Blogcritics: Comments on Blogcritics On Terri Schiavo: Life, Death, Law

Comment by Eric Olsen

Mon, 11 Apr 2005 08:36:14 EDT

the courts merely followed the law - perhaps the law should be changed

Comment by Joyce

Sun, 10 Apr 2005 22:06:39 EDT

The money won to provide care for Terri because her life expectancy was 50 years,Michael was allowed by the Court(Greer )to use it to pay for HIS attorney (Felos and others ) to kill her. Whats wrong with this picture? He didn't even mention Terri wanted to die at the malpractice hearing, it was seven years later,right after he met Jodi he conveniently remembered Terri wanted to dehydrate to death. Yeah right. This whole thing with DeLay is a smoke screen to take attention away from the corruption in Florida Courts , DCF, the legislature and God knows where else. Terri was murdered by the Judicial branch of Government and all the rest just sat on their back side.

Comment by gonzo marx

Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:53:07 EST

Eric O sez... *Medicare had been covering it for some time* excellent point..which brings me to another problem i have with DeLay et al the same folks that were screaming about all this are the very SAME folks that rammed thru "tort reform" that would limit the damages from lawsuits such as the one cited here as well as the gutting of Medicare which has been covering here care in the hospice anybody else smell the Hypocrisy here? Excelsior!

Comment by Eric Olsen

Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:44:04 EST

Medicare had been covering it for some time

Comment by Linda

Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:39:11 EST

How can you say it cost the family nothing to keep her alive. They weren't paying for the hospice? Somewhere I read that the settlement money that Michael Schiavo got for Terri's care went for her care and the lawyers.

Comment by sydney

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:44:49 EST

actually he types by burping. Between his assistant and himself, they have worked out a sort of morsecode language.

Comment by Madspirit

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:43:45 EST

Hee Madspirit

Comment by Eric Olsen

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:41:41 EST

doesn't he type with his eyebrows?

Comment by Madspirit

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:40:54 EST

Yes..Shiavo and Hawking are not comparable. ...but it is relevant in responding to the guy who said he wouldn't even want to be alive if fully cognitive but without functioning body. I love Hawking and would not have brought him into the discussion except to point out to that guy that some might think there is a reason to live...without body but with brain. Madspirit

Comment by sydney

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:38:09 EST

ya I realize you said that he was cognative. I was merely suggesting that because he is Fully cognative (as you say), he is not relevant to the discusion. He can communicate his own wishes, carry move himself, talk etc.. And I was also saying that he is not in a vegatative state. he has control over the movment of some of his body. I just didnt want you to use him as a comparison because, to me they're are not comparable.

Comment by Madspirit

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:28:29 EST

That IS what I said...that Hawking is fully cognitive. I was responding to the guy who said he would not want to stay alive even if cognitive...IF his body did not work. Madspirit

Comment by sydney

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:23:36 EST

Stephen hawking is not in a vegatative state. Far from it... and he has full (nay, fullest) cognative ability

Comment by sydney

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:22:02 EST

"What would Jeusus do?" -- Who the fuck cares? JEsus doesn't have jurisdiction over everyone in America. If anyone let Jesus, or thier interpretation of JEsus, determine my fate I'd be real pissed! In any case, if Jesus, were here to chyme in on the debate, he'd probably tell us to mind our own fucking business and let the family decide it amoungst themselves. Jesus never had anything to say about constitutes death. Thank god. YEt again the hard core Christians make me sick to my stomach. Pompous pricks!

Comment by Madspirit

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:15:49 EST

I agree with most of what you say. If I was totally cognitive...I don't know. Look at Stephen Hawking..a man I adore. He can move nothing...do nothing...but his mind is still brilliant and he still contributes greatly to our collective knowledge. Shaivo was not cognitive of anything. Madspirit

Comment by sydney

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:11:18 EST

agreed. two questions; If you were told you would be in a vegatative state by morning and would have no cognitive or very little cognitive ability, would you prefer to live or die? Personally, if I had no cognative ability, I would choose to die without question. Why would I want to sit and stair at a wall for the next 40 years. That would be hell. If I did have cognative ability, I would DESPERATLEY want to die. Being concious of my life and citing incapacitated stairing into space for 40 fucking years? Give me a fucking break!!!! This is beyond humane. Absolute torture. 2) Some people refuse to accept the inevitability of death. When a person can not support one or more of their body systems on their own, and are rendered unable to feed themselves and require life support as did MRs. Shaivo, then people must accept they the natural course is for them to die. It is not the job of science to keep a heart beating untill the tissue eventually desintegrates. Give me a fucking break. This is soooooooooo common in the hospitals these days. Wher unconcious victims are constantly ressucitated over and over and had the victim any ability to speak they would be saying.. "FOR GOD SAKES< JUST LET ME DIE!!!!!" People in western cultures need to get real and come to terms with our own mortality.

Comment by Madspirit

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:20:56 EST

As I've already stated, I support Michael Shaivo and his right to make this decision for his wife. I think it is obscene and pathetic and CRUEL to pretend this woman is cognitive of anything. They should have let her die years ago. However, I think it is unkind and unneccessary to make fun of Rose for her opinion, her spelling, her grammer. She feels strongly and her feelings obviously come from the heart. I do not see how mocking her could make anyone feel better. It's a plainly asshole thing to do. Madspirit

Comment by apckrfan

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 18:52:05 EST

Not to mention the patients at the Hospice who had to live out their final days, take their final breaths to the noise of protests who had no business being there to begin with. If every death that resulted because an artificial feeding tube or other form of life support were pulled people would have very little to do with their time. Couple that with the fact that loved ones were denied entry or delayed entry into the Hospice and missed the death of their loved ones ... It was a tragic situation. Her husband had the right to do what he did. Would it not have been easier to 8 years ago when he found out there was nothing to be done for her to give up and let her parents have her? It would have saved him a lot of headache and heartache. But he didn't do that. So that leads me to believe that he truly believed she would not have wanted to be kept in this state. I sure wouldn't and it would upset me to have to see my once vivacious and upbeat child in that position. Spouses and significant others discuss things with one another that they do not with their parents or siblings. Not to mention her parents have been quoted as saying they would do whatever it took to keep her alive, including amputing body parts. I am a parent and I am a parent who has lost a child. Would I do anything to get him back? Yes, but would I want him kept alive in such a state? No! If nothing else comes out of this situation, I hope that everyone will if not get a living will but at least go beyond telling their better half of their wishes. Tell your parents, tell your siblings, so there is no question.

Comment by Madspirit

Fri, 1 Apr 2005 18:24:53 EST

You heterosexuals are always so much about marriage and family. Well...the law says the spouse is the legal next of kin. One of the main reasons I fight so hard for us...gays and lesbians...to be able to marry...is because I want my girlfriend to make the difficult decisions...not some red-necked relative. Terry Shaivo's husband has the right to make this decision...and if it were the other way...the conservatives would be supporting the husband. ...but...things don't go their way and they become the obvious hypocrits they really are. What the parents are doing is not humane or out of just pure love. It's painful to lose a child...the hardest thing on the planet...I've heard...but you don't take your brain-dead child...prop them up...and call them "Alive". They talk about how she could improve. Well..she's been in this state for 15 years. When is this amazing improvement going to start? This is pathetic and lewd. ...and the woman had a RIGHT to die...not be propped up like a house plant. Grow up people. Madspirit

Comment by gonzo marx

Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:34:04 EST

to Geo... i'm afraid i must disagree on your assessment of "checks and balances" NOT working.. i believe it has worked in exactly the way it was intended.. the original Court case determined that Terri's wish was to NOT be kept alive under these circumstances.. you can feel however you desire about that sentiment...but we are speaking about just the Law and the system here.. Florida Law..as written by the state legislature is VERY clear in these circumstances, and once the Judge determined that the facts bore out the testimony of the husband and two other Witnesses , along with the medical facts found by impartial, Court appointed experts from more than one field...he made his Ruling.. due process took the Case thru the Court system...up to the Supreme Court of the United States not taking the case over a year ago..after further appeals on different ground also going thru the system..as well as an Injunction from the Governor of the State at one point...it went back to the original Judgement where the System could have broken the intended Rules of checks and balances involved would have been if the illegal intervention by the Federal government had changed the outcome of the Court's ruling... from a completely legal standpoint i am very happy that the federal courts and the 11th circuit apellate Court have upheld the Ruling of the lower court now..personally..i feel deeply for both sides of this very difficult Issue.. but the System worked...those that are NOT happy with the outcome..for whatever their Motives...shoudl at least face the Reality that EVERYTHING was done exactly according to the Rule of Law i say it again..the System WORKED in this case...step back and view it with some Objectivity and i believe you will agree.. cold comfort to the grieving Family, i know...but a good example of what it means to live under the Rule of Law.. for those that feel this was some kind of miscarriage of Justice done by "activist judges" etc.. i would ask you to re-examine and define your terms.. an "activist judge" would have been one that OVERTURNED the lower court's Ruling..since such action would have had NO basis in Florida Law as it has been written by the duly elected Legislature so, Geo..i would suggest that perhaps you should go back to the "textbooks" you mention..and read them over a bit more carefully...setting aside emotional coloring..and examine the FACTS presented therein... Excelsior!

Comment by Tristan

Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:20:15 EST

I don't agree with Rose's position RE:terri schiavo -- but does that make you all feel better to make fun of her like that? Seriously--I thought we were supposed to deal and respond to the ISSUES and not the personalities here..... and I'd think making fun of someone because of their spelling, punctuation, and or english as a "second language" might be a little benaeath people who are more gifted and better educated; otherwise what good IS a "better" education--if it makes us meaner , you know? maybe there is something wrong with our education "system" if this is what it does to us...... like i said-- I think the opposite of Rose on the Schiavo position--but she seemed very sincere and well-meaning in what she wrote....

Comment by Geo

Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:27:36 EST

The poor thing. This is such a sad, sad story. With many lost souls, not shedding the least bit of compasion for the girl, let alone her beloved family, who are deeply affected by the tragedy of it all. And some of you have the audacity to mock and joke. One truth can be wrought from this whole experience. Our government has ceased to be a democratic republic and is in reality an appellate system of government. I guess the unelected justices on the various tiers of the judical branch, make or break the laws, the moral code, the wishes of the people. Why aren't they called on it? As I recall from civic's class, or gov, or whatever... the system was set up as a series of checks and balances. I guess all the text books and the spine-less House of representatives, along with the executive branch... didn't have the same text book as I did. Clearly, through checks and balances this could have been settled. Or, perhaps everyone wished this woman to die... they just didn't expect it to over 2 weeks.

Comment by Bennett Dawson

Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:36:22 EST

And no-punctuation-whatsoever folks. But hey, thanks to rose, I feel better about myself. :-D

Comment by HW Saxton

Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:00:52 EST

And English as a second language folks.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:44:17 EST

we are too kind to killers and rappers

Comment by rose

Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:56:54 EST

this is such a sad story about terri it makes you wonder why are goverment dose not come in with the army and help were all killers and there is no help for are own people what is now in gods hands will be on the people own sins for killing a inocent person were killing her now as i write and there is no help for this person this is so wrong i don't know how a judge can kill her and then let the people on death row still be feed and taken better care of yes we treat the killers and rappers better then this we should all now be guilty of just letting terri die