Federal Judge refuses to order feeding tube re-connected

I haven't read any of the court transcripts and haven't heard this brought up so far. That is my point though. It seems that so much information is being passed around as fact it is difficult to understand exactly what is truth. Court transcripts would be a start though , I'll have to check them out.

Either way, I'm not 100% if the rest is true, I believe that her parents should have more control over what happens to her than her husband (especially in a case like this)

I am not familiar with the details of the case. Has there been any evidence presented as of HER wishes? Did anyone other than her husband ever had conversations with her about the subject? The case should all be about what she wanted to do with her own life, not what her parents or husband want.

Obviously this is a huge test case pegging the 'right-to-life' vs the 'right-to-die' groups.

The Bush administration has held an all-out assault trying to overturn the right-to-die laws in Oregon and this case will have a huge influence on what happens in Oregon and other states that may be considering similar laws.

What I am mostly against is all those people coming out of nowhere at the scent of blood. How can all those strangers even pretend they give a hoot?

It also really scares the heck out of me to know that I could be imprisioned in my own body for decades just because some fanatics think I should be. I am realist. I know it could happen to me.

Tito

I think you're missing something here. Pets have a brain. They are aware, and some are even fairly intelligent, at least by animal standards.
This woman's brain melted away into fluid. Her only responses are reflex actions.
It's like, when you pull the tail of a certain type of lizard, it separates from the body, but keeps wiggling around. Also, a headless chicken will still be able to run around for a few minutes. Cockroaches can survive for 40 days without their head, finally succumbing from starvation.
I don't think it's especially cruel because I don't believe that thing can feel anything conciously. But yeah, it would definitely be better to do it in a faster and more dignified way.
There used to be a human in there.

Comments from people that have actually lived through a similar experience:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7267499?GT1=6305

The husband never refsed any treatments for infections...as a matter of FACT she has never had as much a 1 bed sore. Her husband had her clothes changed daily and makeup done daily for seven years and her husband has been by her side this whole time.

She doesn't smile at anyone and her eyes don't follow people around the room ...what you see is automatic reflex actions nothing more. She has not responded to anything at all.. 2 years ago the courts made a third party her guardian in order to assess her situatiion. He himself said he wanted her to live but then he spent 45 days with her...after which he concluded there is no responsiveness whatsoever to any outside stimuli.






You obviously have never invested more than 5 minutes reading about this case...her cerebral cortex is fluid....this is a fact supported by MRI's withought a cerebral cortex you cannot recover ....

The nurses at the hospice have not said these things...they are on record as well as film stating that he has been nothing but a loving husband....

Maerou-

No, she can't get better. That's just wrong. By all credible reports, her brain is essentialy gone. The doctors who say she can get better are quick to cite all these cases of people who were in comas or vegetative for years and then got better, but they fail to explain exactly how an atrophied, deteriorated brain COULD 'get better'.

As to the various "She smiles" and "she follows objects" reports...

/120/6c/38965/2.html#post421048

No, they say she will be brain damaged, they cannot know for sure if her brain is completely gone because her husband refuses to consent to tests and therapy.

I read court transcripts, he admits that he denied treatment for urinary tract infection.

as has been said:
Her cerebral cortex is liquid. She can not recover.

I apologize for posting something this long but really, if you think that her husband has withheld care your are just flat wrong. He even moved her in with her parents initially but they were unable to manage her day to day care so they put her in a facility. It is absolutely unbelieveable what these parents have put Mr. Schavio through and if my father did that to my husband I would curse him with my dying breath. Five independent doctors and two independent guardians have all said that she was not abused and that she no longer had brain function. The time line goes all the way through 2005 but it's too long to post.

Here is the time line:

February 25, 1990
Terri Schiavo suffers cardiac arrest, apparently caused by a potassium imbalance and leading to brain damage due to lack of oxygen. She was taken to the Humana Northside Hospital and was later given a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) to provide nutrition and hydration.

May 12, 1990
Terri Schiavo is discharged from the hospital and taken to the College Park skilled care and rehabilitation facility.

June 18, 1990
Court appoints Michael Schiavo as guardian; Terri Schiavo’s parents do not object.

June 30, 1990
Terri Schiavo is transferred to Bayfront Hospital for further rehabilitation efforts.*

September 1990
Terri Schiavo’s family brings her home, but three weeks later they return her to the College Park facility because the family is “overwhelmed by Terri’s care needs.”

November 1990
Michael Schiavo takes Terri Schiavo to California for experimental “brain stimulator” treatment, an experimental “thalamic stimulator implant” in her brain.

January 1991
The Schiavos return to Florida; Terri Schiavo is moved to the Mediplex Rehabilitation Center in Brandon where she receives 24-hour care.

July 19, 1991
Terri Schiavo is transferred to Sable Palms skilled care facility where she receives continuing neurological testing, and regular and aggressive speech/occupational therapy through 1994.

May 1992
Terri Schiavo’s parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, and Michael Schiavo stop living together.

August 1992
Terri Schiavo is awarded $250,000 in an out-of-court medical malpractice settlement with one of her physicians.

November 1992
The jury in the medical malpractice trial against another of Terri’s physicians awards more than one million dollars.* In the end, after attorneys’ fees and other expenses, Michael Schiavo received about $300,000 and about $750,000 was put in a trust fund specifically for Terri Schiavo’s medical care.

February 14, 1993
Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers have a falling-out over the course of therapy for Terri Schiavo; Michael Schiavo claims that the Schindlers demand that he share the malpractice money with them.

July 29, 1993
Schindlers attempt to remove Michael Schiavo as Terri Schiavo’s guardian; the court later dismisses the suit.

March 1, 1994
First guardian ad litem, John H. Pecarek, submits his report.* He states that Michael Schiavo has acted appropriately and attentively toward Terri Schiavo.

May 1998
Michael Schiavo petitions the court to authorize the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube; the Schindlers oppose, saying that Terri would want to remain alive.* The court appoints Richard Pearse, Esq., to serve as the second guardian ad litem for Terri Schiavo.

December 20, 1998
The second guardian ad litem, Richard Pearse, Esq., issues his report in which he concluding that Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state with no chance of improvement and that Michael Schiavo’s decision-making may be influenced by the potential to inherit the remainder of Terri Schiavo’s estate.

January 24, 2000
The trial begins; Pinellas-Pasco County Circuit Court Judge George Greer presides.
Testimony of Father Gerard Murphy

February 11, 2000
Judge Greer rules that Terri Schiavo would have chosen to have the PEG tube removed, and therefore he orders it removed, which, according to doctors, will cause her death in approximately 7 to 14 days.

March 2, 2000
The Schindlers file a petition with Judge Greer to allow “swallowing” tests to be performed on Terri Schiavo to determine if she can consume—or learn to consume—nutrients on her own.

March 7, 2000
Judge Greer denies the Schindlers’ petition to perform “swallowing” tests on Terri Schiavo.

March 24, 2000
Judge Greer grants Michael Schiavo’s petition to limit visitation to Terri Schiavo as well as to bar pictures.* Judge Greer also stays his order until 30 days beyond the final exhaustion of all appeals by the Schindlers.
3-24-00 Greer Stay and Order Limiting Visitation

January 24, 2001
Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal (2nd DCA) upholds Judge Greer’s ruling that permits the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube.

In re Schiavo, 780 So. 2d 176 (2nd DCA 2001), rehearing denied (Feb. 22, 2001), review denied, 789 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2001).* (Case No.: SC01-559)

1-24-01 DCA Ruling

February 22, 2001
The Schindler family’s motion for an Appellate Court rehearing is denied.

March 12, 2001
Michael Schiavo petitions* Judge Greer to lift his stay, issued March 24, 2000, in order to permit the removal of Terri Shiavo’s PEG tube.

March 29, 2001
Judge Greer denies Michael Schiavo’s motion to lift stay issued on March 24, 2000; Michael Schiavo can remove Terri’s PEG tube at 1 p.m. on April 20.
3-29-01 Greer Order

April 10, 2001
The 2nd DCA denies the Schindlers’ motion to extend Judge Greer’s stay, which is scheduled to expire April 20, 2001.
4-10-01 DCA Order

April 12, 2001
The Schindlers file a motion requesting that Judge Greer recuse himself.

April 12, 2001
The Schindlers petition the Florida Supreme Court to stay the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube.
4-12-01 Motion for Stay Part 1
4-12-01 Motion for Stay Part 2
4-12-01 Court’s Request for Response from Schiavo

April 16, 2001
Judge Greer denies the Schindlers’ motion to recuse himself.

April 18, 2001
The Florida Supreme Court chooses not to review the decision of the 2nd DCA.
In re Schiavo, 789 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 2001).* Case No.: SC01-559

3-22-01 Schindler family’s Notice to Appeal to Supreme Court

3-30-01 Schindlers’ Jurisdictional Brief Part 1
3-30-01 Schindlers’ Jurisdictional Brief Part 2

4-18-01 Order Denying Rehearing and Motion for Stay

April 20, 2001
Federal District Court Judge Richard Lazzara grants the Schindlers a stay until April 23, 2001, to exhaust all their possible appeals.

April 23, 2001
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court refuses to stay the case for a review by that Court.

April 24, 2001
By order of trial court Judge Greer, and upon issuance of a 2nd DCA mandate, Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube is removed

April 26, 2001
The Schindlers file an emergency motion with Judge Greer for relief from judgment based upon new evidence, which includes a claim that a former girlfriend of Michael Schiavo will testify that he lied about Terri Schiavo’s wishes; Judge Greer dismisses the motion as untimely. Also on this date, the Schindlers file a new civil suit that claims that Michael Schiavo perjured himself when he testified that Terri Schiavo had stated an aversion to remaining on life support.* Pending this new civil trial, Circuit Court Judge Frank Quesada orders Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube to be reinserted.

April 30, 2001
Michael Schiavo files an emergency motion with the 2nd DCA to allow the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube.

May 9, 2001
The 2nd DCA announces a date for the hearing of oral arguments regarding Michael Schiavo’s motion of April 30, 2001.

June 25, 2001
Arguments in 2nd DCA regarding Michael Schiavo’s motion of April 30, 2001.

July 11, 2001
The 2nd DCA remands the case back to Judge Greer.* (1) The 2nd DCA informs the Schindlers that they must address both their desire to have new evidence heard and their perjury claim against Michael Schiavo within the original guardianship proceeding; further, the Schindlers are instructed to file a new motion for relief from judgment in the guardianship proceeding. (2) The 2nd DCA instructs Judge Greer to weigh the Schinders’ new evidence in making a new determination of what Terri Schiavo would have wanted. (3) The 2nd DCA denies Michael Schiavo’s request to discontinue the PEG tube.
In re Schiavo, 792 So. 2d 551 (2nd DCA 2001).
7-11-01 DCA Order

August 7, 2001
After the 2nd DCA remands the case back to Judge Greer, he again finds that Michael Schiavo may remove Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube on August 28.*

August 10, 2001
Judge Greer denies the Schindlers' motion (1) to have their own doctors examine Terri Schiavo, (2) to remove Michael Schiavo as her guardian, and (3) to disqualify himself from the proceedings.

August 17, 2001
Judge Greer delays the removal of Terri Schiavo's PEG tube until October 9 in order to allow the Schindlers time to appeal.

October 3, 2001
The 2nd DCA delays the removal of the PEG tube indefinitely.

October 17, 2001
The 2nd DCA rules that 5 doctors should examine Terri Schiavo to determine if she can improve with new medical treatment.* The Schindlers and Michael Schiavo are to choose 2 doctors each, and the court is to appoint a doctor.* The appeals court also affirms Greer’s denial of the motion to disqualify himself.


In re Schiavo, 800 So. 2d 640 (2nd DCA 2001).
10-17-01 DCA ruling

November 1, 2001
The 2nd DCA denies Michael Schiavo’s motion to rehear the case.

December 14, 2001
Michael Schiavo petitions the Florida Supreme Court to stay the October 17, 2001 ruling of the 2nd DCA.* He states that he and the Schindlers will attempt to mediate the dispute in lieu of further litigation.
12-05-01 Michael Schiavo’s Notice of Appeal to the* Florida Supreme Court
12-14-01 Michael Schiavo’s Motion to Stay DCA’s Ruling.

December 19, 2001
Attorneys meet with a mediator to determine which tests doctors should run on Terri Schiavo.

January 10, 2002
State Supreme Court stays all legal proceedings pending mediation; it orders attorneys to report on the status of mediation in sixty days.
1-10-02 SC Order of Stay

February 13, 2002
Mediation between the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo fails.
2-13-02 Notice that Mediation failed

March 14, 2002
The Florida Supreme Court denies Michael Schiavo’s petition to review the 2nd DCA’s ruling allowing 5 doctors to examine Terri Schiavo.
In re Schiavo, 816 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 2002) (Table, No. SC01-267
2-13-02 Michael Schiavo’s Jurisdictional Petition
2-13-02 Michael Schiavo’s Petition to Stay ruling of 2nd DCA (10/17/01).
2-22-02 Court’s Order of Stay pending its final decision
3-01-02 Schindler’s Jurisdictional Brief
3-13-01 Michael Schiavo’s Motion to Strike
3-14-01* Order Denying Schiavo’s Petition
3-14-01* Order to Strike

October 12-22, 2002
The trial court holds a new hearing on new potential medical treatments.

November 15, 2002
The Schindlers contend that Michael Schiavo might have abused Terri Schiavo and this abuse led to her condition. They ask the court for more time to collect evidence, and to remove Michael Schiavo as guardian.
11-15-02 Petition to remove MS as guardian

November 22, 2002
Judge Greer rules that Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube should be removed January 3, 2003.
In re Schiavo, 2002 WL 31817960 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Nov. 22, 2002) (No. 90-2908-GB-003)
Nov 22 2002 TC* trialctorder11-02.txt

December 13, 2002
Judge Greer stays his November 22 ruling: Terri Schiavo should not have her PEG tube removed until an appeals court can rule on the case.

December 23, 2002
The 2nd DCA denies a motion Michael Schiavo filed seeking permission to remove the PEG tube.

June 6, 2003
The 2nd DCA, affirming Judge Greer’s November 2002 ruling, concludes that Michael Schiavo can remove Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube on October 15.
In re Schiavo, 851 So. 2d 182 (2nd DCA 2003) (No. 2D02-5394), rehearing denied (July 9, 2003), *review denied 855 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2003).
6-06-03 Court Opinion

July 9, 2003
The 2nd DCA refuses to reconsider its decision.

August 22, 2003


The Florida Supreme Court declines to review the decision.
Schindler v. Schiavo, 855 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2003) (Table, No. SC03-1242)
7-24-03 Notice of Schindlers' Appeal
7-31-03 Michael Schiavo’s Motion to Vacate
Court Order denying Motion to Vacate
8-07-03 Schindler's Petition for a Supreme Court Review
8-13-03 Michael Shiavo’s Response to Petition for Review
8-18-03 Schindlers motion for a Stay
8-19-03 Court Orders Schiavo to make a Respond for the Motion for Stay
8-20-03 Shiavo’s Response to Motion for Stay
8-22-03 Court Order denying Review and Motion for Stay


August 30, 2003
Terri Schiavo’s parents file a federal lawsuit challenging the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube. Schiavos’ petition (D). Schindler v. Schiavo, Civil Action No. 8:03-CV-1860-T-26-T-TGW

September 17, 2003
Judge Greer orders the removal of the PEG tube to take place on October 15, 2003.* He also rejects the Schindlers’ request that Terri Schiavo be given therapy to learn how to eat without the tube.
*9-17-03 Court Order

October 7, 2003
Governor Jeb Bush files a federal court brief in support of the Schindlers’ effort to stop the removal of the PEG tube.

October 10, 2003
Federal Court Judge Richard Lazzara rules that he lacks the jurisdiction to hear the federal case.

October 14, 2003
The 2nd DCA refuses to block Judge Greer’s order to remove the PEG tube.

October 15, 2003
Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube is once again removed.

October 17, 2003
The Florida Circuit Court in Pinellas County and the First District Court of Appeal refuse to grant a request made by the “supporters” of the Schindlers to direct Governor Jeb Bush to intervene in the Schiavo case.

October 19, 2003
The Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities, Inc. files a federal court lawsuit that claims that the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube is abuse and neglect.
Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities, Inc. v. Schiavo, No. 8:03-CV-2167-T-23EAJ

October 20, 2003
The Florida House of Representatives passes a bill, “Terri’s Law,” that allows the governor to issue a “one-time stay in certain cases.”
HouseBill35-E.pdf

October 21, 2003
The Florida Senate passes the bill; Governor Bush issues an executive order directing reinsertion of the PEG tube and appointing a guardian ad litem for Terri Schiavo.
Schiavo Controversy Fla_ Gov_ Exec_ Order No_ 03-201.htm
Statements by some House members

October 21, 2003
Michael Schiavo files a state-court lawsuit arguing that “Terri’s Law” is unconstitutional and seeking an injunction to stop the reinsertion of the PEG tube; the court requests briefs on the Constitutional arguments about “Terri’s Law.”
10-21-03 Schiavo Injunction
Amicus Brief from House Speaker Byrd (B)
Schiavo v. Bush. No. 03-008212-CI-20 (Cir. Ct. Pinellas County, Florida).

October 21, 2003
The federal court denies the motion for a temporary restraining order filed in the lawsuit of the Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities, Inc.
Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities, Inc. v. Schiavo, 2003 WL 23305833, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 291 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 21, 2003).
10-21-03 US District Court Order

October 21, 2003
Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube is reinserted.

October 22 2003
David Demeres, Chief Judge for the Pinellas County Circuit Court, orders both the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo to agree within 5 days on an independent guardian ad litem as required under the Governor’s order.* (“Terri’s Law” directs: “Upon issuance of the stay, the chief judge of the circuit court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for the patient to make recommendations to the Governor and the court.”)
Schiavo's Response
Schindlers' Response

October 28, 2003
President George W. Bush praises the way his brother, Governor Jeb Bush, has handled the Schiavo matter.
Transcript of Rose Garden Press Conference

October 29, 2003
Michael Schiavo files court papers in his state-court lawsuit, arguing that “Terri’s Law” is unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union has joined Michael Schiavo.
Michael Schiavo petitioner brief

October 31, 2003
Judge Demers appoints Dr. Jay Wolfson as Terri Schiavo’s guardian ad litem.* Dr. Wolfson holds both medical and legal degrees; he is also a public health professor at the University of South Florida.* He is supposed to represent Terri Schiavo’s best interest in court, but he has no authority to make decisions for her.
10-31-03 GAL Appointment

November 4, 2003
Governor Jeb Bush asks Circuit Court Judge W. Douglas Baird to dismiss Michael Schiavo’s suit (filed October 21, 2003) that challenges “Terri’s Law.”

November 8, 2003
Judge Baird denies Governor Bush’s motion to dismiss the state-court suit.

November 10, 2003
Governor Bush appeals Judge Baird’s decision; the filing of the appeal has the effect of staying* the removal of Terri Schiavo’s PEG tube.

November 14, 2003
Judge Baird vacates the stay.*
11-14-03 Order vacating stay.

November 14, 2003
In response to Judge Baird’s lifting the stay, the 2nd DCA issues an indefinite stay.

November 19, 2003
Governor Bush files a petition to remove Judge Baird.
11-19-03 Petition

November 21, 2003
Florida Sens. Stephen Wise and Jim Sebesta introduce legislation (S692) that would require persons in persistent vegetative states to be administered medically supplied nutrition and hydration in the absence of a living will, regardless of family beliefs about what those patients would have wanted. The measure is withdrawn from consideration on April 16, 2004.
Bill to require sustenence when no living will exists

December 1, 2003
Jay Wolfson, guardian ad litem, concludes in his report that Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state with no chance of improvement.
Wolfson's* Report
Governor Bush's response to Wolfson's report

December 10, 2003
The 2nd DCA refuses to remove Judge Baird, who is the presiding judge in the state-court lawsuit filed October 21, 2003.*
Bush v. Schiavo, 861 So. 2d 506 (2nd DCA 2003) (No. 2D03-5244)
12-10-03 Court Opinion

January 5, 2004
The Schindler family petitions the Pinellas County Circuit Court to reappoint Jay Wolfson, the guardian ad litem.
1-05-04 Schindlers petition to reappoint GAL

January 8, 2004
Judge Demers rejects the request to reappoint the guardian ad litem, citing the pending court decisions over the constitutionality of “Terri’s Law” as reason to wait on any action.
1-08-04 Order denying reinstatement of GAL

February 13, 2004
The 2nd DCA reverses Judge Baird’s ruling (in the case filed October 21, 2003) that denied the Schindlers permission to intervene in Michael Schiavo’s Constitutional challenge to “Terri’s Law.”* The 2nd DCA explains that Judge Baird did not follow proper procedure.* The court also gives permission to Governor Bush to question several witnesses who Judge Baird previously had ruled could not offer any relevant testimony.
Bush v. Schiavo, 866 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2004) (on intervention); 866 So. 2d 136 (2nd DCA 2004) (on request to take depositions). (Case No. 2D03-5783).
bushschiavo2 13 04 opn.pdf
2-13-04 Opinion allowing parents to intervene

March 12, 2004
Judge Baird again rejects the Schindlers’ request to intervene in Michael Schiavo’s suit that questions the constitutionality of “Terri’s Law.”

He didn't refuse the tests that conclusively proved that her cerebral cortex is liquid and as Reitsuki said another great part of her brain has atrophied. Her husband after years of tests said enough and won't allow further testing as it isn't necessary....MRI's don't lie and no brain can mend itself with these problems

Okay, I've weighed in on this for a while...

At face value, it seems like a battle between right-to-life vs. right-to-die in the absense of a will.

The real question, upon further examination, is who takes precedence in the absense of a will - a husband or the parents, who claim conflicting ideas of what Ms. Schiavo's last wishes would be.

I suppose if I had to make a choice, I'd say since the husband was married to her for a number of years, he takes precedence. He says she wouldn't want the feeding tube, he's legally entitled to have power of attorney.

Additionally, the parents' say that their concern is that there may be a slim chance that she could be rehabilitated. Well, she hasn't in what? 15 years? I think their concern has been met.

...

That said, I think it's a shame at how much of a big deal this is. Politicians, especially on the right, have been outspoken on this issue when they should be dealing with war, or the budget, or the illegal immegrant problem, or countless other issues that deal with so many more lives than one person. It goes to show how the media gets ahold of one person's issue and keeps it in a stranglehold, ignoring so many more important stories.

Actually, the more I learn about the situation, the more reprehensible I think the parents are. They were perfectly willing to hand her off to hubby when there was no money. They could not even keep her for the three weeks they had her.

Then the money comes in from the medical malpractice and Wham! Suddenly her parents want some of the money or else they will pull gardianship from hubby.

The court looks at the whole thing and appoints a guardian who says hubby's doing a pretty good job but that because a protion of her brain has liquified, she will never recover. Hence the decision to pull the feeding tube.

These people have put her husband through absolute hell because they thought he should just hand them a portion of the money from the Terry's lawsuit. As it turns out, all of the money has gone into Terry's care or into his legal bills over the issue.

I wonder what her parents planned on spending the money on. Somehow based on their previous behavior, I don't think it was intended for Terry.

.

I just wanted to address this issue specificly, because the media has so distorted it.

That is life support.

If your heart can't pump, they stimulate it. That's lifesupport.

If your kidnies stop working, they filter your blood. That's lifesupport.

If your lungs stop drawing breath, they force air into you. Thats lifesupport.

If you you can't eat or drink, you are fed by machine. That's lifesupport.

Without any of those things, a person would die. Their life is being supported.

Life support = Life being supported by artificial means.

I need to weigh in here too. Terri's situation is truely grave and judging from 15 bed-ridden years and numerous legal encounters. She should be allowed to die with dignity.

In the absence of a living will, the spouse is the ultimate decision. I find it odd, that a government that sems to put so much stock in the "sacred bond" between a man and a woman would have such low regard in real life cases.

Terri's case is not unique. In fact scores of people are allowed to die without all of the legal and politcal hooplah on a daily basis. In many of these cases, there is little or no dispute from family members. In fact, burdens are often lifted and they can go on with their lives.

I don't condone euthenasia, but give her bed and health care costs to someone who may gain some benefit from treatment.

You know I've been wanting to state this since this thread started and could not figure out how to phrase it. As a republican I have been utterly confused and infuriated at this obvious hypocrisy in the government. I feel for the family but ultimately wring my hands for Michael. Well said Weedy thanks for the words.

IMHO, This is not about hypocrisy in the government; this is simply showing that "Moral Control" trumps any other concerns with administrations haeded by this generation of Bushes. We must protect the sanctity of marrige, because that allows the government a 'control' over gays getting legitimacy. But the blind imposing of "the right to life" trumps protecting marriage. It's all about control; if we don't agree with someone, we will do everything we can to impose our will....and hang logic and reason.

That's the American Way. Now wave the flag....or they'll shoot you.

Reitsuki, while I agree with the rest of your post this is a point that is a Stickler.

If the person is able to be fed and drink water through either feeding tubes or manual feeding then its Yes "Life Support" in the sense that its keeping them alive.

But its also not Artificial meaning the machine doesnt digest the food, the machine doesnt pass the protiens and needed nutrients to the body it merely provides the food a smooth transition from mouth to stomach that prevents creating futher damage.

On the Government aspect I am looking at it as this is a formidiable precidence. If the Government is allowed to override a Court Ruling based on a spouses decisions. We are then as a country in great peril.

If this ruling had of taken place to put her feeding tube back in.
The simple point would be a Will and or DNR statment are of no use within the sytems anymore.
People preach all the time about oh you should have a Will etc. etc.
What's the point when your personal opinions and wishes are no longer going to be adhered to.

While I argue the point that basic human needs need to be maintained the human body will dictate when it will die.

My grandmother was on life support. Her wishes were to not be kept alive by artificial means just to prolong her life if she slipped away into a coma.

Her husband and all of her childeren agreed to take her off of Life support meaning Heart lungs etc.

However, the Doctors also noted that she should not be starved to death and in essence that is what we are all talking about here is Starving Terri to death.

My Grandmother once removed from the machines stayed alive 2 more weeks until her last great grandchild was born and brought to her bedside. Once the child was taken out of the room she woke briefly long enough to bid my grandfather goodbye and she left us.

The human spirit is stronger than any religious conviction that any may percieve they have. But the simple point of all this is I believe they should not starve Terri but at the same time respect her wishes for mechanical assisted life.

Shadow.

I would like to think that the Doctors are not passive individuals that go along with everything the husband says. Have any of them disagreed with the outcome? The husband seems to be getting vilified, the very last thing he needs at this terrible time. If you went to your doctor and asked him/her to 'kill' your partner do you really think the doctor would?

It wasn't just one doctor, she has had a number of them and they have tried a number of ways to bring her back before they discovered that her cerbrial cortex was actually liquified. Her husband even took her to California for experimental “brain stimulator” treatment and an experimental “thalamic stimulator implant” in her brain. Also, both of the court appointed guardians, who evaluated her case were doctors.

Regarding the withholding of nourishment, I personally cared for my mother, who died in her mid-thirties. I was fortunate in that I did not need to make the decision for my mother, she made it for herself and refused hydration and nourishment and requested that we only give her pain medication to make her comfortable.

The first week she was conscious and indicated that there was no change in her level of comfort (she had not actually eaten in days anyway) but she did grow weaker. The day that she fell into a coma was probably the least amount of pain that she'd had since she was diagnosed with cancer. She was not given hydration or food but she was given pain medication. Four days later she died peacefully in her sleep at home.

I know it's different because my Mom was conscious and could make the decision for herself. However, had that not been the case, she had made her wishes apparent to me and I would have made the same decision for her.

Thirty some years ago these sorts of issues were family issues and dying was more of a part of living and while people grieved, they seemed to have a better level of acceptance of the process. Most funerals that I went to were actually held in people's living rooms. There as not such a separation of the living and the dying as there is today.


.

Commandment Number 5: THOU SHALT NOT KILL.



To kill is to rob man of the great privilege reserved for God alone. Only God has the right to judge when the physical must end."

Commandment # 11 thall shall not be an asshat....How does one kill someone that canyt eat?

She's basically dead - how do you know that god isn't sitting there strumming his thumbs thinking "damn I wish they'd quit this and let her come home".