Again, I think Congress is wrong for stepping in. I think that Michael Schiavo has the right to determine his wife's fate, only because according to Florida law, he does. A verbal statement of one's wishes is all that's required, and the Florida courts have found time and again that Terri said what her husband says she said. I have no idea why — with all the legal wrangling that has gone on in Florida over the past decade — the Florida legislature has not simply changed the law to stipulate that a written statement is required before someone can remove a feeding tube from a patient. That change would resolve this case once and for all, wouldn't it? Or maybe they have and I'm just missing something.
If you have nothing better to do, you can read the 2003 Florida ruling that gave Michael Schiavo full control over his wife's destiny. Essentially, two other people corroborated Michael's story about what Terri said. Of course, they both have "Schiavo" for a last name.
Two people also contradicted Michael's story. Their testimony was deemed not reliable by the judge. Terri's mother's testimony was not considered in the ruling because the judge decided Terri made the statements when she was about 12 years old. Her friend's testimony was deemed unreliable because the judge thought the friend used the wrong verb tense. [Seriously. See page 5 of the court ruling.]
Who can blame Terri Schiavo's parents for using every avenue available to them, including our Congress? I'd be doing the same thing. I don't know that I could ever remove a feeding tube from one of my children, no matter how bad their condition was. And I sure would want my feelings in the matter to count, even if I had no legal rights. Removing the tube just goes against the basic job description: parents give life to their children and nurture them. We don't withhold food [except for dessert, when they haven't eaten their peas]. We don't send them into a two- or three-week, slow dehydrating death, even if there's no hope for any type of recovery. At least I don't think I could.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Big Time Patriot
I just have a hard time understanding the Republicans. They don't seem to have nay particular set of values, just whatever issue comes up at the moment.
Do Republicans think Marriage is sacred? Not if Republicans disagree with the husband.
Do Republicans think Marriage is even a good thing? Republicans want to pass a constitutional amendment which will reduce the number of marriages in America. Doesn't sound like supporting marriage to me?
Do Republicans value life?
They don't have much concern that the President let more than a hundred people die in Texas when he could have prevented it by merely putting his signature on a piece of paper?
Do Republicans value life while they make America one of the most likely places to die of gunshots just to appease the NRA?
I don't know what the Republicans even stand for these days... There don't seem to be any consistent values.
2 - andy marsh
SO BTP, you bring up gun control, the death penalty and definition of marriage in a thread about Terri Schiavo why?
3 - bhw
Well, technically, the biggest "values" under attack right now are states rights and separation of powers.
The Congress has stepped in and written a law that applies, literally, to Terri Schiavo only. It takes the deciding power away from the state of FL, even though the Supreme Court [I believe] has seen and rejected the case, sending back to FL for the final word.
So the law totally unravels our legal process and creates a new one just for this one person.
Hopefully, the law will be found unconstitutional before the situation goes too much further.
4 - Shark
Horrible case. Too bad these morons don't understand that there's a difference between "killing" and "MERCY".
Letting the poor woman die would be merciful.
PS: Wouldn't it be ironic if it were really God's Will to have her die, and that keeping her alive by extreme artificial means is a violation of the Big Guy's Cosmic Plan?
AHAHAHAHAHA.
Boy, I hope that's the case -- and consequently, all the motherfuckers who are intervening for political purpose spend an eternity in Hell for fuckin' with God's intentions.
These opportunistic hypocrites are Evil Incarnate, plain and simple -- and I can prove it with a pencil and paper.
5 - Shark
Oh, and I can't wait to see the Republican Blowhards line up in Huntsville Texas to protest the 'murder' of a convicted criminal by lethal injection.
6 - SFC Ski
Are you equating the life of Terry Shiavo with the life of a convicted murderer?
7 - Shark
I'd also like to see the husband offer the "protestors" an opportunity to take over her full-time care -- pro bono.
The Christoids With a Conscience over someone else's loved one can show their support by wiping up her shit a couple of times a day.
8 - Shark
PFCSki: "Are you equating the life of Terry Shiavo with the life of a convicted murderer?"
No.
I'm pointing out that people who support the death penalty, while at the same time -- want God in schools and the Ten Commandments in public spaces -- are FUCKING OPPORTUNISTIC HYPOCRITES.
"Thous shalt not kill."
I don't see any amendments to that one, do you?
It would be nice if the Christoids actually practiced what they preached on occasion.
9 - SFC Ski
I don't see where keeoing an innocent person alive while killing a convicted criminal is hypocrisy, not all lives are equal when you look at how they are lived out, IMO. Secondly, a convicted criminal gets an injection, falls asleep, and ceases to live, Terry Schiavo will slowly die of hunger and thirst over a perid that could last as long as 20 days.
10 - Dawn
Who is paying for her care, the husband or the parents? My main objective in not being kept alive long past when my quality of life is gone is that I don't want to be an emotional or financial burden to my family.
But I am practical person and I would rather my children and loved ones be able to communicate with me anytime from the beyond, rather than as a shriveled, disturbing corpse like figure.
I understand the parents need to want to keep their child alive, but something about using their child in this tug of war seems really grotesque and ghoulish.
11 - bhw
Who is paying for her care, the husband or the parents?
The husband won a million dollar lawsuit on her behalf. $300K went to him for the loss of his wife. THe other $700K went into a trust fund for Terri's care, which her husband controls. He has apparently spent almost all of that on pursuing her death, rather than on her care: most of it went to his lawyers.
Here's an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer that talks about the money and how it's been spent.
It's unclear who is paying for her care now. I think some of it is being covered by private funds raised by people who support her parents.
I'm not sure what else her parents can do other than give up. I don't see them as using her. I see them as fighting for her and using every means possible. They're desperate. I can't really blame them.
I would feel a lot better about this case if I didn't doubt Michael Schiavo's altruism and honesty. If his wife had signed a living will, all of this would be moot, and then I'd be fully on the side of telling the parents to let it go.
I still think the husband has the legal right to make the decision, which is what I'd want my husband to be able to do. I just find his story a little fishy -- he fought for the million bucks to rehabilitate her and then once he had it, he started fighting to have her taken off the tube. I can't get past that.
12 - bhw
Shark, I don't see a feeding tube as extreme artificial means. To me, that would be a ventilator or something similar. They're just sticking food in her stomach and her body is doing the rest.
But that's just me. The state of FL makes no distinction between types of life support. It doesn't matter if it's a ventilator, a heart pump, or a feeding tube: they're all considered artificial life support and patients have a legal right to refuse all of them. So in my post, I'm mixing some legal arguments with some personal opinions about the case.
13 - Lisa McKay
According to this piece in Slate, the costs (approx. 80K per year) are being picked up by the hospice and Medicaid. The hospice has been footing part of the bill for a while now, which is unusual. So it would appear that the parents and the husband, at this point in time, are not contributing financially to her support.
14 - bhw
Thanks, Lisa. Here's a story linked from the Slate story:
Just $40,000 to $50,000 remains of the money won in the malpractice case after Terri Schiavo's heart stopped in 1990 and left her in what court-appointed doctors say is a persistent vegetative state. Deborah Bushnell, one of Michael Schiavo's attorneys, said the money is being saved for litigation expenses.
The money is held in a trust fund, and a judge approves all expenditures, from attorneys' fees to the woman's haircuts.
Terri Schiavo lives at the Woodside Hospice -- part of a not-for-profit hospice network in Florida -- among terminally ill patients. She is permitted to stay there for free because she is considered indigent, Bushnell said. Patients who can afford it pay roughly $80,000 a year to stay at the hospice.
Citing privacy laws, hospice spokeswoman Louise Cleary would not answer questions about the Schiavo case but said, "We never turn anyone away. If they need our care, we take care of them."
The article also says the attorneys on both sides are basically working for free at this point.
15 - Temple Stark
I don't see how the husband benefits financially from this? Not to mention a few million people hate him now.
Maybe if he had stopped pursuing his case once the money left went below $100,000 you would have a point. But he's still fighting for what's right from his POV - as are the parents.
16 - jadester
"not all lives are equal when you look at how they are lived out"
I was under the impression, (by all means correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm hardly a christian scholar) that it's not our place to judge the value of a person's life, that job is reserved for God.
Unless he's contracting out these days...
17 - RedTard
I certainly agree with the Democrats on this one. Just like those pesky unwanted babies, the disabled are too much of a burden on people's social lives and should be killed.
Instead of wasting our time trying to keep some crippled burden on society like Terri Schiavo alive we should continue trying to overturn the death penalty before they try to use it on the guy who raped and murdered Jessica Lunsford. If anyone needs protection it's murdering child rapists, not people who can't feed themselves.
18 - gerri
my niece bacame a young brain damaged woman,in 1982,froam a car accident...her parents decided on the 11th day,to remove her from life support(a ventilator)well she continue to breathe on her own(so now what?)she went on tube feedings for 71/2 years,then god decided when it was her time to die(no husband or judge)this should be god's timing in terri"s case..her husband broke his wedding vows 10 years ago(when he resumed his"life"with another woman.therefore he should have lost "his so called guardenship" of her at that time.i wonder, just what his chrildren,will think of him,when they are grown and understand ,what he did to another human being(the one he vowed to god ,in sickness and health)to take care of..someone needs to wire his mouth shut(and let him starve slowly..may god be with her family,i could not do this ,to someone i love.this is nothing short of a slow deliberated murder..i wonder what the rest of the world will think of our"compassionate counry"after this".my older sister, just passed away in january(in a nursing home in crestview fl.at least a third of the patients,there,that i saw,were in this vegetative state(no quality of life)should someone just on in there and "gas them"?it would take a burden off the government,and put them out of their misery,so why not??it appears this is where our great nation is heading...god help us.convicted murderers have more rights(than a innocent young woman)whose only crime was marrying this jerk of a man...
19 - Eric Olsen
Thanks bhw, Man, this is tough stuff - I just don't see how you can willfully starve someone to death. I agree with bhw's distinction between breathing and feeding. I also understand the political aspects and am certain there is grandstanding involved - BUT, if that grandstanding (as in Congress taking up steroids in baseball) also encompasses legitimate public concerns and issues, then concentrating on the grandstanding seems to me besides the point. There will ALWAYS be political grandstanding, but the parents' concerns here seem completely legit to me.
Where there is life there is hope and if she is alive and not in great pain, requiring only a feeding tube to remain alive, then why artificially cut off that hope by starving her to death?
20 - bhw
Thanks, Eric. I'm totally torn on this case. On the one hand, I think the husban does have the right to make the determination for Terri, based on her wishes. Michael Schiavo has maintained since he intitally sought to remover her feeding tube 7 years ago that Terri stated to him and his brother and another family member that she would not want to be kept alive by machines. In Florida, you don't need a written statement, only a verbal one. That is the law, and that's what he has.
And life support in FL legally means any kind of artificial life assistance, including feeding tubes. The court said that it believes Michael Schiavo is telling the truth, and a zillion subsequent appeals have been denied based on a lack of full evidence. Others have been seen through and failed.
The guy has won every legal battle there is, and it is not right for our government to make new laws that override judicial jurisdiction for one person's case. I hope this law will be found to be unconstitutional, because otherwise, all of our private medical decisions could be at jeapordy of governmental intrusion. Some right-to-life organization could start contesting living wills and getting Congress to start challenging family decisions, even when there's no dischord.
But I still have a hard time with the removal of a feeding tube. According to the case file I read, nobody said she specifically mentioned removal of a feeding tube. I'm uncomfortable with how certain Michael Schiavo is that this is what she meant.
And I'll always be uncomfortable with the fact that he didn't mention ending her life until after he'd won the money for her care, $300K of which went directly into his pocket -- and not Terri's trust fund.
I don't think Terri's parents should have the final say in what happens to her, but I understand why they think they should. Terri chose to spend her life with and make life's decisions with her husband, and he should be the one to carry out her wishes.
But he still gives me the creeps.
21 - jadester
Having thought it through a little more, I can concede that whilst my own will if I were to go into such a state would be to leave me to die, in the absence of a will, the decision should fall to the legal guardian/s. In this case, would that be her parents? i haven't followed the story in its entirety
And whilst my parents are aware of my wishes should such a tragedy befall me, and I would trust them to make the decision, I feel they should not have to, I wouldn't want to put them through that. Which is why now more than ever I intend to get at least some form of last will and testament down on paper...and I urge anyone who wants to be sure their loved ones would be spared some of the worst decisions, to do the same.
22 - bhw
In this case, would that be her parents?
No, actually, it's the spouse. And it should be.
23 - gerri
i was just listening to fox's (MY WORD)
and john said in these words(michael has a common law wife now)so he believes like myself(it's not legal to have two wives at the same time(then terri has to be an ex wife ,and he shouldn't have no legal rights with her case...
24 - Temple Stark
What's almost as creepy is a post 500 words long and one paragraph.
There should be more collaboration with posters here because there are points being made in other related threads which would answer most of the questions being brought up in other threads. I know that would be useful and such so it's a non-starter. :-)
25 - Eric Olsen
there is something wrong with the formatting - we are working on it now