Federal Judge refuses to order feeding tube re-connected

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (Reuters) - A federal judge refused to order the resumption of tube feeding for brain-damaged Florida woman Terri Schiavo on Tuesday after weighing the highly charged right-to-die case.

CNN said that U.S. District Judge James Whittemore issued a ruling rejecting a request by Schiavo's parents for the tube, which was removed on Friday, to be reinserted pending a fresh review of the case.

Whittemore issued his verdict after a two-hour hearing in Tampa, Florida, on Monday on the parents' request for resumed feeding.

Shiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, have battled for years to keep their 41-year-old daughter alive and were likely to appeal the ruling.

The judge took up the case after the U.S. Congress and President Bush intervened by passing special legislation allowing the parents to go to federal court in their effort to keep Schiavo alive.

Schiavo's feeding tube was removed on the order of a Florida court that first ruled five years ago that the tube could be taken out. Experts said she could be expected to live for one to two weeks without the tube.

Schiavo suffered a heart attack in 1990 that left her in what courts have declared a "persistent vegetative state." State courts have consistently sided with Schiavo's husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo, in finding that she would not wish to live in this state.

But her parents have argued their daughter responds to them and could improve with treatment. In the highly unusual intervention, Congress rushed to put together a law allowing the parents to take the case to federal court.

Whittemore had made clear at Monday's hearing that to issue an order to resume feeding he would have to be persuaded of the likely success of the parents' overall case.

The Schindlers, who are Roman Catholics, argued several violations of their daughter's rights, including the right to due process and to practice a religion.

The parents' campaign to keep her alive was joined in recent weeks by anti-abortion activists and Christian conservatives who lobbied intensely in Washington to win lawmakers' support.

Congress interrupted its Easter holiday to pass the Schiavo bill and Bush cut short a brief Texas vacation to sign it early on Monday. Continued ...

I agree with that outcome.

Her family will have to deal with its grief. Keeping her 'alive' for themselves is not the right thing to do --

See, I'm of two minds.

I firmly believe she probably should die, as harsh as that sounds. I'm not a fan of keeping braindead people alive for the rest of their natural life when there isn't any hope of them recovering - which no credible medical report I've heard has given her.

On the other hand, on even the off chance that there is any fragment of awareness left in her, starving her to death sickens me. Either have the decency to give her an overdose of morphine, or don't do it.

See, I'm of two minds.

I firmly believe she probably should die, as harsh as that sounds. I'm not a fan of keeping braindead people alive for the rest of their natural life when there isn't any hope of them recovering - which no credible medical report I've heard has given her.

On the other hand, on even the off chance that there is any fragment of awareness left in her, starving her to death sickens me. Either have the decency to give her an overdose of morphine, or don't do it. Until they have the balls to do that, put her feeding tube back in. Give her the same decency you would give a wounded pet, for gods sake. She's still HUMAN, even if she's braindead.

Yeah, kind of funny that we send people to jail for treating pets in that fashion. I'm guessing that this is some funny version of "first, do no harm" being misinterpreted by the medical community as "be a sadistic bastard".

I'd have to agree with Reitsuki on this one... hell, after 15 years in persistent vegetation, I'd want to chase the dragon out of this world. I'm glad the judge decided that federal hand-wringing wasn't an order to decide in a given direction on the case.

(/me wonders if an SL forum post counts as a living will...)

(and for those that may think I'm making light of a grave issue, at least I didn't turn it into a national bread and circus)

From what I've read the doctors say she will feel nothing and not know its happening...they attribute that to the fact that her cerebral cortex is now liquid.

I would hate to be that judge though...hopefully he had no asperations of going any higher in his job because you can bet there were a lot of politicians expecting a different outcome.

Thank god for that.

It says something about the sick right-wing fundamentalists running America today that they battled long and hard to keep a long-term comatose woman alive, while doing nothing about the gun laws that make it easy for disaffected teenagers to off each other in school.

I don't care. I wouldn't starve my FISH to death, much less any form of a human being.

Actually, this is a pretty apolitical issue. I've met just as many people on both sides of the aisle with each viewpoint. I myself am a conservative, right-wing republican, for example, and I believe she should die.

But you're not running America. The small clique in government at present seem to have got the idea in their head that ending the life of someone who is getting absolutely nothing out of life is murder.

They really, really need to turn their attentions to the more pressing problems of society in the USA.

Any way you slice it this is a very sad, tragic case. There is no happy ending either way.

It's just idiotic semantics. Oooh, we can't actually take any direct action to end her life, that would be murder *gasp*.

As if removing her feeding tube isn't exactly equivalent to giving her a lethal injection... they're both actions being performed by another person that will lead to her death. But nobody wants to "take any responsibility", so they'll let her starve instead of ending things quickly and peacefully.

This, I think, was the right decision, as far as it goes, despite the stupidity of having to starve her to death. But, she's been gone for a long time; it's probably time they let her go, too.

Thats why everyone should have a living will...so your wishes are known. Every state has living will and organ donor forms that in most cases are free or at most a few dollars. You can clearly tell people how you want to be handled in case of such an occurence . Anyone who doesn't have a living will after all this is a fool and could wind up the same way.

Theere is also a site that has a form called 5 wishes which is a detailed living will that needs no witnesses

http://www.agingwithdignity.org/5wishes.html

it is legal in 36 states and the district and only costs $5.00 which is a small price to pay to keep your family from going through 15 years of turmoil.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that the life support should be continued or not, but I am pointing out the lack of consistancy. Here is a person fighting for the life of her child but is essentially ignored by the politicians.

What gives?

Oh and btw - Bush was the one who signed the law in Texas that allows hospitals to overide a families wishes and to end life support in some cases.

Again, where is the consistancy? Where were the Right to Lifers when this was going on?

Could the fact that this woman had limited medical insurance have had something to do with it?

None of the recent political posturing done by Congress on this issue will serve to do anything except keep a valid family member from making a decision that the court gives them the right to make.

It seems like the intention is not to save a life but to take the ability to make a medical decision out of the hands of the individual or family and put it into the hands of the "medical professionals" or in the case of Schiavo, the politicians.

Do you want your Doctor, your HMO or your Congressman making your medical life and death decisions for you rather than your spouse or family?

For that matter, a lot of this posturing could even be a prelude to the federal government overiding Oregons decision to allow doctor assisted sucide and state recognized DNR's.

How far it to far?




.

Thats why the Law that congress passed and Bush signed was illegal and unconstitutional...the law was made for only one person. Everyone in this fiasco should be held accountable but they won't be.

"The happy ending cannot come in the middle of the story. But what if there isn't a happy ending at all? There are no happy endings, because nothing ever ends."

--Peter Beagle

I think that people need to realize that death is not some evil sadistic monster out to get us all, like in the Final Destination movies. Death is a part of living. It is a time for those of us left to look back on a life well lived; even to celebrate it. Death *can* be a happy ending...or at least an ending as some people perceive it.

Life needs to be fought for, yes. But it doesn't need to be clung to. Which of these is being used in this case I think is painfully obvious. Terri Schiavo will die...inserting the feeding tube isn't going to stop that, it's simply going to delay it. It's time to let nature...to let God, for those that believe in Him...to take responsibility for this woman. IMHO.

Personally, I think this is the right decision.

This story had a sad, tragic end 15 years ago and has since then been one painful sequel after another.

I can't imagine anyone wanting to stay on life support (or a feeding tube) *if* the brain is essentially mush with zero chance of recovery.

but the thing is, she can get better. she can respond to things, she smiles when her mom comes close. her husband wants her to die, he refuses any therapy for her that could help her, he refused treatments multiple times for infections that could be deadly. she isnt on life support, she has food and water, but no life support.






they wont ever know if her brain is just "mush". they know she can recover, tons and tons of doctors say that she can, but her husband will not let them.

What I always wonder in these cases is, where were all those people outside making a scene and acting concerned when their help was truly needed?

Were they helping to change her diapers? Were they helping out economically? Were they visiting her? Were they providing emotional support to her day-to-day caregivers? Hell no.

Two of my grandparents were totally incapacitated by massive strokes and were taken care of at home by my mother for over two years. She didn't have any Pro-lifers come to her door offering to help. Most people simply forgot they existed.

A friend of mine's wife recently died after becoming a quadriplegic twenty years ago because of a car accident. She begged every day of those twenty years to be allowed to die. After the first couple of months of "concern and care" by friends and relatives, they all dissapeared. Nobody every helped my friend with the intensive home care his wife required. Nobody even bothered visiting her. Where were the pro-lifers then?

As I have screamed numerous times on these forums: TALK IS CHEAP. Instead of protesting or acting so hurt and offended, people should do something about it, when it counts....

Tito

Nobody can do anything, her husband will not let them. Her parents have told him they will take complete care of her, but he refuses. They cannot see her or even be updated on her status

All I can say is that I am glad I have done as much as I legally can to ensure that if I am ever her situation, I will be able to die with some dignity.

I have made sure that if my brother, my wife, or some other 'loving' relative goes 'born again' on me, my wishes and my human right to a dignified death will be enforced by any means necessary.

Just because I will not be able to say that I hate peeing myself, having a stranger changing my soiled dipers and having tubes inserted through every body orifice in order to hydrate and feed me, it does not mean I will like it, or would enjoy 'living' like that for decades.

And then, even though at some point in time there may be a loving person that does not mind doing all of these things for me, what happens once that person dies? What happens when the money runs out?

I tell you what, I would be sent to one of those inhumane places where we warehouse hundreds of thousands of people that cannot take care of themselves. Have you ever visited one?

How come all those protestors are not in those horrible places, providing care and love to all of those people kept there? Maybe because there are no TV cameras? Because It smells bad? or because its hard to stare suffering, pain, suffering and death in the face on a daily basis?

If this woman truly told her husband she did not want to be in this situation, he is a heroe for hanging tough against the sharks. If she didn't, well, then according to those trying to save her, he will receive his just punishment at the hands of a higher power when the time comes...

Tito

Tito

but clearly he wants her dead. Money isn't the issue, the issue is she is still a living person. She can smile when her mother gets close to her face (or got close). Well, if you put it if "he will get what he deserves" why not get rid of the police? Let all the murderers and everyone go about killing everyone, they will "receive their just punishment at the hands of a higher power". She can get better, she can still enjoy herself if he would simply let her be treated. Nurses at many of the places in which he has stuck her have heard him say cruel things to her, including telling her to die.

Unfortunately in this case there are so many lies and rumors spreading around its hard to determine exactly what is truth without being part of it. I've read and watched so many variations on the story it is simply amazing.

I've read the court transcripts. He admits that he denied treatment of her Urinary Tract Infection, put her cats to sleep, and refuses information about her status to be revealed to her parents.

Could you provide a source for where you heard these things? I'm just curious.