability to respond, but respond as much as you could...

Does your "husband". who stands to get the bulk of the money awarded that was granted based on your life span of 50 years, get to kill you by having you declared a potted plant by a published eugenicist who sits with you for 45 minutes?

CliveHer nurses ha... (Below threshold)

Clive

Her nurses have testified she has, or had, a few discernable words. And that she RESPONDS to her environment and those around her.

That definitively disproves PVS.

If you want to argue that she's eugenically inferior and thus should be declared berift of Constitutional rights, as Cranford advocates, then make that argument. But drop the "we are doing this in Terri's best interest" crap.

We are not talking LIFE SUPPORT here, only basic FOOD AND WATER.

Good god, my office PROSECUTES people who starve animals to death and you want to support a man doing that to a woman!!

This is INSANE.

I've known lots of humans w... (Below threshold)
troglodyte:

I've known lots of humans who are "rolled over and changed twice a day" and fed as well, by their parents. They are called babies, and they smile and are happy at the loving care they receive (just as Terri seems to do). They have no idea whether they will ever be "functioning human beings" and, in fact, some of them don't make it, just as Terri might not.

But even when they don't make it, their mothers rarely regret the loving care they were given. And when they die, they die because God takes them away.

That's not quite the same as being deprived of your child by a cheating husband and a tin-pot judge, isn't it?

Given the same circumstance... (Below threshold)
Once upon a beautiful mind:

Given the same circumstances as Terri, I would be unaware of what my husband was doing as well as any other choices being made on my behalf.

I will concede in this, that she should be given over to the parents, but I would hope that my parents would understand my wishes to not just let me stay alive for their benefit and hopes of my return. That 25% of the quality that I once had is sad state to remain in. It is not "killing/murder" it is being let go.

Darleen, I have answered your question, please answer mine.

OnceIf you want yo... (Below threshold)

Once

If you want your wishes followed, than be sure they are written down somewhere. Otherwise, if the law is to act as a vehicle for the moral (and common) good, then it must find that Terri does indeed deserve the minimal basics of life, food and water, until such time she naturally passes away.

Anything less is a call for a eugenics decision. I do NOT want to live in a society that arbitrarily puts to death the lesser amongst us because they are not perfect.

YOU may not want to live at 25% functionality, but someone else just might find it just grand.

What do you think when you observe a severely handicapped child? Are you pleased with their simple smile at a shiney balloon, or do you think "poor dear, should be dead"?

Darleen wrote:"Con... (Below threshold)

Darleen wrote:

"Considering the obvious conflict of interest Michael has in this case, and that Terri's parents have been willing to take over her care, why is his choice absent any evidence of her willingness to choose euthanasia so important that any exculpatory evidence that refutes the medically inaccurate description of Terri is PVS must be suppressed?"

Precisely the right question. That's exactly why I would have voted with the pro-life camp if I were a member of the Florida legislature. Ostensibly this is all being done in accordance with her wishes, but since the only evidence we have of her wishes is the word of her legal guardian, for all practical purposes it's his choice, not hers. The obvious solution is to pass a statute prohibiting euthanasia except in cases where the victim has memorialized his/her wishes in a written instrument, but for whatever reason the Fla. legislature hasn't gone that route.

Stephen Hawking had better ... (Below threshold)

Stephen Hawking had better watch his @ss... the Dems are coming after him soon.

Darleen -Good g... (Below threshold)

Darleen -

Good god, my office PROSECUTES people who starve animals to death...

I don't know why your office should do that any longer. After all, death by starvation/dehydration is "peaceful," "gentle," "dignified," and causes "little discomfort:"

N.Y. Times: Starvation Death Not Painful (Newsmax)

Thanks for giving us the green light to go ahead and starve unwanted animals to death, Dems. *thumbs up*

Oh..and OnceI woul... (Below threshold)

Oh..and Once

I would be devestated and probably bitter for a time if I was incapacitated by stroke or injury

But if I'm not on life support (which does NOT include food and water) I don't care if my "quality of life" is down 75%, I want to be around.

Anyone think it was a picnic for Christopher Reed to decide to go on living? or Steven Hawking?

Bill you say:"B... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Bill you say:

"Bush created a law in Texas that states feeding tubes MUST be removed from people in the same condition if they don't have the means to pay for it."

That is simply an untruth. I know that is what Oliver Willis told you to say but it is not true. Get a clue.

Well, thanks to the Dems...... (Below threshold)

Well, thanks to the Dems... the inevitable has been delayed. and for what purpose? certainly it didn't have anything other than a POLITICAL MOTIVE...

The republicans and the dems had agreed to a voice vote, which would've removed from the public record who voted in which way... but still protect the life. but the Dems saw this as a political oppty and forced a full vote.

They decided that they'd want to starve her for an additional 12 hours just to make that political point. How callous... Perhaps they were hoping that she'd collapse and die within that time period.

In some regards it is "life... (Below threshold)
Once upon a beautiful mind:

In some regards it is "life support" it my not be a breathing tube, but she is unable to feed herself, thus they are "supporting" her life.

My understanding of "life support" is that should it be ceased on someone who is sustaining life because of such assistance, their bodies also fight to stay alive. That it is more over a auto response of the nerve system.

As to your statement about a severly handicapped child, my son lives with Autism, don't you feel like an ass.

I do not view Terri as lesser then us, but if it was her wishes then let it be carried out.

AllahAs I understa... (Below threshold)

Allah

As I understand it didn't the FL legislature try to address this issue and got shot down by the FL Supreme Court?

This isn't just about Michael's "right" but about Terri not receiving even the minimal accepted medical testing to determine PVS.

Jaysus on a Pony ... if a rapist has been sitting in prison for 15 years and 5 years ago new DNA testing unknown at the time of his conviction is now in play, ya think anyone would STAND for the trial judge denying a testing of the evidence that could exonerate the rapist because the judge didn't want to chance the conviction overturned??

Give Terri the MRI and PET. It is the Minimal standard in trying to determine PVS (which in 1996 the British Medical Journal had a study that showed a 43% error rate in diagnosis of PVS)

Once - No one knows what he... (Below threshold)

Once - No one knows what her wishes were... As Wizbang's Paul highlighted in an earlier post, it requires Clear and Convincing Evidence of that person's wishes in order to remove life support. Currently, the only evidence is the recollection of her husband (who would be considered to have a common law wife if he lived in any other state) and that recollection has changed throughout the years. The dems are talking about the rights of the family in making this decision... .but in my mind, Terri's Mom & Dad are more her family than Michael, as Michael hasn't been involved in her life (other than trying to kill her) since she was injured. He has another family which he should be responsible for.. he should turn over custody to her parents, who are willing and able to support her.

St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy

OnceNo, I'm surpri... (Below threshold)

Once

No, I'm surprised YOU don't feel like an ass because you want to decide for an unrelated human being just what is "quality of life" and what is not. I'm surprised, if you truly do have an autistic child, that you don't understand Terri's parents willingness to care for her.

I wasn't going to mention this but I'm really ticked... my husband's late uncle was one of those extraordinary and blessed people who, along with his wife, took in, adopted, loved and cared for profoundly disabled children...both physically and mentally disabled.

Just the kind of people Felos and Cranford believe should not have Constitutional rights and should be denied basic food and water.

So WHAT if Terri can't feed herself at this point. Neither can a severely disabled child.

WE DON'T STARVE THAT CHILD TO DEATH just because they are "lesser" than.

Not surprised Paul, that y... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

Not surprised Paul, that you did not provide any evidence to refute Oliver.

">http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/healthlawprof_blog/2005/03/lifesupport_sto.html"> A Health Law blog details the two stories today in Texas newspapers of Bush's Futile Life Law in practice.

Hey CliveNot a dam... (Below threshold)

Hey Clive

Not a damned thing about Section 166 mandating death to patients that can't pay.

Read it and find it, bucko.

Darleen...any comments on t... (Below threshold)
MikeAdamson:

Darleen...any comments on the Texas cases?

On that I agree. She should... (Below threshold)
Once upon a beautiful mind:

On that I agree. She should be given over to her parents. Yet someone deemed it possible for Micheal to still have power of attorney over her.

Where have the discussions broken down between him and her family? My stance on letting someone go if that is what they have expressed still stands.

The facts on whether this is true or not remain between Terri and Micheal. His motive? money? This is alot to put yourself out their for money. Following through with Terri's wishes is a conviction, it would seem.

Darlene/Anne Coulter, your responses and tyrad's only deminish your efforts. Walk a day in my shoes and then maybe you can discuss Autism with me. Your wrong to ASSume that people in here or out there don't know first hand about fighting for their loved one or having to make a extremely difficult choice.

Uh, never said it was in su... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

Uh, never said it was in support of Oliver's or Bill's claim, Darlene! That was you jumping to hysterical conclusions, babycakes!

Certainly makes Bush look hypocritical, yes?

Clive, you look like the Ch... (Below threshold)
once:

Clive, you look like the Cheshire Cat right now!

RE: Bad TX billNO.... (Below threshold)
ginabina:

RE: Bad TX bill

NO....this bill was not the bill then Governor Bush wanted enacted. However, it went further to protect life than the exisisting hospital policies and was what he could get with a Democratic TX Congress.

Always comes down to Bush-bashing, doesn't it?

The cases are tragic and fr... (Below threshold)

The cases are tragic and from what I read, the Texas law was passed with input from the Right-to-Life group in an effort to put into place a review procedure to resolve DISPUTES between medical practioners and families. Nothing in the 1999 law which only applied to adults (revised in 2003 to include pediatric patients.... hmmm..I wonder if some people will note that date) mandates death to patients that cannot pay. Indeed, at anytime a family can remove the patient to other medical facilities willing to accept the patient.

I'd wager that Terri's parents wish they lived in Texas right now. Cranford's inadequate diagnosis would have been overturned by peer review in a NY minute.

Sometimes when bushes get c... (Below threshold)
once:

Sometimes when bushes get covered with crud you need to shake'm up and bash'm around a little to clean them up.

Clive, you're only posting ... (Below threshold)
Julie:

Clive, you're only posting what has been discussed before. And they say the republicans are doing this for politcal purposes! Ha!

Clive posts at 10:21 pm... (Below threshold)

Clive posts at 10:21 pm

By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay ...

Again, Clive, where in section 166 does it say that?

Once upon Hey, you... (Below threshold)

Once upon

Hey, you ASSume you know what shoes I walk in, so sister, hold your tyrads (sic).

meshugga

There are some opportunitie... (Below threshold)
torlodyte:

There are some opportunities to just be proud to be an American, and a lonely republican out here on in the deepest heart of the left coast.

It would have been so easy for the President and the Congress to just let this one pass. The "court", in the person of this tin-pot judge, had, after all, spoken. Politics would dictate that they let it go, and create a campaign issue on the martyrdom of Terri Schiavo as an example of judges gone wild.

But they didn't. They, the President and the congress, came out of vacation and stepped into the arena. They will be bludgeoned by the MSM. But they did right.

I have become so damned cynical in this bastion of the politically correct that I am surprised. But I am delighted. May this be one more gentle ripple in the start of a tsunami that creates the "Shining City on a Hill" that ought to be.

Clive, you look like th... (Below threshold)
Clive Tolson:

Clive, you look like the Cheshire Cat right now!

Sorry once! Is it that obvious? I just detest liars and hypocrites, especially the Republican variety.

And "once"....Darl... (Below threshold)
ginabina:

And "once"....

Darleen has been arguing for your rights as your child's parent to determine what is best for your child. Why does that elicit such wrath from you?

You clearly have not been following this story for long. To recap: Michael Shiavo sued for Terri's rehabilitation and then, after winning and shacking up with his new wife, suddenly remembered that "oh yeah, one time, in passing, Terri said she doesn't want to live on life support" (paraphrase). It was then that he and the activist Judge Greer (the only judge to ever actually hear the case) began their crusade to kill her.

Hmmm...that would probably be where any dialog between Terri's parents and Michael broke down, I'm guessing. I certainly hope my parents would stop "dialogging" with my husband if he was newly hooked up with a honey and, incidentally, wanted to kill me.

The money was intended to be for Terri's rehabilitation and he has barred all rehab efforts (keeping her room dark and quiet, not even brushing her teeth because it is stimulating, etc.) There are hospice nurses who said that she was able to accept spoonfuls of food and Michael had the court order it to stop.

Still, I'm *sure* he has her best interest at heart and only wants to fulfill her wishes. (not)

What happened to the money? Some say it's gone after all the legal wrangling. There is still a life insurance policy (with guess who as the beneficiary), I've heard. And let's not forget poor martyred Michael's media options.

Has anyone heard the Druge audio? If it can be authenticated, it is chilling and heartbreaking.


Starving for compassion,
ginabina

I know the baby in Texas al... (Below threshold)
Julie:

I know the baby in Texas also had pulmonary hypoplasia on top of his thanatophoric dysplasia. The baby's lungs will never grow. He can not get sufficient oxygen to support his body even on a vent. And bc of his skeletal deformations, his chest will collapse.

Unlike the Schiavo case, we do not have access to his records. So, it's more than unfair, not that you are concerned with fairness, to ask for comments. And the only reason you are asking for comments is because, being a good dem, you havee made it into a political issue. You people are experts on projecting.

Paul wrote:"You kn... (Below threshold)

Paul wrote:

"You know as well as I that under no other circumstance would the Dems agree to staving someone to death... What if we put people on death row to death by starvation? What if a prisoner in Guantanimo misses lunch? The Libs would want Bush drawn and quartered."

I don't even know where to begin here. Are we talking about prisoners who are physically healthy or prisoners in a condition similar to Terri Schiavo's? If the former, then starving them wouldn't be euthanasia, it would be murder plain and simple. If the latter, then it would be euthanasia at the discretion of the state, which is just about the last fucking power you'd ever want a government to have. In short, the liberals would be right to bitch.

As for Sensenbrenner's point about starving an animal, is he implying that sick pets aren't euthanized in Florida? Or that, when they are, their owners are fined for doing so? Or is he actually making a bullshit analogy between healthy animals for whom starvation is a needless agony and a near-vegetative human who, according to her spouse, didn't want to live in this condition? Sensenbrenner should be ashamed of himself, especially considering that the reason Terri Schiavo is being made to die passively, by starvation, while brain-dead animals get a shot is because we're reluctant to give anyone the power to actively take a human life.

Let me be clear: if we knew for a fact that she wanted to die under these circumstances, I'd side with the Democrats. Choice, in that case, does take precedence over life. The fact is, though, we don't know what she wanted and I'm unwilling to let her waste away on the say-so of another. It's that simple.

Not enough time to get into... (Below threshold)
JYT:

Not enough time to get into this fully, but I did read:

From St Wendeler

Michael hasn't been involved in her life (other than trying to kill her) since she was injured

This is a blatant falsehood. From the trial record, "By all accounts, Mr. Schiavo has been very motivated in pursuing the best medical care for his wife, even taking her to California for a month or so of experimental treatment. It is undisputed that he was very agressive with nursing home personnel to make certain that she received the finest of care."


http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder02-00.pdf

How about an apology for the needless slander when you don't know the facts, St.

JYTthe trip was pr... (Below threshold)

JYT

the trip was prior to 1992 wasn't it?

AllahIf Terri had ... (Below threshold)

Allah

If Terri had had a living will, we wouldn't be here.

She didn't and she hasn't even had the minimal medical testing required for PVS.

Something is rotten in Florida and it aint just Terri's teeth that Michael refuses routine care for...

Posted by: Old Coot :... (Below threshold)
Julie:

Posted by: Old Coot :

Looks like DU sent a bus load of trolls over here. Yuk!

Psst, maybe we shd send them cindy as revenge. :p

Not a lot of dignity in ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Not a lot of dignity in being dehydrated and starved and laying there in pain as you skin starts to crack and bleed and choking on the mucus that becomes thick as your body tries to protect itself.

Well, Darleen, where is your outrage at the other hundreds (thousands?) of times this has occurred in our nation's medical establishment? I assume you don't support legalizing any humane ways for a life to come to a dignified end (most people in your camp certainly don't). So starvation is all we're left with.

No, I don't assume to know ... (Below threshold)
Once:

No, I don't assume to know what shoes you walk in, I never stated that I did, unlike you. Oh, by the way we are not in any "Sistahood" meshugga? what does that mean?

It is amazing how you go from intelligent to gutter mama in a split second. I'm not having any tyrad's, but your comments in capitals show that your a woman on the edge.

We can have "adult" debates and still agree to disagree. Yet your kind seem to always take it personally and way out there in having to prove your right. Making comments and ASSumations that make you like such as the later. It is kind of laughable how you insult and then not expect some type of response (head shaking in awe). And when you do, you go on the attack again ( still shaking with a sardonic smile coming through)

Gina,

Darleen has not fought any fight for my child. In addition there is no wrath on my part. I am simply do not agree with all that she has to say. She also makes comments with out being cautious as to who she might be talking to, and when rebutled responds with wrath.

There are some reasonable people here that do not agree with my stance on the issue, but they are not attacking me or anyone else in here. They state their opinion and we banter back and forth like adults. But put to the test I will not idle while darleen feels the need to put it to me because we do not agree.

Why do you hate the sacred ... (Below threshold)

Why do you hate the sacred bond of Marriage so much that you would put the desires of an elected politician to make publicity over the desires of a husband to make the best judgement of what is best for his own wife? When someone marries, they are no longer the responsiblity of their parents, they are now the responsibility of their spouse. If you don't like that, change the laws, abolish marriage.

OK, just one more -- "clear... (Below threshold)
JYT:

OK, just one more -- "clear and convincing evidence" from the court record again:

"Michael Schiavo testified as to a few discussions he had with his wife concerning life support. THe Guardian Ad Litem felt that this testimony standing alone would not rise to clear and convincing evidence...The court reviewed the testimony of Scott Schiavo (brother) and Joan Schiavo (sister-in-law) and finds nothing therein to be unreliable. The court notes that neither of these witnesses appeared to have shaded his or her testimony or even attempt to exclude unfavorable comments or points regarding these discussions. They were not impeached on cross-examination." -- so lets hear no more about how this is all based on the word of her husband. There are 3 (count them, three) witnesses to Terri's wishes.

As long as we're on the subject of what's in the testimony, the whole next section is dedicated to how the court finds "beyond all reasonable doubt that Theresa Marie Schiavo is in a persistent vegitative state...with the exception of one (count them one) witness whom the court finds to be so biased as to lack credibility, her movements are occasional and totally consistent with the testimony of the expert medical witnesses...the unrebutted evidence remains that Terri Schiavo remains in a persistent vegitative state."

Please present your medical degrees AND evidence of having reviewed Terri's mdeical records before disparaging these findings of the court or be relegated to a "faith-based" poster.

Hmmmm... Once upon uses the... (Below threshold)

Hmmmm... Once upon uses the phrase about me as "your kind"

Wow. Not unexpected. Challenge elitism, find elitism.

psst... once upon? meshugga is Yiddish for "insane"

wanna refer to me as "your kind" again?

And do let me know how you "feel" when the Dr. Cranford's start looking at YOUR child as unworthy of living. You know, that 25% quality of life thingy you posit?

BrianPay attention... (Below threshold)

Brian

Pay attention now. Can you do that?

If Terri had a LIVING WILL I would have NO objection to her dying. As an adult she had the right to choose "no heroic methods."

But that is NOT what is under discussion. Terri is being declared not worthy of life because she's an eugenic inconvenience standing between Michael and whatever he hopes to gain by her unnatural death.

Darleen, I believe ... (Below threshold)
JYT:

Darleen,
I believe that I was very explicit in the posting that I was responding to. All Michael's actions that I referenced were after the accident, as is obvious. The egregious poster stated, "Michael hasn't been involved in her life (other than trying to kill her) since she was injured". So, I'm not sure exactly what point you're trying to make with '92. I'll make you a deal: tell me your position on St Wendler's accusation and I'll go look up the trip date.

I am not Yiddish. So again ... (Below threshold)
once:

I am not Yiddish. So again you assume I would understand what you meant. Well if you want to know what I mean by your kind. Look it up, it also means "meshugga"

Excuse me, Once, I assumed ... (Below threshold)
ginabina:

Excuse me, Once, I assumed that your capitalizing the first three letters of ASSume continuously put you in the category of a name-calling idiot who jumped into the middle of a conversation and made it all about yourself. What a brilliant technique to show you are above insults! Cutesy at best; obnoxious at worst.

And to the poster who talked about the sacred bond of marriage? I'd be laughing if you weren't all advocating active participation in killing someone who can't defend herself. I think Michael gave that up when he shacked up with his new honey and had two children with her.

Not to be redundant or anything....


Guess I overestimated you, ... (Below threshold)

Guess I overestimated you, Once.

I didn't assume you'd necessarily know a common Yiddish expression (like I don't speak Spanish but I know what "vio con Dios" means)

but I did assume you'd know how to use Google.

Sorry.

JYTPlease read <a ... (Below threshold)

JYT

Please read this from top to bottom.

If it doesn't give you the least amount of pause, than...well

Hell, eugenics here we come!

Posted by: Darleen at Ma... (Below threshold)
JYT:

Posted by: Darleen at March 21, 2005 01:50 AM
But that is NOT what is under discussion. Terri is being declared not worthy of life because she's an eugenic inconvenience standing between Michael and whatever he hopes to gain by her unnatural death.

As I noted above, that's absolutely wrong. What's at issue is that a court determined that she is in a persistent vegitative state AND that her wishes were to die if in such a condition. Now, you can argue that there should be another appeal, that new laws can apply, that the federal govt. should have jurisdiction, etc, but you can't change what's already been decided by the courts, as much as you want to. All your outlandish claims have been given full and repeated hearings in the courts, and these were the findings.

They only thing I can be gr... (Below threshold)
Once:

They only thing I can be grateful for is not having a radical such as yourself Darleen fighting for anything I might ever need. Your "meshugga" type approach makes pleased that I do not live where you live, in mind and land.

The fact that people agree to disgree is healthy for the debate of life. For if we all thought in a collective mind set, then we would surly be lost. I am neither Dem or Rep, as I am not American. But the issue at hand is a human one. No, I am not related to this woman nor are you. It should have been left to the family and her husband. On some level he must still love her to take on your nation in fulfilling her wishes. He could sulk away into the shadows and not have it his issue any longer. Yet he feels the need to stand by his and Terri's convictions

You know, I had appendiciti... (Below threshold)
Darby:

You know, I had appendicitis once. I went 3 days without food and water. Let me tell you, I could live without the food, but god Dehydration sucks big time.

I was on an IV for 14 hours with a moderately quick drip to re-hydrate me. It took me 2 days before I was able to use the bathroom. I ended having to have to be cath'd to make sure that my bodily functions were working properly. The Docs were worried.

I would not wish that upon anyone. It is miserable and I almost died.

Unless you've been seriously dehydrated. Don't anyone every say it's pleasant. As for Starving to death. From Aug. '03 to the end of Oct '03 I had no job, no food, no transportation, and no money. Starving is not fun either. At times I was living on bread and water once or twice a week.

Luckily a local church came and had a cook-out on the last Saturday of every month. They would let me keep all the left overs. Most of which was bread, which kept me alive for the following month or so.

Then I got the job I currently have. I'm back to a normal and healthy weight. I eat regularly, and I do not every hope to have to be starving every again.

She didn't and she hasn'... (Below threshold)
mantis:

She didn't and she hasn't even had the minimal medical testing required for PVS.

Ok, I've been looking around about this and the only place I can find that says an MRI or PET scan are necessary to diagnose PVS is in that NRO piece. Everything else I find on medical sites basically says that MRI and CT scans (which was performed) can help identify the cause of PVS (like large portions of the cerebral cortex being fluid), but that the condition is diagnosed through clinical observation. Further, PET scans or EEGs (which was performed) "can be used to shed light on the physiology of the VS, but are not yet routine diagnostic tools. Their use is not required for diagnosis of the VS, which remains essentially clinical." Complete info here, courtesy of the Royal College of Physicians (2003).

OK, Darleen. I read the NRO... (Below threshold)
JYT:

OK, Darleen. I read the NRO article. A few quick points that seem to have escaped you in this article:

1) Obviously, you're approaching the work of the Reverend Robert Johansen as being more impartial than that of the trial judge. I was wondering why that is, specifically.

2) It is mentioned a few times in the article that CT scans are useful in pretty severe cases with massive damage. If Terri has this type of damage, then this whole article is pointless. As you'll note, NOWHERE in the article does it state that the good reverend actually shows the doctors the existing CT scan, even though this is a matter of public record. That would seem like a pretty relevant piece of material for them to review.

3) There's a very good reason that judges don't usually rehear cases based on "new facts". That's because anybody can claim to come up with new facts at any time. If this happened every time a ruling went against someone, and the case had to be retried, then we'd never close any cases. That's why procedural error is the basis for appeals.

4) The good Reverend spends 10 paragraphs discussing Dr. Cranford and his testimony. How many paragraphs are spent on the independent doctor's testimony (appointed by the court) that was presented in the trial? How many are spent examining the background, testimony, etc of the parent's "expert witness"?

5) What exactly was it that prevented Terri's parents from making all these exact arguments during the original trial? See, when you write a biased article, you can throw out anything you want, make any arguments that come to mind, etc. When you actually try them in court, is when they get tested against the actual evidence.

Now, please read ALL the court transcript that I linked to earlier. It's only fair

Thank you, mantis. That was... (Below threshold)
JYT:

Thank you, mantis. That was a very informative article.

Big Time Patriot evoked the... (Below threshold)
Newman:

Big Time Patriot evoked the "sacred bond of marriage" to justify Schiavo's right to terminate his (first) wife. I don't know what Schiavo's motives are but I doubt if the sanctity of marriage is one of them.

He's been living common law with another woman for years and has two children by her. I'd say she's his current wife. He just hasn't bothered to divorce his first wife yet. The reasons: Undying love? Money? Too much trouble? Your guess is as good as mine.

In any case he's given up those precious, special, to-die-for, sacred marriage rights long ago.

As someone once said, "You can't have your Kate and Edith too."

::Rep- Mel Watt (D) Scumbag... (Below threshold)
Jewels:

::Rep- Mel Watt (D) Scumbagonia-:: HOW the heck did this guy get elected?!? Do these people have any sense in their heads?

Thanks for the LB, Paul. I missed it yesterday. I don't know what's sadder- the illogical (un)intelligence of these people or that they are voting to kill a helpless woman who's only crime is that she can't lift a spoon to her lips.

As someone once said, "Y... (Below threshold)
Jewels:

As someone once said, "You can't have your Kate and Edith too."
Posted by: Newman

LOL! I need to find a reason to use that one...

Once I have a son with auti... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Once I have a son with autism, and frankly this kind of stuff scares me, because I don't want somebody deciding who deserves and doesn't deserve to be a person, and who does and doesn't deserve to live, and whose disabilities cause too much of a burden that we should be able to kill them.

You may say it won't happen, but it is already happening in Europe where some countries have active euthenasia laws.

This whole road scares me, because I worry for the day my son's disability shows up on the list of those whose quality of life doesn't meet our standard.

"In some regards it is "life support" it my not be a breathing tube, but she is unable to feed herself, thus they are "supporting" her life. "

Then should we head out right now, and start killing anyone who is on a feeding tube? My nephew was on a feeding tube for two years, should my bil and sil been able to starve him to death?

Allah, I think the point ab... (Below threshold)
Newman:

Allah, I think the point about prisoners on death row was that there would be an outcry if we chose to execute them by starvation and dehydration. (No matter how humane it seems to let them just waste away.)

It's obviously not murder when a condemned man is put to death. Some people seem to care more about a serial killer than a handicapped person on a feeding tube. I realize it's a very complex issue, but this part really does seem simple.

I wonder if Terri is a Regi... (Below threshold)
TheEnigma:

I wonder if Terri is a Registered democrat? She must be, because in her current state she is unable to vote, but once she is confirmed to have died, the democrats would find some method to have her vote, for democrats of course.

(if anyone doesn't recoginize it, this comment is pure sarcasm directed at the democrats who always fight to prevent a convicted child murderer from being legally executed but who will fight tooth an nail to allow the torture and murder a fetus or to pull the plug on a helpless woman)

democrats - always on the wrong side of the issue - murder the innocent and save the guilty

This is an issue that shoul... (Below threshold)
once:

This is an issue that should be with the families. My dear friend Kelly who has no passed away from cancer was not eating in the week or so at the end of her life. She was stage 4 and ready to die. She did not commnicate this as she was not lucid enough to convey this, but what could be done for her was done. She was being given the nutrients to sustain her vitals and ease any pain, but she was gone. They let her go. Why is this any different.

You and I both know that that Autism is not life threatening. Our Children do not require support in the functioning of their vitals. They need a great deal of support with there developmental hurdles.

Has the issue of her being a burden even been brought up by her husband? As I said before, here is a man who has put himself out there for the scrutney of the public eye, all in an effort to carry out the wishes he was asked. Correct he has moved on, as I am certain other's have in the same situation. But it does not diminish his care and concern for her and the wishes they had discussed. He seems pretty tenaious about carry this request out. It would be alot easier for him to just relent and go on with his life. I believe scarficing Terri and no amount of money would be worth all this in the end. He has a conviction that is driving him to follow through with this.

Maybe the same drive and determination as you or I might have should someone try to control choices and decisions we would make for our children. I believe this issue ( Autism and developmental disorders) does not compare to what Terri's issue is.

Involving the government in most cases opens a whole can of worms that you cannot close once opened. You are subject to their ideals and belief systems. Yes, you elect these people into these positions to oversee what is best or that they may reflect your stance on things, but not always and not on every issue. That is were the danger lies when allow the government to act on your behalf. They will do what they want to do with or without consent (by implementing laws and bills). It is a double edged sword and mirrors this situation.

We all view things differently and that's what creates healthy debate. I may come out of this with a changed perspective or I may not. I am more then willing to concede when I concur with someone in a point, yet also willing to banter my perspective if I look at it otherwise. All opinions are just that, opinions, even if not agreed upon.

I read of a father who took... (Below threshold)
once:

I read of a father who took his severely disabled daughter (14 years old, I think) to the drive shed on his family farm and made her comfortable by sedating her to sleep. Then started the car he placed her in so that she might sleep willing she died. The list of suffering that she endured on a daily basis had been decided by entire immediate and extended family was torture for her to carry on. The family was commited to caring for her but felt that her quality of life was of such that they felt it more cruel to sustain her life.

He turned himself into the police and told them what he had done. This was the families laid out plan to do so. He knew the laws were not on his side in doing so and that there would be consequences for his actions. He was prepared to adhere to what might follow. The family weighed out the choice they were making and felt anytime he might serve was once less day she would suffer and he was willing to carry that burden to set her free.

The agony he went through to carry his daugther to the drive shed and let her go was torture to him, yet in the end he wanted to set her free from her shell of exsistance.

I do not post on here with laws, bills and party siding. These things need to be discussed,yes but at the core is a woman, that none of us truly knows what she wanted. A husband who stands by a conviction that this is what she wanted and a family who wants to have her relinquished to their care.

I would hope none of us ever have to come to a cross roads such as this in ourlives.

Well, now that there will b... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Well, now that there will be a federal judge reviewing the case, we'll just have to wait and see about Terri's fate. In the meantime, the question becomes do you think that congress have overstepped its bounds here by engaging in trial by legislation? The lawmakers assure us that this law is specific to this situation and will set no precedent, but what is to stop congress from intervening every time they feel a state court case was decided wrongly? For those of you who are supporting this why do you feel its ok for congress to undermine the separation of powers among the branches?

In the end, my guess is that the federal judge who receives this case will either refuse to review the case because the proper functioning of the judicial system is being subverted, or he will review the case and come to the same finding as the Florida courts. If this occurs, what's next?

"Maybe the same drive and d... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

"Maybe the same drive and determination as you or I might have should someone try to control choices and decisions we would make for our children. I believe this issue ( Autism and developmental disorders) does not compare to what Terri's issue is. "

But you see where we are right now, is deciding that it is legal and okay for a man to kill his non terminally ill wife (terri is not terminally ill, she is not in a dying proccess, she is severely braindamaged).

Why do we think it is okay for him to kill her-most comments I hear are "well I wouln't want to live like that" "she is a vegitable" "she is unaware" "she shouldn't be a burden" etc.

All of those same reasons can eventually be applied to other disabled people.

Today we are all fine and dandy with killing somebody like Terri, but when will the lines start to blur? The doctor who advocates Terri's death in court also believes that people with altheimer's and dementia should be "allowed to die."

To be honest I would rather allow Terri's parent to take her home and take care of her, than start the car rolling down the eugenics hill.

To be honest I would rat... (Below threshold)
mantis:

To be honest I would rather allow Terri's parent to take her home and take care of her, than start the car rolling down the eugenics hill.

While I agree that the best thing here would be to give Terri to her parents, Just Me, the idea that removing her feeding tube would create some kind of precedent, therefore leading to eugenics is naive. Terri would not be the first person by far to have treatment withheld leading to death, even in absence of a living will. The car your worried about rolling down the hill has already been chugging along for quite a while now, and I haven't seen anybody killing off disabled people. Just because politicians have decided to make a spectacle out of this case doesn't make it the first of its kind.

Just Me, The comme... (Below threshold)
Once:

Just Me,

The comments that you quoted, are they from Micheal? Or that from other people stating their opinion on the issue? As to how they might feel given the same situation.

I think the lines have become blurred as to who can be quoted as saying what. We will ever know if this is her wish or not. That is between her and Micheal.

The best case would to release her to her parents. If they deem now or in the future that she is suffering and wish to assist her in dying then they will. But if this law/bill passes they will not be able to act on her behalf on any issue. Double edge sword, rears it's ugly head.

Lumping all disabled issues into Terri's given situation in my opinion is completely unrelated.

"He's been living common la... (Below threshold)

"He's been living common law with another woman for years and has two children by her. I'd say she's his current wife."

Thomas Jefferson had children with someone other than his wife, are you now saying some of the Founding Fathers weren't even married to their wives? Wow....




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy