Terri Shaivo thread

[Gene Honda Civic]

Count again, I didn't vote.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Count again, I didn't vote.

 

when you're dying of AIDS, I'll remember to pull the plug....

[Texsox]

PA, I was wondering when you would weigh in. Good to hear from you. Peace. I know we had a challenge, but personally, I am finding no humor here today.

[JUGGERNAUT]

I have no idea what they all think Gov Bush can do short of breaking the law.

 

The FLDCAFS (FL Dept of Child & Adult Family Srvcs) took their appeal all the way to FLSC. It was denied. This was the appeal for them to take Terri into protective custody & make her a ward of the state.

 

Judge Whittemore had completed the hearing & his now deliberating. He wil post his decision in the next couple of hours on the courts web site.

 

There is suspcious pkg at the court house in Tampa & they have evacuated the area.

 

=========================================

 

All of you are right that the media has been a powerful force in this case.

 

They will not let it die. CNN of all channels had a a powerful segment tonight. Featuring Kate the woman who had fought her way back from MCS-PVS.

I was perfectly fine with letting this play out in the courts & then the bomb struck for me. A disabled person called Larry King's show & she asked him if we were all going to be threatened because we are on feeding tubes?

Suddenly the talk shifted from Terri to how this decision could impact the 10's & 1000's of disabled persons who are on feeding tubes. I'm not sure most of these people have living wills or even the capacity to complete one. The people I know who where disabled were further along I believe than Kate was.

 

What I fear is that these people living in their homes today with feeding tubes could have a relapse & then following a mis-diagnosis be declared as a PVS & then have their life decided by a guardian who may or may not have their best interests at heart.

 

I pray Judge Whittemore considers the ramifications of his decision.

I pray that regardless of that decision FL takes a new look at it's r-t-d law & defines procedures to make it both harder to declare a PVS & harder to declare a r-t-d.

I pray that all 50 states take a new look at their r-t-d laws & follow that same procedure.

But most of all I pray that the 10's of 1000's of disabled Americans who are being fed by tubes today that their guardians have their best interests at heart & will error on the side of life if they should have a relapse.

 

======================================

[sox4lifeinPA]

PA, I was wondering when you would weigh in. Good to hear from you. Peace. I know we had a challenge, but personally, I am finding no humor here today.

 

I've been findind real life much more uplifting lately... I have a guys biblestudy every wednesday night. (so solid).

 

and yeah, I remember our challenge, but you're right... what's funny about encouraging the killing of babies, retards and anyone who professes a faith in God?

[JUGGERNAUT]

Dershowitz is a very good source to listen in when you want the facts of the case.

 

I know we all have high-strung emotions on this but Dershowitz said on MSNBC if this case is deliberated in MO it's entirely different. If it's deliberated in many other states it's entirely different. In those states the r-t- d would never have been established.

 

But in the state of FL the law is that a statement from a spouse attesting to their spouses r-t-d is sufficient. That's the law. The right was established while Michael is still legally her spouse. This is the point that Dershowitz wanted to stress. He feels the FL law is wrong. Dershowitz believes there is not enough evidence in the case to establish that right & so he blames the FL Congress.

 

Dershowitz stated he thinks their best hope is that Whittemore will write something that could then convince a couple of more justices in ATL to side with their appeal. That would cause the tubes to be immediately re-inserted (surgery - assuming she could survive it) & then Michael would then challenge that appeal to the USSC on basis of the constitutionality of Schiavo's Law.

 

There is of course the aftermath of all of this. Michael has secured the right to cremate Terri. I don't think many of us realize how this looks to those who know little about the law or much beyond their own personal experience. These people see a man who is sleeping with another woman & has fathererd 2 of her children having the power to both starve his wife to death & then cremate her.

 

For those who know something of the law they know he would not be able to do this in many other states.

 

I find peace in mind in all this by remembering that O. J. is free. That Blake (Beretta) is free. That their ex-wives are dead. Those families are crushed. Both these men were accused of murder. The prosecution had ample evidence for a conviction & the jury found them not guilty. Yes there were procedural goofs with O. J but that was not the case that I know of with Blake.

 

The point of all that is I keep reminding myself that the American justice system sometimes resembles justice & sometimes it doesn't. I'm happy that the US Congress passed Schiavo's Law. I think that extra tool will make it harder for guardians of disabled persons to starve them to death in the absence of a living will. Its an extra tool to insure due process within the state.

Edited March 25, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT

[LowerCaseRepublican]

I'm happy that the US Congress passed Schiavo's Law.  I think that extra tool will make it harder for guardians of disabled persons to starve them to death in the absence of a living will.  Its an extra tool to insure due process within the state.

 

Let's call Schiavo's Law what it is -- and what their own Congressional memo that got leaked said it is: Congressional authoritarian statists wrapping themselves up in this poor woman's sickbed to try to pander to the extreme Christian right in order to garner more votes during the 2006 midterm elections.

[Queen Prawn]

Since you obviously want to know more I will give you the whole story as I recall it:

 

No, actually I didn't want to know more, I was just clarifying what Steff was getting at.

[Rex Kickass]

when you're dying of AIDS, I'll remember to pull the plug....

 

Classy.

 

Something tells me you won't be marrying Gene Honda Civic. So I'm pretty sure that it won't be your call.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

So with all this wrangling going on, marriage = one man, one woman, her parents & the US Congress?

[Steff]

No, actually I didn't want to know more, I was just clarifying what Steff was getting at.

 

And it's a real sick thing that anyone.. ANYONE would support that behavior no matter if someone was throwing up good or bad food. That is simply unreal.. how in the hell someone can rationalize that... I can't even comprehend it. It's sick. It's just sick.

 

"Go ahead honey... puke up the bad stuff.. it's ok.. It's ok that you are ripping up your insides.. destroying your mouth, teeth, throat, stomach, etc, etc.. not to mention the emotional damage you'll suffer to go along with the obvious mental damage you already have... it's cool. I support ya.. here.. have another bon, bon... just puke it up later.. "

 

Sick.. simply sick.

 

The word "not" doesn't change the fact that you SUPPORTED her throwing up, and if you notice my response I assumed you meant to have the word "not" in there and responded as such. With all the preeching you've done in this thread I would have never, EVER guessed that YOU would be one to condone such activity...

 

If it slithers like a snake...

[Steff]

when you're dying of AIDS, I'll remember to pull the plug....

 

 

 

I didn't vote either PA.. and it's not because I don't have an opinion on it.. it's because I don't feel it was my place to vote on ending or continuing someone's life.

[Queen Prawn]

I didn't vote either PA.. and it's not because I don't have an opinion on it.. it's because I don't feel it was my place to vote on ending or continuing someone's life.

 

Makes three of us.

[Heads22]

OH MY GOD

 

I agree with Nuke. I'm neutral. I'm not going to make a judgement, much less try to, based on what is on television. I don't know her, don't know medicine well enough, don't know what's going on with a lot of stuff.

[Steff]

You need serious help.  I've corrected the post already & yet like a boar you have decided to post your own version of it. 

 

 

I need help.. me... ?? YOU SUPPORTED and ENCOURAGED someone to vomit and I need help..

 

 

 

LMAO... Oh Jugger.. you do make me laugh.

[JUGGERNAUT]

www.christianwireservice.com - I've read the briefs.

 

All of them our asking Gov Bush to use his executive order power to take custody over Terri. That's different than the FLDCAFS trying to take custody over her life.

 

One brief is making reference to FL law pertaining to disable persons, another brief makes reference to the 8th Amendment & cruel & unsual punishnment, another applies to a FL statute of disable persons to enjoy life.

 

I think you can see the weakness here. All of the briefs elevate Terri's state from being that of PVS to being disabled. The court of FL has already declared her to be in a PVS state. So sure Gov Bush could declare an executive order but to what end? He can't force the court to change their position on r-t-d or PVS. So he risks impeachment over the act to no end.

 

What Buchanan is advocating is that Pres Bush declare an executive order on the basis that FL's r-t-d laws are unconstitutional. What these other lawyers are advocating is that Gov Bush declare an executive order on the basis that recent FL court decisions are unconstitutional with respect to both FL & the US law.

 

To what end? The USSC has already recognized the state's power to enact r-t-d laws. It's recognized the right of the state to set a high procedural bar to establish that right. There was nothing in the 1990 decision that suggests the USSC would be willing to define a minimal set of standards for that bar. So Bush is suppose to risk impeachment so that Terri can be fed again? Buchanan is crazy. He's arguing US Cons Law ignoring recent USSC decisions governing the interpretation of that law.

 

Now let's consider Gov Bush's options. He can issue an executive order

to take Terri into protective custody under the guidelines of those very weak briefs or he can make a charge against Michael on the grounds he violated the disabilities act of the state of FL & then take her into protective custody as a criminal witness. So Gov Bush is suppose to risk impeachment so that Terri can be fed again? Again it's crazy.

 

They just can't seem to understand that any executive order outside without the blessings of the courts is going to be short lived, challenged,

& change ABSOLUTELY NOTHING with respect to Terri's future. The act of the order is not suddenly going to cause Greer to change his decision.

 

Maybe it doesn't make sense. May it does look crazy to the rest of the world. But Greer is the definitive voice of the court in this case. His decision has been upheld by the highest court in FL, a full Fed Appeals Court & the USSC. I realize they don't want to admit that but when the USSC refuses to hear your case it is assumed they see no reason to challenge the Fed Appeal Court ruling.

 

I applaud the efforts of Terri's family for doing all that is in their power to save Terri's life. They are firmly convinced their daughter responds to them & enjoys being with them. They are standing strong in their conviction to fight to the very end for her life.

 

But please keep it real. Don't get on TV & start askiing Gov Bush & Pres Bush to do something, anything to save her life. The Judicial branch serves as a check & balance against both the Legislative & Executive branches. Executive powers are meant to deal with major emergencies & not contesting a right to die right sanctioned by the highest court in the state of FL.

 

=================================

 

I hope some of the people who voted for the GOP in both the state of FL & the nation do not suddenly stop voting or switch parties because they couldn't save Terri. They have done everything in their power to help the Schindler's cause. The Schindler's have the opportunity to go before Judge Whittemore tonight because of Schiavo's Law. Without Schiavo's Law this would have ended at the FLSC after the USSC refuse to hear it.

[sox4lifeinPA]

I didn't vote either PA.. and it's not because I don't have an opinion on it.. it's because I don't feel it was my place to vote on ending or continuing someone's life.

 

I understand...and this may shock many of you, but legally speaking, I think what's going down is what should be going down. The husband is the undisputed guardian and he has the sole right to say what happens, just as miss pa will one day have the same right.

 

However, morally speaking, I think there's so much more to the story including a pretty clear picture that her "husband" is the love child of hitler and satan.

 

I listened to the reading of the affidavid (spell check please) of one of the nurses that took care of Terri... pretty amazing for a woman that's supposedly in a persistent vegetative state.

 

I have no heart for the lost anymore, I feel sorry for those who want to make this a political battle...both sides. I'm sad that one side hates babies, the other hates inmates....one side hates religion....the other fears acceptance....and we all hate trying to find the root of all these problems and actually doing something to fix them.

 

 

see you in another 4 weeks

[Gene Honda Civic]

This will get me flamed, but I say bring on the Marsmallows. Let's make S'mores

 

http://nik-martin.com/terristatus/

[Texsox]

I think anyone reading the thread knew exactly what Jugernaut meant and it was an obvious typographical error. Of course he wouldn't support bulimia. What's that phrase about a goose and a gander . . .?

[Wong & Owens]

I think anyone reading the thread knew exactly what Jugernaut meant and it was an obvious typographical error. Of course he wouldn't support bulimia. What's that phrase about a goose and a gander . . .?

 

 

Actually, if you read his posts, he wouldn't support bullemia.

 

You'd think someone who obviously considers himself to be the utmost authority on everything from Terri Schiavo to Hawaii Five-O would learn how to spell.

[Steff]

I think anyone reading the thread knew exactly what Jugernaut meant and it was an obvious typographical error. Of course he wouldn't support bulimia. What's that phrase about a goose and a gander . . .?

 

 

Yea.. very questionable when he says "honey... it's ok if you puke the bad food.. just make sure you eat the good stuff..." :rolly

 

Not to mention he further explained that it was just fine with him as long as she ate in his presence.

 

I think most reading this thread know that you're acting like a horses ass...

[JUGGERNAUT]

Not sure if it's been posted here, but Judge Whittemore rejected the Schindlers latest motion. Their appeal awaits the judges in ATL again.

 

I don't think it's been mentioned her but I think this story resonates with Catholics more so than just Evangelicals.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/sanct...e/eutharc.shtml

Euthanasia & Suicide - Morally unacceptable

Refusal of Extraordinay Medical Treatment - Morally acceptable

 

The biggest problem in this for many 100's of millions of Catholics around the world is that the Pope has weighed in on this case. In his continued reference to Terri being starved to death it's apparent that he does not consider feeding tubes as extraordinary medical treatment.

 

When you consider that there are millions of disabled persons around the world today who are aware & are being fed by tubes you can see his argument. To the non-Catholic this is not a big deal but to a Catholic it's a very big deal. Absolution from one's sins before death is arguably one of the most important aspects of the faith for Catholics. Generally speaking a Catholic wants to leave this world morally cleansed above anything else in their life.

 

Terri as you know is a Catholic. For the past 15 yrs she has been receiving Communion when the court has permitted it. As some of you may know absolution through confession is a pre-req for Communion. So every time she has received Communion in this time it's been a re-affirmation of her Catholic faith if you will. We also know that prior to her collapse she attended church regularly. So it's safe to assume her faith was very important to her.

 

We all say things at times that are driven by emotions that later on when we have calmed down we might think twice about. This is where the interpretation of separation of church & state may get in the way of the court making a reasonable decision. Should these emotionally charged statements that might follow a movie, television program, story someone's heard, an article someone's read, etc. have greater credence for a Catholic than the faith they are committed to? That's not an easy question to answer but you would hope the court does not simply ignore the devotion a person demonstrates to one's faith. From a lay person's persepective looking at a Catholic as a member of a group with by-laws devotion of one's faith & acceptance of the statutes of that faith can be measured by not just how often a Catholic attends church but more importantly how often they appear before a priest to confess their sins.

 

When a Catholic confesses their sins it is an affirmation of how serious they take their faith with respect to dying with a morally cleansed soul.

IMO, it's wrong for the courts to simply ignore such practices from Catholics in determining a Catholic's right-to-die. I would hope that Greer did not do this, but based on what I've read from his decisions I can not find any evidence that he did not. That for me is very disturbing. If the courts have taken the sep of C&S to such an extreme as to consider religious behavior & practice irrelevant to cases then something needs to be done about that. No behavior & no practice whether it be religious or secular should be ignored in any case where it can play a significant role in the decision.

[Texsox]

Pope is ‘serenely giving himself to the will of God’

By Ruth Gledhill Religion Correspondent

THE POPE is “serenely abandoning” himself to God’s will, according to a senior Vatican cardinal. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the head of the Congregation of Bishops, made his comments during a sermon at a Maundy Thursday Chrism Mass at St Peter’s, in Rome, where he was standing in for the ailing Pope John Paul II.

 

Senior Roman Catholic sources in London emphasised last night that the comments referred to the Pope’s spiritual rather than physical health, but acknowledged that his health was deteriorating.

 

The Cardinal’s comments came at the end of a week where the Pope’s health has worsened further, with reports by Italian news agencies that he has been vomiting, suffering strong headaches and not responding to medication.

 

However, the doctors treating him said that there were no immediate plans for the Pope to return to hospital, although just one public engagement, an Easter Sunday blessing, is scheduled for him this weekend, making this the first year in his papacy that he has missed the traditional Holy Week services.

 

The 84-year-old Pope, whose health remains troubled since he underwent throat surgery at the Gemelli Hospital, in Rome, last month, watched yesterday morning’s service on television from his Vatican apartments.

 

Cardinal Re said: “We want to thank him for the witness he continues to give us even through his example of serene abandonment to God, which he links to the mystery of the Cross.” At the start of the Mass, the Cardinal read a message from the Pope. It said: “I am united ideally with all of you who are gathered in the Vatican basilica. Via television from my apartment, my dearest ones, I am spiritually with you.”

 

Maundy Thursday is the day that Catholics commemorate the founding of the priesthood. On this day priests renew the vows they first took when they were ordained.

 

The Pope underwent a tracheotomy to relieve severe breathing problems on February 24. He has spent a total of 28 days in two stints at the Gemelli Hospital. Since he left hospital on March 13 the Pope, who also suffers from Parkinson’s Disease and arthritis, has made four brief appearances but has not spoken in public.

 

On Wednesday this week, the day he normally holds his general audience, the Pope made a 65-second appearance from his window overlooking St Peter’s Square. According to Reuters, he looked gaunt, pale and pained.

[Texsox]

A personal hero of mine was Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. Much was written how he faced his impending death

His final public act was writing a "friend of the court" letter to the U.S. Supreme Court, promoting the pro-life effort against physician-assisted suicide. (The court is currently considering crucial test cases from Washington and New York states.) "There can be no such thing as a 'right to assisted suicide,'" Bernardin wrote, "because there can be no legal and moral order which tolerates the killing of innocent human life...." And he wrote, "I am at the end of my earthly life....[A]s one who is dying I have especially come to appreciate the gift of life....I urge the court not to create any right to assisted suicide."

 

Instead, Cardinal Bernardin sought to embrace death as a natural part of life. In the spirit of St. Francis, to whom he had deep devotion, he stood in front of TV cameras and called death his friend. World-renowned advice columnist Ann Landers was among the few of his closest friends and family called to his bedside at the end: "He somehow made us all less afraid to die," she wrote. Before he slipped into a coma, he received phone calls of farewell both from Pope John Paul II and from President Bill Clinton.

Some consider pulling the feeding tube as assisted suicide. Others will not. To each their faith.

 

Peace

Edited March 25, 2005 by Texsox

[JUGGERNAUT]

The entire right-to-die right is a very difficult one for Catholics to come to grips with. The only latitude being that those who are Catholics have the right to refuse extraordinary medical treatment to sustain our life. The Church doesn't give much latitude in determining when you can & can not refuse treatment. It should be obvious now that feeding tubes are a borderline case at best.

 

There has been much debate on whether one feels pain during starvation. Obviously that's going to depend on how much awareness a person has to the pain. I've read what I can on this & was surprised by the answers. There is no way to insure a person will not feel pain during starvation. A morphine IV can not insure against that & in some cases can hurt. Other analgesic drugs are considered more appropriate but they do can not insure against it. Instead they observe the person during the starvation and treat any signs of pain that are visible.

 

This of course calls into question right-to-die by lethal injection. This applies to any life-support & not just feeding tubes. If the act of refusing such life support creates a possibility of pain for the incapacitated person then all states need to re-evaluate this. Most Americans are members of some religious faith that strongly opposes suicide & assistance to suicide.

This is a good example where religion can shape legislation in a positive way.

 

The key to the religious doctrine is that a Catholic can not willingly make a decision to assist in their death or the death of another. They can only make a decision to refuse life-support to sustain their life or sustain the life another. So the solution then is for the state to make right-to-die by lethal injection the default. They can still provide the right-to-die by suspension of life-support any option for those who want it. Though that option seems illogical I look to some Muslims who seem to associate death & suffering with a higher reward in heaven so I would not deny that option for those people.

 

This would allow Catholics & other religious persons to die in peace free from suffering in their last days.