Terri Schiavo is going to die because Michael Schiavo has better lawyers.
Exhibit #1) This article in the St. Petersburg Times (Memories diverge on what Terri wanted), explains it all.
On the Monday in January 2000 when the Schiavo case went to trial, the Schindlers’ lawyer remembers being surprised to see a St. Petersburg Times reporter in court.
What are you doing here, Patricia Campbell asked. She had no anticipation that the case would make the front page.
Back then, Campbell was working alone, without an assistant to help. On the other side was Michael Schiavo’s lawyer, George Felos, who had handled the seminal right-to-die case of Estelle Browning, which went to the Florida Supreme Court in 1990.
Campbell said in an interview Wednesday that she took the case out of sympathy for the Schindlers. She said about 20 attorneys had turned down the couple, who had little money.
Campbell, who now has a prestigious AV rating from the Martindale-Hubbell lawyer peer review system, had never handled a right-to-die case. She did not have money to find witnesses, she said. Indeed, Campbell did not take depositions from Joan and Scott Schiavo before the trial. Normally, that would be a basic step for a lawyer preparing for trial.
Campbell presented just two witnesses to address the claim that Terri would not want her feeding tube removed.
[More]Exhibit #2) This morning Florida’s Department of Children and Families missed an opportunity to legally take custody of Terri Schiavo. WFTS reports:
Wednesday afternoon, Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer issued a temporary restraining order, preventing DCF from removing Terri from the Pinellas Park hospice where her life-sustaining feeding tube has been disconnected.
This morning at 8, DCF filed an appeal to Greer’s order. When they did so, an automatic stay of the order went into effect, meaning that they could intervene.
The attorney for Terri’s husband Michael (George Felos), who opposes any attempts to prolong Terri’s life, said he suspected DCF wasn’t aware of that stay until he had filed a motion for a new restraining order.Legally Terri’s family was never able to recover from that one day in court 5 years ago. Felos was just rubbing salt in the wound this morning as he continued his legal dominance…
You’re talking to the wall DS. You are filled with your own self-importance. I predict you’ll soon be brought down to Earth, hard.
Well I’m both a skydiver and a rockclimber, so I hope you’re mistaken TT. Why are you getting so wigged out anyway?
RE: TruthTeller’s post (March 24, 2005 11:15 PM)
TERRI IS NOT ON LIFE-SUPPORT…
Technically true. The appropriate terminology is (from previous thread):
The 2004 Florida Statutes, Title XLIV, CIVIL RIGHTS
Chapter 765 HEALTH CARE ADVANCE DIRECTIVES
765.101 Definitions.–As used in this chapter:
…
(10) “Life-prolonging procedure” means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous vital function. The term does not include the administration of medication or performance of medical procedure, when such medication or procedure is deemed necessary to provide comfort care or to alleviate pain.
…
You say potato, I say potahto.
You could say support, law does say prolonging procedure.
Dumb Shit:
No, dumb shit, it doesn’t. One of the basic rules of appellate law is that the reviewing court defers to the findings of the trier of fact and does not substitute their evaluation of the evidence or the credibility of the wits for that of the trier of fact.
And why the hostility? Besides all your antireligious vomit you insisted on sharing with us, I’m sick of people like you. You don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. You get corrected but your too stupid and/or arrogant to even know what the correct answer is. And then you come out on the offensive.
So, tell me again you legal beagle, how many appeals have you filed? Oh, what was that? None? Zero? Nil? Zed? Yet, you’re the fucking expert. Right.
RE: ~DS~’s post (March 24, 2005 11:30 PM)
Well I’m both a skydiver and a rockclimber…
I trust you have a living will? I sure don’t want to revisit this topic again.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at March 24, 2005 11:32 PM
Well, that’s fucking brilliant. That means you’re on a Life-prolonging procedure too. Unless you never eat.
Damn those definitions getting in the way of ones ignorance.
I am not a lawyer, so I have never filed an appeal, but the Guardian-Ad-Litem report states that the Florida 2nd District Cour of Appeals conducted what amounted to a De Novo (Anew.” A trial de novo is a completely new trial) review of the evidence. Also if no new evidence can be presented at appeal then how are we always hearing about new DNA evidence being presented and a case being reversed or remanded back to the trail court. Also as I went thru the documents at Terrisfight.org it appears to me that at least 2 Florida judges as well as a Federal judge went thru at least some of the evidence at various times. If you can explain that Julie I would be grateful. Based on your answer to DS I am assuming you are a lawyer.
Wow,Florida (and most of medibiz) view hydration and feeding as medical treatment and hearsay is good enough to get you killed if you are unable to speak for yourself!
COOL!!!!!!
The only thing cooler than being a seriously disabled person in FL would be being a northern black man with a white wife getting stopped by a small town Alabama cop.
RE: Gabriel Chapman’s post (March 25, 2005 12:30 AM)
Damn those definitions getting in the way of ones ignorance.
Yeah, I hate it when that happens… and when law relies on such silly stuff. Just what are they thinkin’?
RE: been there’s post (March 25, 2005 12:54 AM)
Wow,Florida (and most of medibiz) view [magic phrase omitted by been there] hydration and feeding as medical treatment and hearsay is good enough to get you killed if you are unable to speak for yourself!
Again with the misstatement a mere 1’22” after being presented with the definition. Let’s try again:
“… artificially provided sustenance and hydration …”
Darn definitions are really hard to pin down.
Hey now that we have that cleared up all of the disabled that use feeding tubes or vents will be rushing right down there.
How about the guy that uses the Vulcan mind meld to determine that PVS patients want to die? Hero or nutjob?
Such a deep, dark, silent blue. I stared as far into her eyes as I could, hoping to sense some glimmer of understanding, some hint of awareness. The deeper I dove, the darker became the blue, until the blue became the black of some bottomless lake. “Mrs. Browning, do you want to die … do you want to die?” I nearly shouted as I continued to peer into her pools of strikingly beautiful but incognizant blue. It felt so eerie. Her eyes were wide open and crystal clear, but instead of the warmth of lucidity, they burned with the ice of expressionlessness.
Check this kook out!
About twenty minutes after this incident, George heard the voice of “God” speak to him in a slightly stern voice:
“Be careful what you think. You are more powerful than you realize.”
If you talk to God, you are praying. If God talks to you, you have schizophrenia.
-Thomas Szasz
There is treatment available though.
Get Judge Greer to order this unfortunate to have the cure applied.
Hey wait, He knows Terri Schiavo!!!!!!!
He may talk about his spiritual journey with Schiavo then
My two cents on this is that the courts were very effective in generating thousands of pages of documents on what appears to a very poor, fundamentally inadequate investigation of Terri Shiavo’s medical condition (meaning primarily her level of cognitive function). For those defending the court decision, I would only suggest you not equate the vast quantity of legal documents with the questionable quality of the medical science used to assess her state, and to remind yourself, that all else aside, the responsibility for this latter sad state of affairs rests firmly on the shoulders of Michael Shiavo.
I think it is probably fair to say that Terri is not, and never will be, operating in any remotely related to normal cognitive fashion. Most likely she is in a “semi-vegetative” state, which is to say equivalent in cognitive level to the most extreme mental retardation. I say “most likely” because Michael Shiavo has consistently refused a) the type of therapy needed to demonstrate whether she could be taught to self-feed, and b) refused to allow the battery of cognitive tests needed to assess level of retardation. Had she been in a true vegetative state, it seems to me that he would have bent over backwards to prove her condition, rather than allow himself to be demonized over the last 12 years or so.
If I am correct about her medical condition, then the likelihood is that Michael would not be allowed to have her killed, er I mean “have her feeding tube removed.” I know this is speculative, but it certainly explains the facts, including Michael’s odd reluctance to have the medical tests be done in a rigorous and transparent manner.
All that said, I can identify with his position. If your spouse went from a normally functioning human to a completely different person who is on the borderline between complete vegetative state and something slightly more, wouldn’t you want to to “see it ended” as well? I know I certainly wouldn’t want to be forced to live in such a shallow meaningless existence. It kind of reminds me of the old Metallica song “One” (about a land mine victim who is kept alive with no ability to interact with the external world).
In Terri’s case, had Michael been more aggressive, probably what we would have ended up with is a case study of a person in a unique state of consciousness unlike any cases previously studied. In layman’s terms, she would have ended up a glorified guinea pig, which may be closer to what Michael Shiavo really fears.
Kevin Aylward writes: Terri Schiavo is going to die because Michael Schiavo has better lawyers.
It would be more accurate to say that Terri Schiavo’s body is going to die. Her mind died years ago.
The good news is that people like you will finally have her corpse to use as a sock puppet instead of her bedridden, persistently vegetative but still living body.
Bully for fscking you, huh?
I certainly wouldn’t want to be forced to live in such a shallow meaningless existence
With that attitude it’s already too late.
It kind of reminds me of the old Metallica song.
Whoa, a man who has studied the classic philosophers. Have you read Jim Morrison too?
-S- wrote:
It’s not about what Michael Schiavo wants but what Terri Schiavo wants. Her parents and family want to care for her, so let them.
I see. So it’s about what Terri wants. No, wait, it’s about what her parents want!
Emotionally reasoning here…
Yes, you are. Perhaps you should drop the emotion and try reasoning with reason.
Amy said:So, tell me again you legal beagle, how many appeals have you filed? Oh, what was that? None? Zero? Nil? Zed? Yet, you’re the fucking expert. Right.
Good point. In Austin working for a large lobbying firm in town, I was instrumental in only perhaps a few dozen appeals, and most of those revolved around state laws and state issues before the Texas Ledge. Mostly, I merely helped draft a portion of the language for proposed legislation on behalf of our clients, rather than try cases, as I’m not a lawyer-I only worked with a team of lawyers, and few of these cases went before a court anyway. I also had the opportunity to meet George Bush a number of times, as he was then Governor of the state. He’s a decent guy, quite different from his persona in the media. Sincere, charming, and surprisingly articulate. (Note that you can be all those things, and still make mistakes.)
More importantly Julie, your attitude is both bizarre and counter productive to democracy in general and this discussion specifically, not to mention atrocious in manner and tone. I’ve stated in simple, easy to read, language, that if it were up to me, I’d let the parents of Terry Schiavo assume her care, and that I don’t necessarily support removing the feeding tube as I don’t think it can hurt her or help her at this point-not to mention I feel it’s a bit barbaric to let her die of thirst, even if she can’t feel anything. Yet, you either missed all that in your misplaced, immature, zeal to castigate everyone and anyone who doesn’t agree with every element in your increasingly disjointed rants, or you don’t care about facts written plainly before you on this Blog.
This type of knee-jerk response and people such as yourself are precisely why Americans are growing disgusted with Neo-Christian Extremists, and terrified that their legal and political future could be in the hands of someone so incompetent and dishonest as yourself. You’re condescending, intolerant, brattish, uninformed, and ignorant as all get out, while professing a false sense of superiority which you apparently cannot back up and compensate for by attacking others. You’re un-American and un-Christian in that respect. It’s a terrible witness for any religion or political ideology, and I’d be willing to bet there are conservative Christians reading this thread who would agree with you on many issues, who wish you and those like you would shut the hell up and stop embarrassing them with your childish antics. Your incoherent responses are so inane it’s tempting to conclude that you’re a liberal douche trying to make conservatives look bad by caricature.
This is a blog hon, not a court. It’s a place to discuss differences and similarities of opinion on matters both complex and straight forward, as well as the undelrying ratinal for those views. You seemed to have confused it with a Holy Crusade or a highly censored venue where you have some kind of final say so over what others think and state. You have neither.
In resposne to the more sane and polite commentators who are uneasy with current developments within the GOP: I really don’t see a solution, sad to say. It’s a deal with the devil. We/they have merged almost seamlessly with a group of folks who are motivated by a political ideology based on a violent form of neo-Christianity, eerily similar to the fundamentalist Islamic ideology known as Wahhibism. I had to leave the party, as a scientist, a pragmatist, and a moral person, I just couldn’t rationalize it any longer. Not to mention I don’t want to be associated with them when it crashes and burns, as I feel is highly likely at some point.
The ramifications of lawmakers pandering to extremist fanatics are chilling. In Florida for example, the State Ledge is trying to enact legislation that would make it possible for College students to sue their professors over course material, if it does not jive with the student’s personal ideological views. For example, a creationist student could sue a biology prof for teaching evolutionary biology, in a class titled ‘evolutionary biology”. Or a Neo-nazi could sue a history professor for teaching only ‘one side’ of the Holocaust “Hypothesis” and blaming it on Nazi Germany! I mean holy smokes batman, how could they teach anything under those circumstances?
It’s sad to watch unfold, because most of the Christians I know personally, including those who would call themselves members of the religoius right, are wonderful folks who truly care deeply about this nation and about Christian values. Here on the Space Coast for example, the local Hospice is run almost entirely by evangelicals who provide badly needed comfort and care in the final days for terminally ill pateints.
I guess they don’t realize how horrifying these developments in politics are for the rest of us who support freedom and liberty for all. And they apprently have no historical perspective on the usual end result of such phenomena. But it’s extraordinarily difficult to get through to people when their initial premise os that facts don’t matter, and that reality-including empirical data- is malleable as a function of one’s ‘world view’.
It’s tempting not to hold them responsible. They’re being led by fanatical but extremely persuasive nutjobs, such as Rev Sun Myung Moon or Pat Buchanan, kept whipped up into a righteous frenzy so as to be incapable of excercising rational judgement and making lucid decisions, they flock like lemmings to support whatever position their Neocons masters put before them- regardless of how antithetical it is to core theistic principles and how threatening it is to our basic American liberties, they lack critical analytical skills; IOW they’re easily conned. As you can see from this thread and many others like it all over the blogosphere, they happily attack and smear anyone who dares to question their reasoning with vile, vulgar attacks, and a lot of them don’t seem to give a flying fuck about core freedoms, fiscal discipline, big government intrusiveness, or anything else remotely conservative in the traditional sense.
The result is a political trainwreck for everyone. Frankly, it reminds me of Nazi Germany, and the political tactics used by Hitler as he ascended in rank during the 1930s. But if they’re not responsible enough to learn about the issues and use factual data to make rational decisions which affect us all, if they have no respect for the Constitutional Rights of everyone except for themselves (Which kind of defeats the purpose of the Constitution), and if they sell out the very principles of liberty, due process, and religoius freedom they claim to admire, what can one do but cut them loose politically? How else will politicians get the message?
So, I see no other solution, outside of speaking with my ballot and abandoning the GOP, at least until such time as they kick the violent, extremist, immoral, elements to the curb( I mean good grief, the current incarnation of Law at the highest level gives the fucking President and his Cabinet explicit permission to ignore every rule of conduct enacted by the Congress of the Courts, and kidnap people from any nation, send them secretly off to Syria or other third world shitholes to be tortured to death with no charges, trial, or even notification of the family as to what has become of them, and this power will be present after Bush has left office. Can you imagine the potential for abuse or mistakes that holds? [shudder]).
It may be that nothing can stop the infection of the body politic and America itself with the anti-American forces of right wing religious fanatacism, expertly managed by a few unscrupulous individuals cleverly using it to feather their own nest at the expense of us all. But I don’t have to be part of it. And I won’t be.
s9 this “The good news is that people like you will finally have her corpse to use as a sock puppet instead of her bedridden, persistently vegetative but still living body.
Bully for fscking you, huh?”
Was pretty tactless, for one thing there isn’t any thing “good” about this case, no matter what side you fall on, and frankly anyone who thinks there is something good, needs to rethink their opinion.
Thanks David B.
And thanks to Kevin, Paul and Jay for finally posting something different today; it was quite refreshing.
I will enjoy my peace today – thanks.
Cindy
~DS~: I’m an atheist and a registered democrat who crosses party lines when voting. So, there goes your bs theory.
allium: Good. I’m glad you like it because she posts it at least 3 times a day no matter what the topic.
Posted by: julie at March 24, 2005 04:43 PM
______________________________________
NO I DON’T BITCH. I COME HERE, READ THE POST, NOT THE COMMENTS, THEN COMMENT IF NEED BE. I MAY BE THE LONGEST CINDY HERE BUT I’M NOT THE ONLY CINDY. GOES TO SHOW YOU HOW THE HELL SMART YOU ARE, YOU ASS. I’m going to take DavidB and Allium’s advice and have a peaceful day. WHY DO YOU TROLL HERE?? Bloody hell, wish you’d go elsewhere and if you put me down again, imagine my arm coming out of your computer to give you the hardest slap I know you deserve.
Angel I have no idea what you’re talking about.
My last wrod. I would be OK with the Schindlers taking over the care of Schiavo. But the Courts have heard evidence from the principles, reviewed medical diagnosis, and weighed the matter as carefully as they possibly can (Case history is enclosed below). Appeals courts have examined the case from a State and Federal Constitutional basis. State and federal legislative bodies have examined it. The consensus court decisions have been that Terry Schiavo is not going to improve, that the case was properly pursued, that she is in a persistent vegetative state, and that she would not have wished to be kept alive under these circumstances. (I can provide you a Florida radiologist who works with a neurologist, both of whom actually examined Schiavo in person at great length, and both of whom are not any kind of raving liberal whatsoever, flatly stating that Schiavo’s EEG has been flat for fifteen years and her cerebrum is full of fluid, which means even the tiny portions of cerebral cortex which aren’t cerebro-spinal fluid and do have a few intact neurons aren’t firing at all). This has been shown to exist beyond a reasonable doubt. You may not like it, but those are the facts on record. It’s tragic, it’s understandably unbearable to those who love her, especially given that she can smile and grimace and moan which we humans respond to emotionally. I sincerely wish this was not the case and there was hope for her. No one is ‘happy’ this poor lady is in this kind of shape; good Lord what the hell is wrong with someone that they would stoop to implying otherwise?
That is what the courts and doctors have found. IOW, the courts, the docs, the radiologists, and the majority of the public, have found that you and your fundie pals are dead wrong and don’t have a shred of a leg to stand on medically or legally (And the fundie neurologist who is claiming otherwise without even having examined the woman is an embaressment to docs nationwide) , that rumors to the effect that her husband abused her or brought this on in some way are utterly unfounded, and that you should quite bluntly fucking butt out: You’re not wanted or welcome. They’ve decided you, or Jeb, or Bush, or Delay, have no more right to go charging into this matter, and taking the law in your own hands, than Osama bin Laden does. End of story.
As sad as this case is for everyone involved, it raises a host of interesting and dicey issues regarding quaility of life, euthinasia, assisted suicide, and family rights. And I feel those matters should be discussed. Should we keep people alive to the last possible second regardless of their own wishes or those nearest them? Should we force the insurance companies or medicare to pay, or should we foreclose on their relatives assets to cover the bill, or lay it on the taxpayers, locally, state wide, or federally? Would it be Consitutional to do any or all of that? Is it Consitutional to make states or local municpalities pay for Federal mandates, or vice versa? When the patient is at least partially to blame for their own predictament, do the same rules apply; if for example their condition was the result of a crack overdose, driving drunk, or comitting a crime? Who decides these matters, courts, congress, the spouse, the parents, the legal guardian, the children, the governor, the President? Would it afect the process, or should it, if Schiavo was 90 years old, or age six?
These are all legitimate issues that everyone has pretty much shied away from over the years and by default left to the doctors and the families of the victims. And they need to be discussed, because unlike extraordinary rendition, or evolution vs creationism, this issue will likely affect you or someone you know during your life, and probably more than once.
But the freaky thing here is that a fringe group of fanatics is claiming that their subjective faith in a supernatural deity, and their unquestionable, narrow, intepretation of what that Deity wishes in this case, which cannot be confirmed in anyway of course we’re all just supposed to take their word for it, trumps science, medicine, marriage, the decrees of any other other religious group who doesn’t buy their claims, The Law, and the vast majority of public opinion. And that the Congress, or the Governor, or political groups, can simply ignore those laws they don’t like and unilaterally act as they please, with no accountability to the courts, police, voters, or public. That they are Divinely authorized by God-eh, as intepreteted by one and only one religious persuasion (Although I’m sure the Iranian Clerics and the Sunni Wahhibists would agree comepletely here), to go storming into a hospital room and kidnap a body at gunpoint in flagrant violation of legally decided courses of action. And in this case concerning the aforementioned law, the public is squarely behind the court and medical decisions in massive majorities, with only a small fringe element insisting the law be broken by elected officials, who are sworn to act in the interests of the plurality which elected them. The implications for our culture if this behavior were widely accepted as the norm are, in a word, staggering. The precedent it could set is ghastly.
And in the event that some of you are still not convinced this matter has been well heard, this is the case history, it’s not exactly ‘sparse’:
November 1984… Terri & Michael marry
February 1990… Terri suffers cardiac arrest and a severe loss of oxygen to her brain
May 1990… Terri leaves hospital and is brought to a rehabiliation center for aggressive therapy
July 1990… Terri is brought to the home where her husband and parents live; after a few weeks, she is brought back to the rehabilitation center
November 1990… Terri is taken to California for experimental therapies
January 1991… Terri is returned to Florida and placed at a rehabilitation center in Brandon
July 1991… Terri is transfered to a skilled nursing facility where she receives aggressive physical therapy and speech therapy
May 1992… Michael and the Schindlers stop living together
January 1993… Michael recovers $1 million settlement for medical malpractice claim involving Terri’s care; jury had ruled in Michael’s favor on allegations Terri’s doctors failed to diagnose her bulimia, which led to her heart failure; case settled while on appeal
March 1994… Terri is transferred to a Largo nursing home
May 1998… Michael files petition for court to determine whether Terri’s feeding tube should be removed; Michael takes position that Terri would choose to remove the tube; Terri’s parents take position that Terri would choose not to remove the tube
February 2000… Following trial, Judge Greer rules that clear and convincing evidence shows Terri would choose not to receive life-prolonging medical care under her current circumstances (i.e., that she would choose to have the tube removed)
March 2000… Judge Greer denies petition for more swallowing tests, finds it uncontested Terri cannot swallow sufficiently to live
April 2000… Terri is transferred to a Hospice facility
January 2001… Second District Court of Appeal affirms the trial court’s decision regarding Terri’s wishes
April 23, 2001… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District’s decision
April 23 or 24, 2001… Trial court orders feeding tube removed
April 24, 2001… Terri’s feeding tube is removed for the first time
April 26, 2001… Terri’s parents file motion asserting they have new evidence regarding Terri’s wishes
April 26, 2001… Trial court denies Terri’s parents’ motion as untimely
April 26, 2001… Terri’s parents file new legal action against Michael Schiavo and request that the removal of Terri’s feeding tube be enjoined; the case is randomly assigned to Judge Quesada
April 26, 2001… Judge Quesada grants the temporary injunction, orders Terri’s feeding tube restored
July 2001… Second District rules that Judge Greer erred in denying the motion alleging new evidence and, in essence, orders the trial court to consider whether new circumstances make enforcement of the original order inequitable; Second District also reverses the temporary injunction and orders dismissal of much of the new action filed before Judge Quesada [READ]
(uncertain)… Terri’s parents detail their reasons why enforcement is inequitable: (1) new witnesses have new information regarding Terri’s wishes, and (2) new medical treatment could sufficiently restore Terri’s cognitive functioning such that Terri would decide that, under those circumstances, she would continue life-prolonging measures; Terri’s parents also move to disqualify Judge Greer
(uncertain)… Trial court denies both motions as insufficient
October 2001… Second District affirms the denial of the motion to disqualify and the motion regarding the new witnesses; the appellate court reverses the order with regard to potential new medical treatments and orders a trial on that question with doctors testifying for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor
March 2002… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District’s decision
October 2002… Judge Greer holds a trial on the new medical treatment issue, hearing from doctors for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor; Terri’s parents also assert that Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state
Schindlers file emergency motion for relief from judgment based on a 1991 bone scan report indicating Terri’s body had previously been subjected to trauma
November 22, 2002… Following trial, Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ motion for relief (new medical evidence motion), rules that no new treatment offers sufficient promise of improving Terri’s cognitive functioning and that Terri is, in fact, in a persistent vegetative state
November 22, 2002… On this same day, Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ emergency motion related to the 1991 bone scan
June 2003… Second District affirms the trial court’s decision denying Schindlers’ motion for relief from judgment
August 22, 2003… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District’s decision
August 30, 2003… Terri’s parents file federal action challenging Florida’s laws on life-prolonging procedures as unconstitutional
September 17, 2003… Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ motion to provide additional therapy, finding it an effort to retry the issues that were previously tried
October 10, 2003… Federal court dismisses Schindlers’ case
October 15, 2003… Terri’s feeding tube is removed for the second time
October 20, 2003… Florida House passes a bill to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri’s and restore her feeding tube
October 21, 2003… Federal court rejects injunction request
October 21, 2003… Florida House and Senate pass a bill known informally as “Terri’s Law” to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri’s and restore her feeding tube; Governor signs the bill into law and immediately orders a stay; Terri is briefly hospitalized while her feeding tube is restored
October 21, 2003… Michael brings suit against the Governor, asking to enjoin the Governor’s stay on grounds “Terri’s Law” is unconstitutional; Judge Baird rejects Michael’s request for an immediate injunction, allowing the tube to be restored, and requests briefs on the constitutional arguments involving the new law
November 7, 2003… Judge Baird rejects Governor’s motion to dismiss Michael’s suit and have case litigated in Tallahassee
November 20, 2003… Judge Baird rejects Governor’s request for the judge to recuse himself
December 1, 2003… Guardian ad litem appointed under “Terri’s Law” to advise Governor submits report to Governor
December 10, 2003… Second District rejects Governor’s effort to have Judge Baird disqualified
April 2004… Second District affirms Judge Baird’s decision denying Governor’s motion to dismiss and have case litigated in Tallahassee
May 2004… Judge Baird declares “Terri’s Law” unconstitutional on numerous grounds
June 2004… Second District certifies “Terri’s Law” case directly to the Florida Supreme Court
July 2004… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment based on Pope John Paul II speech
September 2004… Florida Supreme Court affirms Judge Baird’s ruling that “Terri’s Law” is unconstitutional
October 2004… Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on Pope John Paul II speech)
December 1, 2004… Governor asks U.S. Supreme Court to review Florida Supreme Court’s decision declaring “Terri’s Law” unconstitutional
December 29, 2004… Second District affirms (without written opinion) Judge Greer’s ruling denying Schindlers’ most recent motion for relief from judgment
January 6, 2005… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, alleging Terri never had her own attorney, that the trial court impermissibly applied the law retroactively, and that the original trial on Terri’s wishes violated separation of powers principles
January 24, 2005… U.S. Supreme Court declines review in “Terri’s Law” case
February 11, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ latest motion for relief from judgment (motion raising various due process challenges)
February 23, 2005… Florida’s Department of Children and Families asks to intervene and for 60-day stay to permit investigation of alleged abuse
February 23, 2005… Schindlers file motion requesting new tests to determine Terri’s status
February 25, 2005… Judge Greer rules motions appear endless, he will grant no further stays; sets March 18 date for removal of feeding tube
February 28, 2005… Schindlers file motion requesting that Terri be fed orally
March 2, 2005… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, arguing factual error in original judgment
March 8, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ motion to feed Terri orally
March 9, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ motion requesting new tests
March 9, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers’ most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on factual error)
March 10, 2005… Judge Greer denies Department of Children and Families request to intervene and for stay, finds agency is free to investigate
March 16, 2005… Second District affirms Judge Greer’s denial of Schindlers’ motion raising various due process challenges, emphasizes law has been followed in this case
March 18, 2005… Schindlers file new federal action arguing due process violations in original trial; case assigned to Judge Moody
March 18, 2005… Judge Moody denies new federal claim, citing lack of jurisdiction
March 18, 2005… Congressional committee issues subpoenas for Michael, Terri, and Terri’s caregivers to appear at hearing to be held at the hospice where Terri has stayed
March 18, 2005… Congressional committee files motion to intervene and modify order requiring the removal of Terri’s feeding tube
March 18, 2005… Judge Greer denies congressional committee motion, ruling no grounds exist for intervention
March 18, 2005… Congressional committee requests Florida Supreme Court and Second District stay the feeding tube’s removal
March 18, 2005… Terri’s feeding tube removed for the third time
March 18, 2005… Florida Supreme Court denies congressional committee request, citing lack of jurisdiction
March 18, 2005… Second District denies congressional committee request as without merit
March 21, 2005… Congress enacts Terri’s Law II, authorizing Terri’s parents to seek federal court review of whether Terri’s federal rights have been protected
March 21, 2005… Schindlers file new action in federal court based on new law, claiming Terri’s federal rights have been violated
March 22, 2005… Judge Whittemore denies Schindlers’ request to have Terri’s feeding tube reinserted, finding no substantial likelihood the Schindlers will succeed with their claims [READ]
March 23, 2005… In a 2-1 decision, Eleventh Circuit affirms Judge Whittemore’s decision not to restore Terri’s feeding tube
Wow DS. I disagree with a lot of what you wrote about neo-christianity etc., but your summary of the case was excellent. The bad thing is this is one of those issues that has moved beyond the ability for rational discussion, so I think you wasted a lot of time. The people that are inclined to agree with you have already agreed, those who are not won’t. It will however be interesting to see how long it takes before you are attacked for posting it.
Well I appreciate that observation Chad. Another interesting factoid is that every Judge appointed by Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2, sided with Michael Schiavo, except in the case of the rehearing in which the 10-2 decisionw as not affixed by Justice name, we can’t be sure. And the same Florida Supreme Court which was being widely hailed as The Wise Sages intepreting Conlaw by the religious right in 2000, ares now being smeared across the wingnut blogosphere as ‘activist judges’. I fear you’re right about the depressing attitude of the fanatics. We have to take this party back from them before they drive it, and our principles, over a goddamn cliff.
~DS~,
The bulk of public opinion, along with most judicial interpretation of law, is ensconced in a contradictory position to that of President Bush and Governor Bush, the top executives in their respective domains. You will note how both Bushes have backed off from their initial advocacy though to quantify it exactly is tough – I guess it’s more of an observation. GWB urged Congress to act and then sat back and hoped. Legal, but politically risky. JB has done essetially the same thing at the state level.
However, I think they noticed the political maelstrom (who could miss it!) and don’t want to go in with both feet. Some have suggested that they could use a stronger approach to force this issue to a greater degree. Neither seem willing so their political calculus (and perhaps ethical) do have limitations. They are saavy politicians to be sure. One wonders, however, if they have done some irreparable harm to the Republican party? If this had happened in the summer of ’04, I’d wager that the Democrats would have made serious inroads into the body politick.
Missing from DS’s timeline is the pivotal event in the pro-Michael side’s version of the case: Terri’s alleged comment that she wouldn’t want to be kept alive. When did that happen?
Hard to imagine that an event found by the primary judge in the case to be “clear and convincing evidence,” could be so minor as to be irrelevant to DS’s summary…
Uhhh … Yeah, that silly activist Judge Greer, an appointee of the Bush’s/Reagan and a life long Christian Conservative, just went and made that part all up, you know, just for kicks and to help out the leftist agendists, when he found for Michael Schiavo, McGhee. And all the appeals rehearing which examined the case, all of whom were also appointed by conservatives, just, you know for kicks, went along with it, cuz they’re all in on the UN/Commie World Wide Liberal Plot to stifle all that is good and moral …
“Jury: A panel of twelve citizens charged with deciding who has the better lawyer.”
If I am not mistaken it was in Feb. 2000, that Judge Greer made those findings (regarding Terri’s wishes), that is in DS’s timeline.
Karl- I am not sure what your comment has to do with this thread, since to my knowledge this has never been in front of a jury. Although it is a generally funny comment.
Finally I dont think Greer is a Reagan / Bush appointee since he is a state not federal judge, and I believe Florida elects there district court judges.
Here’s a poser:
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-brain-damaged-woman-arrest,0,4268134,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nation-headlines
Aside from this man’s tactical lapse (bringing a box cutter to a gun store), was he morally right or wrong, and why?
You’re correct Chad and TY for the catch to my sloppy work. Greer was first elected circuit judge in ’92 after serving two stints as county commisioner. He’s known among his peers not just as being a member of the religous right, they jokingly say he is the religious right. Until just recently he was a member in good standing with the Florida GOP and Christian Coalition. Now he’s being smeared quite handily and it’s hard to say what will become of him. He was very unfortunate to have this case land on his watch. Judges in the Circuit can be appointed by the governor under some circumstances as best I can tell, but Greer was elected as most judges here (I live in Fla) are. My apologies.
RE: Karl Lembke’s postt (March 25, 2005 11:42 AM)
“Jury: A panel of twelve citizens charged with deciding who has the better lawyer.”
A truism of sorts but not applicable here as noted by chad. The trial of contention did not have a jury.
—————————————
For those interested in another, more comprehensive and dynamically updated timeline (from a university ethics department), please review:
KEY EVENTS IN THE CASE OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO
Kathy Cerminara, Nova Southeastern University, Shepard Broad Law Center
Kenneth Goodman, University of Miami Ethics Programs
With thanks to Steven Haidar, Dartmouth College
(Please respect their copyright policy.)
The most pertinent document is the original trial with facts; so if you read anything, read the original judgement:
February 11, 2000
Judge Greer rules that Terri Schiavo would have chosen to have the PEG tube removed, and therefore he orders it removed, which, according to doctors, will cause her death in approximately 7 to 14 days.
Trial Court Ruling (Link to *.pdf)
In fact the history of February 25, 1990 through February 11, 2000 is the most enlightening as far as setting the stage for all of these debates and misconceptions. Pay close attention to detail when reviewing and it (or the entire timeline) will allow one to reach a much more conclusive determination to what happened and why… and why the appellate courts have decided the way they have.
My personal opinion is he was morally wrong. First there is the question of trying to impose himself into the situation, and “rescuing” a person with a very minimal quality of life (Yes, I know that is a value judgement that has to be made by each person, but for this argument I am using my values). Then there is the question of violating the order imposed by the judge. I know the theroy that an unjust law does not have to be obeyed, bust since the law (the Florida Right to Die laws) this judgement was based was enacted with the goal of relieving unnecessary suffering is it really unjust? That comes down to another value judgement and since I am not a life at all cost advocate I am again using my values and saying that the law is just. Then there is the theft, outright prohibited in the 10 commandments, and what I am assuming was the threatening of another with the boxcutter (I may be mistaken on that) all in all I don’t think he has much moral ground to stand on. I am sure others will disagree with me.
Now here is my question – If you are a Christian don’t you accept that the body is just the vessel for the soul’s time on Earth? If that is the case isn’t keeping Terri alive in this state the greater evil since it prevents her soul from ascending to Heaven. (I am assuming she hadn’t commited some mortal sin before her accident)?
I’d say if she has a soul, it certainly couldn’t be held against her for having her tube removed, and assuming her bulemia wasn’t an issue, yes, freeing her soul would be the more humane act. I’m not a theist though, so I don’t have a stake in that issue.
What also seems to be lacking in the Internet discussions of this case here and elsehwere is the legal reality: People can and do say all kinds of things on air and in the media, but when under oath their stories often bear little resemblence to those comments. There is no risk of perjury in lying or exaggerating on blogs or to the press. You can basically say pretty much anything out here in the media world you want, with little legal risk outside of libel, and libel is a notoriously difficult charge to prove. I can go on live TV right now, claim I was visiting a friend at the same hospital as Terry Schiavo, and claim I stopped in her room by accident and had a lengthy conversation with her about existential philosophy and string theory in Chinese, swear on a Bible on camera I was telling the God’s honest truth, and blog it, be interviewed on 20/20, or appear on the cover of Time Magazine, all without fear of legal repercussions whatsoever. And I could then appear a week later, put my hand on the bible, and say I made the whole thing up. If I do that in court however, I could find myself in contemp for perjury, sporting a felony record, and meeting my new roomate named BubbaBob in Prison. Thus people are less likely to lie under oath unless they feel they have no other option. That’s one of the reasons that court findings beat the living shit out of Internet anecdotes and are considered much more reliable and credible. What we see here and elsewhere are folks putting anecdotal rumor on the same rung in the ladder of credibility as court testimony, and that’s simply absurd.
Just Me wrote: …for one thing there isn’t any thing “good” about this case, no matter what side you fall on, and frankly anyone who thinks there is something good, needs to rethink their opinion.
I agree! Of course, the “good news” I was referencing was not an attribute of the Terri Schiavo case itself, but rather an attribute of the political phenomenon surrounding it.
The “good news” is that it will soon be able to proceed without anyone using a woman’s still-living body as a sock puppet to advance their political agenda. The “information,” however, is that her corpse will remain useful for at least a couple weeks after the body dies.
Furthermore, I’m ever so sorry you didn’t like the blunt tone I used to point out that this whole affair has been a macabre clown show. But I figure that when some folks are seriously calling for Governor Jeb Bush to send in the National Guard to keep their sock puppet from expiring, the clown show is long past the point where it should have ended.
That’s one of the things that makes Delay and others so deplorable. The Schindlers are Schiavo’s parents, of course they’re giong to latch onto any hope, no matter how remote, they can find. Man I feel so bad for them. Offering them that hope when in fact it is not there, claiming that she ‘talks and laughs and eats food’ when in fact she does nothing but let out bloodcurdling moans like a halloween banshee(I have an MP3 file of it, it’s real bad) , which anyone who has ever worked with head injuries recognizes as reflexive, is fucking sick. It would be pretty nasty if it was just an act of esperation or an honest mistake. That the Schindlers are getting dragged over the coals in what can only be some kind of surreal roller coaster of extreme emotion … so that Tom Delay can try and score some brownie points with the religious fanatics, points which at this time don’t seem to be materializing, is utterly obscene. I don’t generally throw around terms like evil casually. But that motherfucker is as evil as they come in DC. I’m tempted to move to Sugarland, Tx., just to vote against the sick fuck.
That’s life.
Of the many ironies generated by the case of Terri Schiavo – the comatose woman whose fate has divided America – two currently stand out. The first is that what originally seemed an overwhelmng victory for conservatives – with a Republican congress and president joining in an unprecedented federal intervention in the Florida “right-to-die” case – has now exposed a deep conflict in conservatism itself. At issue is a dilemma for many of George Bush’s strongest supporters. Are they primarily social conservatives – in which case they back the federal government’s move to keep Mrs Schiavo alive at all costs? Or are they primarily constitutional or “federalist” conservatives – in which case they dislike Washington imposing itself over the decision of state courts, a precedent that conservatives would bitterly resist if it was pursued by a Democratic congress or by a liberal president?
The second is that Ms Schiavo’s best chance of returning to a cognitive state lies with stem-cell research. Although stem-cell therapy is still in its infancy, a likely future application is expected to be the replacement of damaged brain cells, such as those that have reduced Ms Schiavo to a vegetative state for the past 15 years. In a few years, it is possible that Ms Schiavo may be curable. But for this to happen, moral conservatives, including Mr Bush, would have to revise their view that stem cells not only have a right to life, but one that outweighs the right to a cognitive life of sufferers from brain conditions such as hers. Having demonstrated how much value he attaches to Ms Schiavo’s life – allowing himself to be wakened in the early hours to sign the federal intervention into law – Mr Bush may one day have to decide whose hopes for life are of higher value: a woman who was in the prime of her life when she was struck down by brain damage, or a group of cells forming part of an embryo of four or five day’s existence.
When this case took off, conservatives may have treated Ms Schiavo’s case as a black-and-white moral issue. But they will have to wrestle with the complex consequences for many years to come.
well, this thread got quiet suddenly. What happened did she pass away?
So, I could only get through about 90% of the posts in this thread because some of it was really ridiculous. Thus, I apologize if I’m saying something already stated.
It seems to me that the Schindlers have had the executive branch of Florida’s gov’t on their side since at least 2003 (and maybe longer since I’m sure Jeb didn’t just wake up one morning and decide he had nothing better to do than save Terri’s life). They also enjoyed the support of the Florida legislature until the judicial branch told them that they had no business getting involved.
Now they have the support of every evangelical organization AND the executive branch and more than half the legislative branch of the federal government.
Michael Shiavo has a lawyer.
Oh, OK. Now I see how the case has been stacked against the Schindlers. What was I thinking?
I feel very much for Terri s parents, but they must let her go. It is a selfish thing to want to keep her from an eternity of non-suffering. As a parent I would not want my child there to keep me company, knowing that they would be in G-ds hands would be more comforting. Aside from that, all of you out there try to imagine these numbers. 400,000 Americans, on American soil, each year, die from tobacco related illness. What do our Congress and Senators do about this besides line their own pockets with the largese the lobbiests pay out and the companies themselves pay to operate an addictive drug assembly line. Are people allowed drugs NO. Are they allowed cigarettes? YES. You or a loved one will be affected by the death caused by tobacco and it is more of a moral issue than the Schaivo case. They numbers are staggering, 400k a YEAR! Let me know that you are truly moral Americans not swayed by the lawyers today who look the other way as we are killed by this greedy society supposedly relying on the Bible for guidance. E mail me and let me know that you understand the real issues are ones that the current administration is looking for votes in 2008, to make you look the other way while we continue the killing in Iraq, Pakistan, and genocide (yes inhumane genocide) right here at home. Diversionary tactics for the average American to be concerned with and not real issues affecting our childrens and grandchildrens futures. thank you for providing this forum so some people may understand.
s9 the term “sock puppet” is so dehumanizing it is rediculous. Even if you are all for pulling the tube, the woman is still a human being, and at the very least deserves to be treated as such. She isn’t a “sock puppet” her brain isn’t “mush” and she isn’t some in animate object. She has at least some family that loves her, and they just want to take care of her.
Denying her humanity is morally repulsive.
“Now here is my question – If you are a Christian don’t you accept that the body is just the vessel for the soul’s time on Earth? If that is the case isn’t keeping Terri alive in this state the greater evil since it prevents her soul from ascending to Heaven. (I am assuming she hadn’t commited some mortal sin before her accident)? “
Um, no. Honestly, I figure the best move is to let God work this one out, rather than the government assuming the role of helping God along.
Brian: unfortunately, you miss entirely the worth and value of what “emotional reasoning” is. And, for those of us who have capacity to realize when and how to apply it and when not to.
A keen indication in my experience of a fool is someone who dismisses human emotion, and emotional reasoning.
The Instructor from Harvard Law with Rocks where White Matter ought to be who dismisses the application of the word, “murder” as being — oh, the horror! — “emotionally charged” rhetoric, also conveniently avoided addressing what Terri Schiavo’s death under these circumstances is. Instead, he conveninetly stepped all around that in his ever-so-denigrating-about-life-while-praising-remote-and-abstract-rationalizations-under-guise-of-a-text-as-tool mentality that makes me now better understand just what harms and why have befallen many who are produced into our society by persons such as himself.
Emotion and emotional reasoning is not a bad thing, and actually contributes a great deal to creativity. And to just about every aspect of human civilization. But, I suppose we could all just reduce to the status of cats and chase mice around and…oh, wait, that’d be illustrating excitement, aggression, hunger, aggravation, enthusiasm, desperation (the mice), fear, anxiety…
Emotion and emotional reasoning is a key aspect to survival. No one’s yet been able to explain away not applying the word, “murder” to Terri Schiavo. Interesting that Michael Schiavo’s “rights as spouse” can be so ardently protected and advanced and defended by such an emotional base masquereding as “law.”
chad: no, but it’s Good Friday.
But, Brian, you missed the point of my comments and completely. Instead, you responded emotionally.
I puzzle as to comments such as yours, however, that accomplish nothing but sorta place darkness and depression and the down side of converssation out there instead. I am thinking that you are suffering depression, yes?
Just Me writes: She isn’t a “sock puppet”…
Then folks here should stop treating her body like a sock puppet.
Just Me writes: …her brain isn’t “mush”…
Dude. Her cerebrum was destroyed. There is no place in her brain where consciousness can reside. There is no chance of her brain ever recovering any of her memory or other personality traits. The person who was Terri Schiavo does not exist anymore.
Just Me writes: …and she isn’t some inanimate object.
Duh.
Just Me writes: Denying her humanity is morally repulsive.
I couldn’t agree more. That’s why I’m finally morally repulsed enough to comment about folks treating her body like a sock puppet.