Judge Voids Law Keeping Fla. Woman Alive

[5stringJeff]

Terry Schaivo is now in danger of her husband pulling the plug on her, even though she will likely improve with therapy - but her husband is more interested in collecting the insurance money, apparently.


-----------------------
TAMPA, Fla. - The law pushed by Gov. Jeb Bush to keep a severely brain damaged woman alive is unconstitutional, a Circuit Court judge ruled Thursday. The governor's office filed an immediate appeal.

The ruling by Pinellas Circuit Court Judge W. Douglas Baird voided the law passed in October, just days after Terri Schiavo was disconnected from the feeding and hydration tube which has kept her alive for more than a decade.

The law allowed Bush to order Terri Schiavo's feeding tube reconnected.

Her husband, Michael, had fought a long court battle to carry out what he said were his wife's wishes not to be kept alive artificially, but her parents have said there were no such wishes.

Michael Schiavo contends his wife never wanted to be kept alive artificially. Her parents, however, doubt she had such wishes and believe her condition could improve with therapy.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...=/ap/20040506/ap_on_re_us/brain_damaged_woman

 

[DKSuddeth]

this has been back and forth in the courts and a judge decided that the husband was right, did it not? I'm sure that questions were asked of different doctors about therapy improving her condition as well.

I knew when FLA passed this law that it would be voided. It's clearly unconstitutional and only bolsters the reasons for leaving a living will or trust to implicitly state your requests.

 

[krisy]

The husband has absolutely no proof whatsoever that she would not have wanted to stay alive. She follows things with her eyes and to me,looks like she is regeristing something. There has also been new speculation about what really happened the day of her "heart attack". Her husband is free and clear to do what he wants,get married whatever. I think he even has a child. That's fine,but his drive to pull the plug sounds to me like there may be another motive behind what he is doing. Her parents have agreed to take full responsibility for her. He has moved on with another relationship,so why in the world would he want to take her from the people that brought her on to this earth when he has a new life? I don't get it. She could have also been more rehabilitated if he would have let them do something years ago. He never let them touch her with a chance of rehabilitation-hmmmm...why could that be?

 

[krisy]

I thought I heard also that Florida had a previous law that you cannot starve someone to death by withdrawing a feeding tube. That is all they'll be doing.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by krisy
The husband has absolutely no proof whatsoever that she would not have wanted to stay alive. She follows things with her eyes and to me,looks like she is regeristing something. There has also been new speculation about what really happened the day of her "heart attack". Her husband is free and clear to do what he wants,get married whatever. I think he even has a child. That's fine,but his drive to pull the plug sounds to me like there may be another motive behind what he is doing. Her parents have agreed to take full responsibility for her. He has moved on with another relationship,so why in the world would he want to take her from the people that brought her on to this earth when he has a new life? I don't get it. She could have also been more rehabilitated if he would have let them do something years ago. He never let them touch her with a chance of rehabilitation-hmmmm...why could that be?

Its quite possible that he's truly pursuing this because thats what she wanted. As to the day of the 'heart attack', was there no investigation on it?

granted, there's alot of grey area still but this ultimately should come down to the spouses right to decide, provided that all avenues of investigation have proven that no crime was commited and all therapuetic improvement has been ruled out.

 

[NewGuy]

The point here is that she will not die if the feeding tube is removed. She can be taught to eat, but they have never let that happen. Why? Because Michael has connections with the medical facilities she resides in. He has refused to let her TRY to live based on what he says are her wishes. This makes the whole case clean cut murder.

-Oh.

What caused her to be this way?

There was a criminal trial for attempted murder AGAINST MICHAEL. The judge suspended it indefinitely until this particular issue was resolved.

Guess who the star piece of evidence is?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by NewGuy
What caused her to be this way?

There was a criminal trial for attempted murder AGAINST MICHAEL. The judge suspended it indefinitely until this particular issue was resolved.

Guess who the star piece of evidence is?

Now thats something I have never heard related to this story. I remember something about an investigation but NEVER a suspended murder trial. How is this man walking free with another woman and child then? I'd have to see the documentation regarding an ongoing trial.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Now thats something I have never heard related to this story. I remember something about an investigation but NEVER a suspended murder trial. How is this man walking free with another woman and child then? I'd have to see the documentation regarding an ongoing trial.

They DID have the docs up on her site.

I will have to look it up again.

 

[NewGuy]

http://www.terrisfight.org/

http://www.terrisfight.org/documents.html

--For the court documentation (nothing titled as referring to the murder trial, but I DID read in one of the docs a few months ago a reference to it).

http://www.terrisfight.org/myths.html

--all the reasons this whole thing is illegal :with the laws recited.

The site has changed a lot over time. Any significant time spent reading the site shows the reality of his connections and the fact he is trying again to kill her.

One of these documents DID have references to the suspended murder trial, but I just cant locate it right now.

 

[krisy]

Originally posted by NewGuy
The point here is that she will not die if the feeding tube is removed. She can be taught to eat, but they have never let that happen. Why? Because Michael has connections with the medical facilities she resides in. He has refused to let her TRY to live based on what he says are her wishes. This makes the whole case clean cut murder.

-Oh.

What caused her to be this way?

There was a criminal trial for attempted murder AGAINST MICHAEL. The judge suspended it indefinitely until this particular issue was resolved.

Guess who the star piece of evidence is?

Exactly.He never wanted her rehablitated from day 1. If he has moved on with his life,I still would love to know why he cares if she gets taken care of by her parents. Sean Hannity dicussed this a while ago,and said there were funny circimstances surrounding her medical conditions. The doctors are split on her future,but if half say she could make it,why not give her a shot?

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by krisy
Exactly.He never wanted her rehablitated from day 1. If he has moved on with his life,I still would love to know why he cares if she gets taken care of by her parents. Sean Hannity dicussed this a while ago,and said there were funny circimstances surrounding her medical conditions. The doctors are split on her future,but if half say she could make it,why not give her a shot?

I have looked on the internet and can't find any mention of a pending criminal attempted murder trial against Ms. Shiavo's husband. Further, I have a hard time believing that such a trial would be stayed pending the current civil litigation. That just is not how attempted murder prosecutions generally go. I will be shocked if I am wrong about this, but I don't think I am.

As for why he is taking the course he has chosen, he says it is because this is what she would want. I personally don't know. At least one court apparently believes him. But I would appreciate it if some of you guys would stop suggesting that he doesn't and never has cared for his wife, wants her to die for insurance money, or that he killed her himself. The fact is, you don't fucking know, and as for your unfounded suspicions, try to keep them to yourself just on the basis of human decency and respect. Among the things that we do definitely know is that the man lost (for all intents and purposes) his wife (apparently due to heart attack induced brain damage). Whatever you think about what should happen to his wife, I think he deserves a little compassion for that alone.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Reilly

As for why he is taking the course he has chosen, he says it is because this is what she would want. I personally don't know. At least one court apparently believes him. But I would appreciate it if some of you guys would stop suggesting that he doesn't and never has cared for his wife, wants her to die for insurance money, or that he killed her himself. The fact is, you don't fucking know, and as for your unfounded suspicions, try to keep them to yourself just on the basis of human decency and respect. Among the things that we do definitely know is that the man lost (for all intents and purposes) his wife (apparently due to heart attack induced brain damage). Whatever you think about what should happen to his wife, I think he deserves a little compassion for that alone.

And you are an idiot for thinking we need to leave it alone.

For all that reading you SUPPOSEDLY did, you couldn't find the conflicts with doctors who were biased, the conflict of interest with michaels connections to the healthcare institutions, the fact that the courts are completely one sided based on unconstitutional illegal improper proceedures, and the fact that Terry shows signs IN VIDEO on the site that defy doctors reports of being brain dead. All definitions used which claim her to be incapacitated are not applicable to her situation, hence the whole process is illegal.

You are so smart, you "read" the site and yet didn't learn anything.

What you think we should feel or say about the case has no merit whatsoever until you know something about it.

 

[krisy]

Originally posted by Reilly
I have looked on the internet and can't find any mention of a pending criminal attempted murder trial against Ms. Shiavo's husband. Further, I have a hard time believing that such a trial would be stayed pending the current civil litigation. That just is not how attempted murder prosecutions generally go. I will be shocked if I am wrong about this, but I don't think I am.

As for why he is taking the course he has chosen, he says it is because this is what she would want. I personally don't know. At least one court apparently believes him. But I would appreciate it if some of you guys would stop suggesting that he doesn't and never has cared for his wife, wants her to die for insurance money, or that he killed her himself. The fact is, you don't fucking know, and as for your unfounded suspicions, try to keep them to yourself just on the basis of human decency and respect. Among the things that we do definitely know is that the man lost (for all intents and purposes) his wife (apparently due to heart attack induced brain damage). Whatever you think about what should happen to his wife, I think he deserves a little compassion for that alone.

With all due respect,I can have whatever opinion I want,and can say what I think happened all I want. We could all be wrong,who knows. The point is,the woman is not braindead,or she would not be following that balloon with her eyes in the video. I realize I am not a doctor,but something doesn't seem right to me. I am allowed that opinon if it's o.k. with you. Or,should I ask your permission next time I want to post what I think?

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by NewGuy
And you are an idiot for thinking we need to leave it alone.

For all that reading you SUPPOSEDLY did, you couldn't find the conflicts with doctors who were biased, the conflict of interest with michaels connections to the healthcare institutions, the fact that the courts are completely one sided based on unconstitutional illegal improper proceedures, and the fact that Terry shows signs IN VIDEO on the site that defy doctors reports of being brain dead. All definitions used which claim her to be incapacitated are not applicable to her situation, hence the whole process is illegal.

You are so smart, you "read" the site and yet didn't learn anything.

What you think we should feel or say about the case has no merit whatsoever until you know something about it.

You are apparently completely unable to recognize my point (why am I not surprised). I wasn't discussing the merits of the case at all (not the Dr's opinions, the court decision, Terri's condition, or anything of the like) - only some people's (that includes you) characterizations of and accusations about Mr. Schiave.

You are an obstinate jackass.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Reilly
You are apparently completely unable to recognize my point (why am I not surprised). I wasn't discussing the merits of the case at all (not the Dr's opinions, the court decision, Terri's condition, or anything of the like) - only some people's (that includes you) characterizations of and accusations about Mr. Schiave.

You are an obstinate jackass.

And you are incapable of aquiring reading comprehension skills.

I know full well what you said, and you are not qualified to say how he should be treated if you do not know the facts of the case.

Therefore, my point remains.

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by krisy
With all due respect,I can have whatever opinion I want,and can say what I think happened all I want. We could all be wrong,who knows. The point is,the woman is not braindead,or she would not be following that balloon with her eyes in the video. I realize I am not a doctor,but something doesn't seem right to me. I am allowed that opinon if it's o.k. with you. Or,should I ask your permission next time I want to post what I think?

I have no idea if she is in a persistent vegative state. I don't know is she can ever recover. I have no idea if she will ever regain (or currently has) conscious thought. I don't know enough about the case to form an opinion about the future course of action for Ms. Shiave.

While I can't prevent you from posting any opinion that you like, I can hope that you try to treat others (even those you don't know) with some degree of dignity, compassion and respect (whether you agree with them or not). I can also ask that you (plural - towards multiple board member) not slander this man who has lost his wife with unfounded accusations and suppositions. I can't make you do these things. Of course, I would think you would want to do these things anyway.

I apologize for being so preachy. The level of mud-slinging and slander got to be too much for me. I am a bit sleep deprived and I am beginning to think that I am overreacting. I have said my piece. Sorry if some of you felt offended.

 

[Reilly]

Originally posted by NewGuy
And you are incapable of aquiring reading comprehension skills.

I know full well what you said, and you are not qualified to say how he should be treated if you do not know the facts of the case.

Therefore, my point remains.

Nobody knows the full facts (how he feels, etc.) but, presumably, Mr. Shiave. That's it. Nobody knows. So one should not be so quick to label his motivations or suggest that he is responsible for her condition. If that is your point, I agree with you.

You are a Bible thumper. Shouldn't compassion come more easily to you?

You have points?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Terry Schaivo is now in danger of her husband pulling the plug on her, even though she will likely improve with therapy - but her husband is more interested in collecting the insurance money, apparently.

I have a patient now who has no pupillary response...no startle reflex...no withdrawl from noxious stimuli such as nail-bed pressure...mulitple lesions from stage I to stage IV all over her body...vent dependent...and being fed through a PEG tube. The family stubbornly persists in the belief that she is still responding to external stimuli.

This could be Terry Schaivo's case, but it's not. Your judgement of Mr. Schaivo only shoes how ignorant you truly are of the dynamics of such cases. Ms. Schaivo's parents could be the selfish ones here. Clinging vainly to a life which no longer is, for reasons known only to them. Afraid of "playing God" by removing her from life support, when in fact that is what they are doing...Playing God. Where it not for artificial measures, she would have passed long ago, with a modicum of dignity. But no...Terry Schaivo's family, both her parents and her husband are being wrenched back and forth by misguided and ignorant politicians...As if the emotional strain of Ms. Schaivo's condition isn't already enough. If Ms. Schaivo was going to "get better" , she would have done so by now.

There comes a time when one must let go of a loved one, no matter how painful it may be. Failing to do so will only cause greater pain for the family and the loved one. One's death should be a time of peace and reflection for the family. A time to remember and celebrate the good times. A time to reconcile and forgive for the bad. To turn it into a legal and political circus is a poignant and painful tragedy.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
this has been back and forth in the courts and a judge decided that the husband was right, did it not? I'm sure that questions were asked of different doctors about therapy improving her condition as well.

I knew when FLA passed this law that it would be voided. It's clearly unconstitutional and only bolsters the reasons for leaving a living will or trust to implicitly state your requests.

Unfortunately, livings wills are not legally binding documents. It can be voided by the objections of a single family member to its provisions.

 

[krisy]

Originally posted by Reilly
I have no idea if she is in a persistent vegative state. I don't know is she can ever recover. I have no idea if she will ever regain (or currently has) conscious thought. I don't know enough about the case to form an opinion about the future course of action for Ms. Shiave.

While I can't prevent you from posting any opinion that you like, I can hope that you try to treat others (even those you don't know) with some degree of dignity, compassion and respect (whether you agree with them or not). I can also ask that you (plural - towards multiple board member) not slander this man who has lost his wife with unfounded accusations and suppositions. I can't make you do these things. Of course, I would think you would want to do these things anyway.

I apologize for being so preachy. The level of mud-slinging and slander got to be too much for me. I am a bit sleep deprived and I am beginning to think that I am overreacting. I have said my piece. Sorry if some of you felt offended.

Don't worry about it Reilly,we all get hyped up about what we believe. I don't know that he did anything,I just strongly disagree with his choice to "pull the plug". Sorry if I was a little cocky,I really am a nice person