Terri

Shattered said:
Since when are guardian ad litems licensed medical doctors? Was Terri's? Did I miss something? If so, show me..

They can be. One of Terri's guardian was Dr. Wolfson. He did not examine her however. He just spent some time with her and reviewed the medical records and history. He did not make an independent diagnosis. He just looked at the medical examinations that had been done to make sure they were done properly and that there were grounds for a PVS diagnosis. He did not make a PVS diagnosis himself.

Shattered said:
Do YOU approve of the type of husband that Michael was? Please, justify adultry to me. Like I said, even if you take everything else away.. The broken bones, the controlling atmosphere, the lack of consideration for anyone but himself, you STILL have a cheating sack of shit. Please justify that so I can understand it.

I don't look at adultery in this case as black and white. He was technically an adulterer, but only after he became aware that his wife was not likely to recover and his in-laws encouraged him to date and get on with his life.

I think one can start a new relationship and have undiminished love for someone from a prior relationship. I am sure widowers love for their new wives/husbands doesn't diminish or cheapen their love for a spouse that has passed on. I liken this situation to that one.
 
ReillyT said:
They can be. One of Terri's guardian was Dr. Wolfson. He did not examine her however. He just spent some time with her and reviewed the medical records and history. He did not make an independent diagnosis. He just looked at the medical examinations that had been done to make sure they were done properly and that there were grounds for a PVS diagnosis. He did not make a PVS diagnosis himself.



I don't look at adultery in this case as black and white. He was technically an adulterer, but only after he became aware that his wife was not likely to recover and his in-laws encouraged him to date and get on with his life.

I think one can start a new relationship and have undiminished love for someone from a prior relationship. I am sure widowers love for their new wives/husbands doesn't diminish or cheapen their love for a spouse that has passed on. I liken this situation to that one.


It's truely amazing how far you guys are bending over backwards to defend this asswipe , you would swear he was Bill Clinton .Terri's friends that I saw interviewed said he was a controlling jerk that systematically got rid of all her friends . One spoke of the bruises on her upper arm and thighs . They also said that she was planning on divorcing him . None of these women have anything to gain from revealing what they saw first hand . He on the other hand has a great deal to protect (it would be very interesting to see how much life insurance he has on her). I have known assholes like this , they take advantage of emotionally weak women and control every aspect of their lives . Obviously the woman he is with now is the same way , she has had kids with this low life , stayed with him while watching him battle the real relatives of Terri , and has no doubt allowed him to control her life as well . This is my opinion , I have no proof , just intuition . Then again none of you have proof that he is the fine , upstanding , misunderstood , devoted husband either .
 
sitarro said:
It's truely amazing how far you guys are bending over backwards to defend this asswipe , you would swear he was Bill Clinton .Terri's friends that I saw interviewed said he was a controlling jerk that systematically got rid of all her friends . One spoke of the bruises on her upper arm and thighs . They also said that she was planning on divorcing him . None of these women have anything to gain from revealing what they saw first hand . He on the other hand has a great deal to protect (it would be very interesting to see how much life insurance he has on her). I have known assholes like this , they take advantage of emotionally weak women and control every aspect of their lives . Obviously the woman he is with now is the same way , she has had kids with this low life , stayed with him while watching him battle the real relatives of Terri , and has no doubt allowed him to control her life as well . This is my opinion , I have no proof , just intuition . Then again none of you have proof that he is the fine , upstanding , misunderstood , devoted husband either .

I have no idea if he is a fine and upstanding person. I just think that to throw adultery around as a reason why is a terrible person is myopic and insensitive to the plight of anyone who would be in an similar situation. I just don't think the fact that he is currently with another woman means he didn't or doesn't love his wife.

In the absence of proof or personal knowledge, why don't you just withhold judgment on the type of person he is? Especially with all the misinformation and unsubstantiated allegations surrounding this case, why not just admit that you just don't (and really can't) know Michael Schiavo?
 
Shattered said:
:poke:

You said not more than half a dozen posts ago that humans are "just humans" and "they die".. So, it's easy for you to zap another human being out of existence, but it was the "hardest thing you ever had to do" to put a DOG out???

I would do the same for my mother,father,brother or sister. I also said it was an act of love which I truly believe it is. It is time to go when all you can do is drool.

Pls. don't confuse me with a liberal. I happen to agree with 99% of posters on this board. This issue, however, I cannot see eye to eye with everyone.
 
budboomer said:
I would do the same for my mother,father,brother or sister. I also said it was an act of love which I truly believe it is. It is time to go when all you can do is drool.

Pls. don't confuse me with a liberal. I happen to agree with 99% of posters on this board. This issue, however, I cannot see eye to eye with everyone.

Terri wasn't drooling , that was one of the observations of the doctor that felt she could be rehabilitated to some extent . His opinion was that she was indeed swallowing or she would have drowned on her own saliva . Admit it , she was no worse than a great deal of people who are born with limited brain function . Have you heard the tape of her father asking her questions and her attempts to respond . It is very compelling yet the members of the hemlock society didn't want to hear it. They were merely wanting to set a precedent on the books that will work for other state sponsored murders .
 
krisy said:
I left Micheal out on purpose.

My grandma used to tell us to pray for the people we were angry at,or the ones that did something wrong to us. Right now,I'm just pissed ,plain and simple and I think he is a lousy stinking piece of crap,whom at the very least could have let her parents take care of her. Then the parents can't even have the body?!!! He is going to put it in a family plot of his. So I guess when he kicks,one wife will be on one side of him,and the "2nd" wife on the other side. Sounds great-I bet his future wife will be thrilled!


And that loony toon lawyer of his needs his head looked at-he is creepy,plain and simple. Hell,they just said on Hannity and Colmes that the freak talks about how he dreams about bludgening his ex to death in his book.

You don't think its kind of creepy that the parents wanted to keep their brain dead daughter alive for an indeterminant amount of time?

What the fuck were they planning on having Madame Tusseau's wax friggin museum?
 
OCA said:
You don't think its kind of creepy that the parents wanted to keep their brain dead daughter alive for an indeterminant amount of time?

What the fuck were they planning on having Madame Tusseau's wax friggin museum?


where was vincent price when you needed him?
 
OCA said:
You don't think its kind of creepy that the parents wanted to keep their brain dead daughter alive for an indeterminant amount of time?

What the fuck were they planning on having Madame Tusseau's wax friggin museum?

No, I think they wanted to comfort her and have time to finish their personal relationship with her. (without Michael around)
 
dilloduck said:
No, I think they wanted to comfort her and have time to finish their personal relationship with her. (without Michael around)

What relationship??????????? She didn't know if it was 2005 or 1705.
 
OCA said:
What relationship??????????? She didn't know if it was 2005 or 1705.

I appreciate you hard core attempts at black and white ( and much of you hard core braggadico and insults are quite amusing) but people and relationships are a bit more involved than you are willing to concede.
 
dilloduck said:
I appreciate you hard core attempts at black and white ( and much of you hard core braggadico and insults are quite amusing) but people and relationships are a bit more involved than you are willing to concede.

Nice backhanded compliment.
 
dilloduck said:
If a child of yours died in an accident would you want to see the body? If so , why?

what kind of accident? do i get to keep it alive for 15 years and hug it?
 
manu1959 said:
what kind of accident? do i get to keep it alive for 15 years and hug it?
Try to be serious and answer the question---car accident (does that help ?)
If you have legal guardianship you apparently can do anything you want to with it.
 
dilloduck said:
Try to be serious and answer the question---car accident (does that help ?)
If you have legal guardianship you apparently can do anything you want to with it.

well when my father died i did not want to see him dead and refused...same for my grandmother, same for my favourite uncle, oh yea and my granfather that shot himself in the head and my other two grandparents and my other great granparents and my cousin

so if i am so unfortunate as to have a child die before i do my guess is i will not want to see me son or daughter dead....i would prefer to have my last visual memory of my son or daughter be one where they are alive....

see thread on meental pain and suffering
 
dilloduck said:
Try to be serious and answer the question---car accident (does that help ?)
If you have legal guardianship you apparently can do anything you want to with it.
its really very simple. as difficult as it would be, if I am told that there is no hope for recovery at all, I'd be bound by god to let her go.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
its really very simple. as difficult as it would be, if I am told that there is no hope for recovery at all, I'd be bound by god to let her go.

you wouldn't want to even see her body?
 
musicman said:
As I'm sure you knew, Free, the Angels of Death actually make up a distinct subgroup of serial murderers in criminal history - power-mad bastards playing God under the guise of "alleviating suffering". We had one operating in this area (SW Ohio) some years back - a lowlife named Donald Harvey. I was attending the funeral of a friend of mine, and struck up a conversation with an older gentleman. Came to find out that his deceased wife was one of Harvey's victims. That's chilling stuff.


Oh gosh,MM. I remember that nutcase!!! The grandmother of a friend of mine was apparently one of his victims. They had to have her body exumed(sp?) to find out. It was a very painful time for the family. Wasn't it Drake Hospital on Galbraith that he worked at?
 

Forum List

Back
Top