Schiavo Thread Part the Third

[Sava]

Originally posted by TCO


I am in favor of the individual. The individual is the one who is facing death or incapacitation. All other parties (husband, parents, etc.) are NOT the individual. Husbands do not have the power of life or death over their wives. They don't own them.

It needs to be Terri's choice. And if she did not have a living will, then we need to opt for life since it is not irrevocable. I have no problem with her choosing suicide or opting for plug pulling. I had a grandpa who never went to the doctor after being diagnosed with lung cancer. It's a free country. I would not have been happy forcing him to take medical attention (although I wish he had).

It was Terri's choice. She made it clear to at least 3 people who testified before the courts that her wish was to not live like that. This has been adjudicated for over 7 years with the courts consistently ruling for Michael Schiavo.

Her parents are the ones stuck in denial about the situation. And to make matters worse, they are being taken advantage of by these right-to-life wackos.

You say we should opt for life. But what's going on with Terri isn't life. Being in a PVS is not life.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten


Like I've told other people, I can't really help you if your main source of news is the television. Not even worth talking to you if that is the case.

And I fail to see how pointing out Michael Schiavo's obvious conflict of interest equates to engaging in conspiracy theories. I'm not saying he definitely has ulterior motives, just that there is definitely reason to doubt his portrayal by some as an ideal husband and guardian.

Give us the site please. I really know no fact about this case. Just arguing concepts (burden of proof, etc.) Do you have a couple good ones? Perhaps an objective one?

[Sava]

Originally posted by TCO


Give us the site please. I really know no fact about this case. Just arguing concepts (burden of proof, etc.) Do you have a couple good ones? Perhaps an objective one?

TCO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_schiavo

this is the best and least biased source for information on the case...

if you are looking for a good legal analysis, I'd recommend watching the Abram's report on MSNBC, I'll see if I can dig up some transcripts for you...

[chequita guevara]

Hmmm, an injured knee from the fall. Then where does Ned keep coming up with this BS about a broken back and femur?

One of the doctors claiming that Terri isn't in a PVS.

Terri's family and Dr. William Hammesfahr, a neurologist they hired to examine her in 2002, claim that she was battered by her husband. Hammesfahr was later to be disciplined by the Florida Board of Medicine in 2003 over a dubious stroke treatment (PDF file) (http://www.doh.state.fl.us/mqa/Final...OH-03-0182.pdf) (the same treatment, in fact, that he proposed to use in order to treat Terri in 2002), and has been accused of falsely claiming to be a Nobel Prize nominee.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sava
It was Terri's choice. She made it clear to at least 3 people who testified before the courts that her wish was to not live like that. This has been adjudicated for over 7 years with the courts consistently ruling for Michael Schiavo.

Her parents are the ones stuck in denial about the situation. And to make matters worse, they are being taken advantage of by these right-to-life wackos.

You say we should opt for life. But what's going on with Terri isn't life. Being in a PVS is not life.

If it is truly clear that is what she wanted, I'm comfortable with it. If the court process was robust. I would like info on that. Don't scream at me that it had to be, just show me some info. If I come to the conclusion that the process was robust, I will be on your side. If I still have doubt, then I will not be.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sava


TCO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_schiavo

this is the best and least biased source for information on the case...

if you are looking for a good legal analysis, I'd recommend watching the Abram's report on MSNBC, I'll see if I can dig up some transcripts for you...

I'm sort of lazy. Could you have someone spoonfeed it to me?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by TCO
I'm sort of lazy. Could you have someone spoonfeed it to me?

The "pro-life" side has been lying through their teeth.

[Mr. Harley]

The State of Florida has a system of due process in place. Terry Schiavo is her legal guardian. He petitioned for the hearing. The court appointed a disinterested party who determined the extent of her brain damage. Even without all the rest of the fuss, that is enough to pull her plug. Tough. Sorry.

I find it interesting that the Republicans are now the people interfering with state's rights, civil courts, and family matters. If you don't want this to happen, change the law to deny the husband, or anybody, presumptive guardian status. Automatically have the court appoint someone - oh, excuse me, that means more lawyers are going have to paid to serve as these guardians.

Plus now you are interfering in the nuclear American family. Husband and wife. Any system that does this is going to have problems. Ned, look at the abuses, by the legal profession, in those states where strangers can essentially get the elderly declared incompetent and take over their estate. The lawyers have a pretty awful record.

Ok, so the courts will have someone overseeing this. Who is going to pay? The taxpayers, those spoiled brats who want something for nothing and keep voting for deficit spending by both parties. The estate of the family. Great, we eliminate the inheritance tax, but if medical science can keep you in alive but brain-dead, the lawyers and doctors will take all of it.

The current system has worked, for centuries, i.e. the foundations go back to British Common Law. It works, leave it alone. It works for most Americans, 70-80% plus is poll numbers are correct. Ned, TCO, Drake - are you will to pay Terri's tax, a surcharge to support people in her situation, or like in Texas where nobody except the state wanted to pull the plug on that baby - who yes was going to die an awful death. If you are, then fine. You aren't - then you are a hippocrit of the worst kind, because analysis shows that medicaid will be paying most of the bills in one-two years, maybe less. Yes, in this case there is enough outside meddling to pay the bills. But who will pay the bills of the cases that DON'T get the attention? Remember, it's you who want to dismantle the current system. Care to pay for it?

Leave it alone, and let the poor women's body die and her soul go on to whatever awaits it. If you really believe in God (Ned, I noticed you post earlier so you are exused ) let her go on to her final judgement, or resting place, or whatever it is we will all discover is beyond the veil.

Oh, and TCO, from you post on family I understand why this is such a hot button issue for you. My mother, a claustrophobe, died restrained while her brain shut down because the my father was too busy coursing Borzois with the woman who would become my stepmother, and did not want to be bothered. And she clearly wanted to come home to die. It's always sad when that happens, but once the person no longer can represent themselves, then you might argue that the wishes of the family are a testimonial in some ways of those they married and or raised. When push came to shove, my mother married a jerk. I'm sorry your family didn't do to well either, on the issue of asking your grandmother. All you can do is go on, and make sure you never do the same, and raise your children the same way. Break the cycle.

[Sava]

oh I heard the first "THIS IS JUDICIAL ACTIVISM" claim last night...

some dip**** named Randall Terry (a really nutty pro-life, anti-gay nutjob) was claiming this was the work of liberal judges, despite the fact that Judge Greer is a Republican and a Baptist...

[chequita guevara]

Randall Terry is the former leader of Operation Rescue.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
I find it interesting that the Republicans are now the people interfering with state's rights...

You wanna know what the really strange thing for me is? It's that the Democrats are defending such things after a long history of argueing for the expansion of Federal power into such matters and against the existance of State's rights.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
You wanna know what the really strange thing for me is? It's that the Democrats are defending such things after a long history of argueing for the expansion of Federal power into such matters and against the existance of State's rights.

The Dem's have never argued the Federal government should intrude into people's lives. Democrats believe in regulating business. Republicans believe in regulating morals, families, and individual behavior. Each side tries to use states rights to stop the other side from intruding into areas they think the government has no business being.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The Dem's have never argued the Federal government should intrude into people's lives.

They have however traditionally been the party argueing for the intrusion of Federal Power into areas that have traditionally been the province of States as this is.

[chequita guevara]

Both sides have. It's what they've been arguing about that's different. The Democrats never said the Federal government should get involved in how people should raise their children, that's a GOP thing. The GOP was aghast at Federal intrusion on labor law. And so on. Like I said, one side wnats to regulate people, the other side wants to regulate business.

[Ned]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
The State of Florida has a system of due process in place. Terry Schiavo is her legal guardian. He petitioned for the hearing. The court appointed a disinterested party who determined the extent of her brain damage. Even without all the rest of the fuss, that is enough to pull her plug. Tough. Sorry.

shawn, Florida law also requires the consent of the victim that must be proved by "clear and convincing" evidence.