PDA

View Full Version : Michael Schiavo - what's your gut reaction ?



MJC
03-24-2005, 10:49 AM
I think he's a creep. I think he tried to strangle his wife 15 years ago, botched it and got scared.

I think he's absolutely terrified that she'll somehow recover and spill the beans about the attempted murder and all the hideous abuse she's endured at his hands and orders over the years.

I look at his pictures in the media and see something in his eyes that says "I hate/abuse/dominate women"

I also think this "hospice" he selected is run by a scumbag.

[ 03-24-2005, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: MJC ]

uncas
03-24-2005, 10:54 AM
MJC.. you could very well be right... It has reached a point for me at least that I am being swamped with " he said, she said " or a parent said...etc...all to fill those following this with a feeling that they are right.
I honestly don't know whether he attrempted to kill her...heard that...I also heard words from doctors saying that this was not a possibilty....
The bottom line is you have a lot of people out there who do not care about integrity...just the money...and will say anything that those who bought them want them to say.

Sometimes too much information is a bad thing!

I think OJ is guilty as sin...not that it matters...

Keith Wilson
03-24-2005, 10:59 AM
Gee, how charitable. That's quite an astounding ability, to just look at his picture and tell that much about his character. You wouldn't perhaps have actually ever met him or know anything about him that didn't come from those opposed to his decision about his wife, would you?

Gentlemen, this is starting to be a trend, and I don't like it at all. Someone does something you don't agree with; tries to have his wife's feeding tube removed, runs against Mr. Bush, takes a political position you oppose, and the default tactic is to demonize him. Michael Schiavo tried to murder his wife (without a shred of evidence); Bill Clinton's a rapist and had Vincent Foster murderered (without a shred of evidence); John Kerry's a gigolo and a traitor, and lied about everything that happened in Vietnam (without a shred of evidence).

Listen carefully: YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MICHAEL SCHAIVO'S CHARACTER OR MOTIVATIONS. Neither do I.

[ 03-24-2005, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
03-24-2005, 11:00 AM
I'm glad I'm not in his shoes.

John of Phoenix
03-24-2005, 11:04 AM
Sadly, OJ was aquitted. Schiavo hasn't been tried. Yet.

Except by Fox of course.

[ 03-24-2005, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: John Teetsel ]

Alan D. Hyde
03-24-2005, 11:04 AM
Why doesn't he just divorce her, go on his way, and let her parents do what they can?

Alan

MJC
03-24-2005, 11:05 AM
That's quite an astounding ability, to just look at his picture and tell that much about his character It's a gift I've found useful in the past.

I actually started out on his side until I spent some time looking into the case history.

uncas
03-24-2005, 11:10 AM
Alan...This idea has been discussed....For some reason, it is not possible for him to do so...as it would have been the easy way out.
Some may think it is because of the money... I don't know.
I have added up the money he received or Terri received and if it covers 15 yrs. of hospital bills I would be very surprised.
Heck a heart transplant...In the hospital on Monday...out the following week...costs what 500,000...how can what moneys received for malpractice or what have you not already have been completely exhausted.

High C
03-24-2005, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by MJC:
...I actually started out on his side until I spent some time looking into the case history.Same here. I heard all the "vegetative state talk, and believed it. When I saw the videos which nobody here wants to comment on, I changed my mind. I watched them alongside the director of a large regional rehab unit who was mortified that anyone would consider her totally brain dead, much less consider cutting off her food supply.

We shouldn't kill her. This is wrong. :(

[ 03-24-2005, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: High C ]

Alan D. Hyde
03-24-2005, 11:17 AM
Agreed.

Alan

uncas
03-24-2005, 11:17 AM
High C...The reason I did not look at the videos is simple...they can be doctored and to the best of my knowledge, there was nothing to indicate whether they were or not.
Remember who put the videos on.....the websites....I'm not saying they were documented but I say the individuals who put them are could be considered as biased.

[ 03-24-2005, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: uncas ]

LeeG
03-24-2005, 11:40 AM
wow,,,a few minutes video beats hours of diagnosis and multiple court decisions. You guys are as good as Frist diagnosing by day time tv. Hey,,maybe those WMD really are in freighters roaming the ocean,,Osama and Saddam could have tranfered them to shipping containers ,,yeah,,that's what happened,,yeah.
So,,do you think the Marine in Falluja was a cold blooded killer? We saw the movie and heard the comments.
How about this. Terry had bulimia so bad she had a heart attack,,maybe her upbringing with control freak parents enabled her to be rescued by a control freak husband but neither one could rescue her from herself. So you wingnuts are able to figure all this out from still and moving pictures,,,
Holy moly MJC the hospice is DONATING the care for her. It's FREE. If you had one ounce of brains you'd know what that means in cost and emotional investment for the Schindlers AND the Hospice house.
braind dead, we got brain dead people typing.

Meerkat
03-24-2005, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Alan D. Hyde:
Why doesn't he just divorce her, go on his way, and let her parents do what they can?

AlanPerhaps:
1. He believes his wedding vows.
2. He's more than a christian in name only such as you folks.
3. He's more than a gentleman in name only tongue.gif

LeeG
03-24-2005, 12:03 PM
my gut reaction? It's like looking at a car wreck while driving by.
my next thoughts are that it takes a whole hell of a lot of cowardice to legislate other people hardship.
To pull out the "err on the side of life" bs. for political principle reeks of cowardice,,GW and DeLay are slime,,pure and simple slime disguised as caring gentlemen. To say "he's a killer" and be this far from the experience both families are going through is cowardice. It's like getting out the camera and driving REAL SLOW past the car wreck and taking picture of the dead and injured. "wow, check out that one his legs over there and his heads over there!"

MJC
03-24-2005, 12:07 PM
I found this excerpt the other day, it made me think...

Michael Schiavo's former girlfriend speaks (http://hyscience.typepad.com/hyscience/2005/02/michael_schiavo_1.html)

I know these folks are part of a conservative organization, but I've tried to stop my anti-conservative, brain dead, knee jerk reaction. He's a creep. There's a reasonable doubt.

Michael Schiavo Fails to Show for Deposition (http://66.195.16.55/bio411.html)

Keith Wilson
03-24-2005, 12:09 PM
Why doesn't he just divorce her, go on his way, and let her parents do what they can?Perhaps, after trying everything reasonable and waiting long enough to be sure there was no chance of recovery, he really believes that he's doing what his wife would have wanted? Just a thought. :rolleyes:

It seems to fit Ockham's razor better than bizarre and complely unsupported theories about attempted murder and conspiracies.

[ 03-24-2005, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

Bruce Hooke
03-24-2005, 12:10 PM
My gut reaction is that I do not have anywhere near enough information to judge Michael Schiavo and so I would feel like an obnoxious idiot if I tried to do so. The same is true of the videos -- I'm not a doctor and given the apparent complexities of Terri's medical situation I would have to be an idiot to think I could draw much useful information from a few videos selected and possibly edited by someone who has a very definite perspective they want to sell with the video. Trying to draw serious conclusions from such a video would be like trying to judge the efficacy of a medication based on the advertisements I saw during the superbowl.

On top of that, I don't really think that any of the above is really the important part of this story for anybody other than her friends, family and relatives of Terri Shiavo. The important part of this story to the rest of us should be the political and legal games that are being played with this case. That is what will have a long term impact. I'm not being cold-hearted, but it is a fact that people die all the time, and many of those deaths involve decisions to remove some form of life-support, so one more such case, however controversial, is not really that important in the grand scheme of things. What is important is the political and cultural fallout from the controversy because that could have a direct impact on many of us.

George Jung
03-24-2005, 12:32 PM
My original intent was to stay off this thread; comments ruled primarily by emotion.

That said, however, I agree:


Same here. I heard all the "vegetative state talk, and believed it. When I saw the videos which nobody here wants to comment on, I changed my mind. I watched them alongside the director of a large regional rehab unit who was mortified that anyone would consider her totally brain dead, much less consider cutting off her food supply.

We shouldn't kill her. This is wrong. ----------------------------------

Same here. I heard all the "vegetative state talk, and believed it. When I saw the videos which nobody here wants to comment on, I changed my mind. I watched them alongside the director of a large regional rehab unit who was mortified that anyone would consider her totally brain dead, much less consider cutting off her food supply.

We shouldn't kill her. This is wrong.



[/QUOTE]
wow,,,a few minutes video beats hours of diagnosis and multiple court decisions. You guys are as good as Frist diagnosing by day time tv. Don't be so quick to dismiss Dr. Frists' ability to tell more, watching only the videos, than what you discern. The medical education actually is worthwhile in this regard.
One thing I've found very bothersome is the equating of provision of water, and nutrition, to 'life support'. I consider more extensive measures, such as a ventilator (patient unable to breath on her own), or IV meds to support the blood pressure, etc., to be 'life support'. Recognize that if you were paralyzed, and had no one to bring you food and water, you also would die.
That said, I also agree we don't know enough to comment on hubbies character or prior actions. One would hope that, if there were reasonable cause, an investigation would've been carried out at the time of his wifes' initial injury. But you have to admit, the way this has been portrayed just smells bad.

edited to note: just read my post (and modified it. oops)

[ 03-24-2005, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: George Jung ]

km gresham
03-24-2005, 12:35 PM
I don't believe we should be starving people to death. However, this may be the answer for the Social Security crisis - just starve the old people. Their lives aren't very good anyway, what with achy bones and bad digestion and dimentia.

Keith Wilson
03-24-2005, 12:51 PM
Karen, I haven't yet gotten my act together to make a living will. I have, however, said to my wife on multiple occasions that I definitely do not wish to be kept alive as a brainless body if there's no reasonable hope of recovery. If I have an accident this afternoon that leaves me in a permanent vegetative state, there will be no written documetation of my wishes. Would you say that the state should prevent my wife from having my feeding tube removed and "starving me to death"?

km gresham
03-24-2005, 12:52 PM
We shouldn't starve people to death.

Bruce Hooke
03-24-2005, 12:54 PM
Karen, So do you think it should be illegal for someone to CHOOSE to refuse medical treatment (potentially in advance of the actual situation in which such a decision might have to be implemented)? I find the idea that someone might choose to refuse treatment much less troubling than the idea that we might FORCE someone to accept medical care that they do not want. That is the choice we are faced with. Talking about starving lots of old people to death just because they are old is just political grandstanding. Such sound bites sound impressive but are really quite shallow because they fail to thoughtfully address the real issues.

km gresham
03-24-2005, 12:56 PM
It sounds to me like the road we are on.

If we starved an animal to death, even an injured one we would be breaking the law, and I doubt you'd find many people in favor of doing such a thing. There seems to be a great deal of support for doing that very thing to an injured human being.

Bruce Hooke
03-24-2005, 01:01 PM
The animal analogy is a mighty dangerous path to go down. Remember, when an animal is deemed too sick to live for long we often ACTIVELY kill them. Many call it humane, but is that really the comparison you want to make?

Beyond that, it still does not seem like you are addressing the real issue, which is one of CHOICE. Again, should a person have the right to refuse medical treatment even if such a refusal will lead to their death or should we go to a system of forced medical care?

Steve Paskey
03-24-2005, 01:10 PM
Regarding Michael Schiavo, here's the real story, from the South Florida Sun-Sentinel:


. . . an independent report to Gov. Jeb Bush and the judicial system two years ago [prepared by Jay Wolfson, professor of public health and medicine at the University of South Florida] said "the evidence is incontrovertible that he gave his heart and soul to her treatment and care." The allegations being made against him are nothing more than politically-motivated [DELETED]. Shame on anyone who repeats or believes any of it.

Cuyahoga Chuck
03-24-2005, 01:16 PM
Michael Schiavo has been under the scrutiny of his legal opponents for more than five years.
If there was any solid evidence that could have been used in court against him it would have been used. The Schillers have been able to keep this issue in court because they have the support and the money to do so. That would suggest that they also have the wherewithall to investigate their son-in-law. If they would have found something it would have shown up in the court procedings.
The malarky that has been posted on the web is just that.
The legal procedings in this case are pristine. There has been no hint of error in the judge's decisions. He has gone to extraordinary measures to look in every nook and cranney. The case was so solid that the only option possible for the judges detractors was to try and float contrary legislation to get around the judge. It was all slapped down by the courts.
The Schillers got their case heard in every court possible,state and federal. This is the fourth time they have been to the Supreme Court of the US. If they want to be diehards or martyrs or whatever they're welcome to do that but all they have accomplished is to cast doubt on our legal system of the United States because they didn't get their way. They have been able to root around and file motion after motion with arguments that were vague and not demonstrable. They have been able to go to the head of the line while other citizens had to wait their turn to be heard.
All they have accomplished is to energize every one-issue nutcake and crazy in the land.The bitterness and dissent that the Schillers have dredged up will outlive them.
The justice system gave them more than they were entitled to and yet they were still not satisfied.
Charlie

Garrett Lowell
03-24-2005, 01:26 PM
My gut reaction is that I feel sorry for him and for the family, all of them.

Keith Wilson
03-24-2005, 01:29 PM
OK, Karen, another question. Let's say I go out for lunch today and get into a car accident that leaves me in a permanent vegetative state. Let's further say that I have left clear written instructions that I don't want to be kept alive as a brainless body. I'm lying in the hospital with a feeding tube; I might live twenty more years if the tube's not removed. What should we do?

1. Follow my instructions, remove the tube, and let me die of dehydration in a week or so (one doesn't starve to death, actually).
2. Remove the tube but give me something lethal to speed things along and eliminate the chance of suffering: an overdose of morphine, let's say.
3. Leave the tube in contrary to my instructions, because "we shouldn't starve people to death".
4.Something else?

Now what if I haven't left written instructions, just talked about it with my wife? Does that change what we should do?

Chris Coose
03-24-2005, 01:31 PM
We shouldn't starve people to death. This is a matter of perception.
This woman will die because she is unable to eat and has not been able to do that for some time. To allow her to die naturally seems reasonable.

I don't think it is moral for a fellow citizen to pull a switch which will send poison through somebody's veins or electricity through their system to kill em'.

Again, a matter of perception and an alignment of values.

John of Phoenix
03-24-2005, 01:41 PM
Bruce, of course one should have the option to refuse treatment. At some point, we'll have the right to choose to die. Assuming we can keep this theocracy at bay.

Steve P., thanks, that was refreshing.

Keith, a modified #2 for me, please. Leave the tube and send down a Sapphire martini with a couple of gorgonzola stuffed olives. Morphine will be fine.

LeeG
03-24-2005, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by km gresham:
We shouldn't starve people to death.LIQUIFIED CEREBRAL CORTEX.

Karen get your head out of the National Enquire and Kirstie Alleys career change and use that organ between your ears. LIQUIFIED CEREBRAL CORTEX.
There is no more a person left in that body than an amputated arm will miraculously regenerate into an elephant trunk.
DON"T YOU READ? THERE"S NO PERSON THERE.
Here medical condition is an artifact of medical technology, it's not a person. Terri Schaivo is a cause. There's no Terri Schaivo the person.
Why don't you acknowledge the Schindlers family association with right to life groups and the symbiotic fund-raising involved where their case becomes a hook for donations.
LIQUIFIED CEREBRAL CORTEX.

High C
03-24-2005, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by Meerkat:
Perhaps:
1. He believes his wedding vows.He has made a new family with another woman. While it's certainly understandable that he'd want to get on with his own life, I think this fact should amount to a surrender of his rights as her husband.

While he may be married to Terri Schaivo in a technical sense, in a moral and very real sense, he is now married to another. For the law to allow him an authoritative role in her care at this stage is, at best, a gross error in the law.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
03-24-2005, 01:58 PM
What do I think? This is what I think:

1. It's none of my business.

2. It's none of your d*** business, either.

3. That the cant and selfrighteousness displayed by some of the people who have posted in this thread shows that they are no Christians.

4. And furthermore, they are not people that I would choose to associate with. :mad:

John of Phoenix
03-24-2005, 02:02 PM
...the Schindlers family association with right to life groups and the symbiotic fund-raising involved where their case becomes a hook for donations.
Wait till you hear the Tom DeLay tape on this subject. (Just heard it on NPR.) :eek:

Remarkable!

LeeG
03-24-2005, 02:11 PM
http://slate.msn.com/id/2109621/

Although the notion that the religious right's "moral values" determined the 2004 election has been roundly debunked (for example, here and here), perception is reality in politics—and the indelible perception in Washington is now that George W. Bush owes his evangelical Christian base big-time.

One corollary to this idea is that no one helped Bush win more than Dr. James Dobson. Forget Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who in their dotage have marginalized themselves with gaffes (this week Robertson referred to potential Supreme Court nominee Miguel Estrada as "Erik Estrada"). Forget Ralph Reed, now enriching himself as a lobbyist-operative, leaving the Christian Coalition a shell of its former self. Forget Gary Bauer, now known chiefly as a failed presidential candidate who tumbled off a stage while flipping pancakes. Dobson is now America's most influential evangelical leader, with a following reportedly greater than that of either Falwell or Robertson at his peak.

Dobson earned the title. He proselytized hard for Bush this last year, organizing huge stadium rallies and using his radio program to warn his 7 million American listeners that not to vote would be a sin. Dobson may have delivered Bush his victories in Ohio and Florida.
He's already leveraging his new power. When a thank-you call came from the White House, Dobson issued the staffer a blunt warning that Bush "needs to be more aggressive" about pressing the religious right's pro-life, anti-gay rights agenda, or it would "pay a price in four years." And when the pro-choice Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter made conciliatory noises about appointing moderates to the Supreme Court, Dobson launched a fevered campaign to prevent him from assuming the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which until then he had been expected to inherit. Dobson is now a Republican kingmaker.

[ 03-24-2005, 02:17 PM: Message edited by: LeeG ]

True Love
03-24-2005, 02:27 PM
We should not allow viable humans to be treated in this manner. This woman is as viable as any newborn, who also couldn't exist without the care of a human.

What's next? Will we be starving other innocents, say, those with severe cerebral palsy or autism or severe mental retardation because they don't appear to be cognisant? Will we be joyfully killing old people who have no one else on the planet to look after them - what kind of life is that, with no one to care about you so we'll "off" you and put you out of your misery.

I find it odd that a culture which values the life of whales, of disappearing species, is so quick to take the life of one of its own.

The circumstances in this case warrant review - something the law passed by Congress was expected to bring. The courts have thumbed their nose at the law.

Also, Michael Schiavo has a conflict of interest regardless of whether you believe he tried to hurt his wife. There is no evidence other than his testimony (surprisingly only brought up by him 7 years after she suffered the original brain insult) that she expressed she'd never want to live "this way."

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Let's say you suffer a brain insult. It's known that your wife is excessively controlling - follows you everywhere, is extremely jealous, etc. One of your friends states that the two of you had talked of divorcing your wives and getting an apt together while trying to put your life back together. You suddenly, at a very young age are stricken at home with an alleged heart attack. The only other person at home at the time is your wife. Questions arise as to the appearance of some fractures - which aren't the result of a heart attack. You end up in the hospital like Ms. Schiavo. A year later, you wife is having sex with someone else and talking about marriage. She moves on to another relationship, gets pregnant and has two kids with her lover. There are caregivers that go on the record that say she has intervened to keep them from providing you therapy. One even says that your wife asked her "When is that bastard going to die?". 7 years later, she "remembers" that you once said you'd never want to live "this way."

Would you really want that kind of person advocating your death? Would you really want the judge upholding that person's "right," via marriage - a marriage she hasn't been faithful to, that you had talked of getting out of, advocating your death? Can you see your parents fighting for your life and willing to care for you?

Think about it.

[ 03-24-2005, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: True Love ]

LeeG
03-24-2005, 02:34 PM
Florida Babtist Witness (http://www.floridabaptistwitness.com/1714.article)

Tallahassee’s phones ringing

Meanwhile, in Tallahassee, a Bush spokeswoman told the Tallahassee Democrat the governor’s office had received nearly 165,411 e-mails and "thousands of phone calls" since Aug. 27.

In an Oct. 23 report, the Democrat quoted Alia Faraj who said the office normally gets an average of about 5,000 e-mails a week.

Not knowing the nature of each of the messages, Faraj said "people are generally in support of saving Schiavo."

Florida’s Supreme Court, which has in the past refused to hear Schiavo’s case, has received about 100 calls in various offices, as have legislator’s offices.

Evangelicals react



BUNKLEY
Bill Bunkley, legislative consultant for the Florida Baptist Convention, said he believes the fight has just heated up for right-to-life issues.

"As many people have breathed a sigh of relief, this is the first wake-up call that this may be a long process as well as a gut-wrenching one," Bunkley told the Witness. "This is a spiritual battle."

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told Baptist Press Oct. 21: "We need to have a presumption in favor of life, not a presumption in favor of death."

"Our national leaders would be wise to begin addressing this issue to insure that all humans-regardless of their age and physical or mental condition-have a right to be protected from predators who might seek to ‘pull the plug’ on their life," Land said.

Joni Eareckson Tada, an evangelical who is also a quadriplegic, told James Dobson on his radio program Oct. 22 she views the case as "Roe v. Wade for people with disabilities."

A Web site set up by Terri Schiavo’s supporters – www.terrisfight.org (http://www.terrisfight.org) – has video showing her moving her head, opening her eyes, smiling and laughing.
James Dobson’s conversation with Joni Eareckson Tada is available on the web at: www.oneplace.com/Ministries/Focus_on_the_Family/ (http://www.oneplace.com/Ministries/Focus_on_the_Family/) .
[See the Witness Web site at: www.FloridaBaptistWitness.com (http://www.FloridaBaptistWitness.com) for additional coverage.]

LeeG
03-24-2005, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by True Love:
We should not allow viable humans to be treated in this manner. This woman is as viable as any newborn, who also couldn't exist without the care of a human.


Think about it.Liquified cerbral cortex.
that is different than s*** for brains.

Dan McCosh
03-24-2005, 02:40 PM
I'm old enough to have witnessed death in various forms, ranging from quick and unexpected, with my mother and father, through a couple of days of hard dying in the hospital with an aunt and uncle. My wife witnessed a favorite grandmother in a coma for 10 years, an experience that has left her suspicious of too many kinds of medicine today. Her father passed away with some assistance from the hospital staff just two years ago. The notion that a US Congress and a US president would get involved in this kind of thing, after all the evidence, courtroom issues, etc., is appalling.

whb
03-24-2005, 02:55 PM
Starving to death by choice is exactly how many seniors leave this world. They reach a point where they are tired and just want to be rid of their bodies and they simply choose to quit eating. Fortunately for the most part we have grown sufficient respect for their rights that we now allow them to do so, perhaps with some pain medicine. Not that long ago they would have been force fed (feeding tube).

Why is it that a society that talks ad nauseum about rights and freedoms is so blind when it comes to the right to die in as dignified a manner as possible.

Howard

Keith Wilson
03-24-2005, 02:58 PM
The innuendo about Michael Schaivo - no, it's way more than innuendo, it's vilest libel, based on as far as I can tell nothing credible whatever - is absolutely amazing. Somebody please tell me why NONE of these rumors that are now circulating as fact came out at any of the numerous Florida court hearings? Why the court-appointed guardian ad litem, even the fellow appointed by Jeb Bush himself didn't run into any of it? Is there any plausible explanation other than that they are out and out lies?

uncas
03-24-2005, 03:04 PM
Well, I was accused of getting off the subject...tangently...the other day on another thread....so I will get back on this one....
I have no feelings about the husband right or wrong... It depends upon whom you want to listen to...There is so much hate floating ( or sinking ) around the protagonists...and there is more than one...who out here can judge?
Do I blame him for setting up a home with a girlfriend and two kids.....Yes...but I am putting my own belief out there.. I don't think I would.....
Do I blame him for trying to put some life together.....No not really...He has been through hell....and at a time when families should work together, his and his wife's there should be more discourse...
Do I blame him for not having any discourse with Terri's parents...He is half of the problem...
Did he attempt to kill Terri...I don't know.....but his in-laws would like us to believe it.
etc...etc...etc...
He certainly is no Scott Peterson or OJ Simpson...

LeeG
03-24-2005, 03:07 PM
whb, like one of the Republican Congressman said a society is judged by how it cares for the weakest. The Hospice movement came to the US late in the game compared to countries like England. Our focus is on what we can DO. Medical technology allows a person to DO something. When it comes to the dying process most of what a person has to do is LET GO. It's awfully hard to let go. One can be in control when there's something to DO. Connect a body up to life saving equipment and you're doing something.

swanko
03-24-2005, 03:10 PM
He's obviously a liberal and has a Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker on his toyota hybrid. Guys like this just want to raise taxes on wealthy americans so he can stay at home and watch oprah while collecting welfare. and i'll just bet he doesn't have an alibi for where he was on september 11, 2001, does he? I wish zell miller would show up and rip this guy a new one!!!they're all the same!!!

Cuyahoga Chuck
03-24-2005, 04:08 PM
True Love,
Believe what you like.
But, there is a document compiled by a "guardian ad litem", appointed by Jeb Bush, who investigated the entire situation for 30 days so that Bush would know how to procede when he was executing the law called "Terri's Law". His name was Dr.(of law) Wolfson. In his report to Bush he portrays the husband as actively participating in the care of his wife for about 4 years. It says that the huband was so demanding about the care of his wife that the hospice staff considered getting a court order to shield them from constant complaints about mistakes the hospice workers made.
After 4 years The husband pressed a claim that, as the responsible representative, he was ordering life sustaining care to cease. In effect, he had given up hope.
He was challenged by the parents and that's when this story came to public attention. If there is anything sinister in the above story please point it out.
He gave it a shot. It didn't work. His hope faded. He decided to call ahalt.
There are hundreds of thousands of cases where family members, legally, pulled the plug on loved ones long before they have invested in 4 years of gut-wrenching care.
If what Dr. Wolfson said is true Michael Schiavo is a candidate for sainthood.

Charlie

uncas
03-24-2005, 04:53 PM
The orginal question was about Terri's husband....even with the divergent thoughts.....I am going to point out one thing I have seen in 46 posts....
There are as many inconsistencies and differences in stories and opinions in 45 posts to SUGGEST that no one has any idea of what the actual facts are....At least not here...So...to go back to the original question...
I can not possibly make a judgement call on Michael. I can not say he is a good person, a great person, a bad person, or someone who should be strung up.

huisjen
03-24-2005, 06:33 PM
Oh just shoot her. Needs killin'. If she's a vegatable, she won't care. If she isn't, she'll appreciate it.

That, folks, is my gut reaction.

Dan

Donn
03-24-2005, 06:37 PM
"Yesterday I was growing vegetables, and now I can't even spell it!"

huisjen
03-24-2005, 06:41 PM
Up yours, Dutchman.

Dan

Donn
03-24-2005, 06:47 PM
Eat me, compost-breath. tongue.gif

bukuboy
03-24-2005, 06:49 PM
You asked for my gut reaction, I'd say he's a dumb phuck. Some wealthy right- to- lifer offered him 10 million dollars to give custody to her parents. I'd have run down to that hospice so fast ,put her on my back and dumped the gomer off on the front porch and collected the 10 mil. ---Bill

Chris Coose
03-24-2005, 07:13 PM
True Love says

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Let's say you suffer a brain insult. It's known that your wife is excessively controlling - follows you everywhere, is extremely jealous, etc. One of your friends states that the two of you had talked of divorcing your wives and getting an apt together while trying to put your life back together. You suddenly, at a very young age are stricken at home with an alleged heart attack. The only other person at home at the time is your wife. Questions arise as to the appearance of some fractures - which aren't the result of a heart attack. You end up in the hospital like Ms. Schiavo. A year later, you wife is having sex with someone else and talking about marriage. She moves on to another relationship, gets pregnant and has two kids with her lover. There are caregivers that go on the record that say she has intervened to keep them from providing you therapy. One even says that your wife asked her "When is that bastard going to die?". 7 years later, she "remembers" that you once said you'd never want to live "this way."

Would you really want that kind of person advocating your death? Would you really want the judge upholding that person's "right," via marriage - a marriage she hasn't been faithful to, that you had talked of getting out of, advocating your death? Can you see your parents fighting for your life and willing to care for you?

Think about it.
This is a gem.
If I were in her place it wouldn't much matter, now, would it? Would I give a fiddler's fart who was making decisions?

You "insult" my brain with this non sense.

Shall we all take our lead from the executive branch and screw the law for depraved emotion?

Please, pull my tube.

Donn
03-24-2005, 07:21 PM
How about a little tail, to lighten up this thread?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v54/donnwest/001_24a.jpg

Chris Coose
03-24-2005, 07:23 PM
Supersize me!

That photo is headed for infamy by the way.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
03-24-2005, 10:19 PM
We shouldn't starve people to death. Apparently there are moral circumstances to lethally inject or electrocute them though... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

MJC
03-25-2005, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by bukuboy:
You asked for my gut reaction, I'd say he's a dumb phuck. Some wealthy right- to- lifer offered him 10 million dollars to give custody to her parents. I'd have run down to that hospice so fast ,put her on my back and dumped the gomer off on the front porch and collected the 10 mil. ---BillThis is something I haven't heard before, can you post a link?