On the Past Days

[dilloduck]

Right..I just can't find anyone to fight with. :rotflmao:

It would seem so----we're just trying to discuss things on a forum and yes--it is about people. You sem to think we shouldn't be doing that yet won't tell us why

 

[Mr. P]

It would seem so----we're just trying to discuss things on a forum and yes--it is about people. You sem to think we shouldn't be doing that yet won't tell us why

I guess you just missed those posts, Dillo...Their out there..Go fish.

 

[dilloduck]

I guess you just missed those posts, Dillo...Their out there..Go fish.

np--guess you''ll share with me what you want to. Really just hoping for some open discussion

 

[MissileMan]

Mr. P Wrote:


The FL court did not take into account much of the information that might go to demonstrate a) the Terri Shiavo's condition is not PVS and b) that Michael Shiavo is an unfit guardian and that guardianship should be transferred to her parents.

The numerous appellate courts did not take any of the new information into consideration either....hence why people felt that the case needed to be reexamined with all the new information entered and considered.

You have asserted this several times. Can you supply some links that support these allegations? For instance a list of witnesses that were not allowed to testify, and what they were going to testify to, might shed some light on your argument.

 

[MissileMan]

P - it's just not that simple or easy and I think you know it.

Let's assume for the moment that EVERY derogatory thing we've heard about Michael Schiavo is true. Let's assume that he was in some way responsible for his wife's condition, that he is attempting to hasten her death and that he is avariciously waiting to collect the balance of the money awarded for his wife's care.

Don't you think that in such a situation that society has an obligation to step in and defend the helpless spouse who cannot speak for herself? Or do you believe that a husband should be allowed to get away with murder and profit from it as well?

Now I'm not saying that any of the previous is true in this particular case. But you have all the elements there and apparently you only have the word of the husband on the matter of his wife's wishes - a husband who stands to profit substantially from his wife's death.

Sometimes society has to get involved - not to meddle, but to carry out an obligation toward a helpless individual who cannot act for him/herself.

Here's the thing though...Michael himself involved "society" when he went to the court to have them make the decision on what to do about Terry. He gave the court guardianship of her and let them weigh all of the evidence presented. The court decided based on everything presented that Terry would not want to be maintained in her current condition. If Michael had been the only person allowed to testify at the hearing, the "only on his word" arguments might hold some water.

Just because someone disagrees with the court's decision is no reason to start making wild accusations to justify their disapproval.

 

[musicman]

Here's the thing though...Michael himself involved "society" when he went to the court to have them make the decision on what to do about Terry. He gave the court guardianship of her and let them weigh all of the evidence presented. The court decided based on everything presented that Terry would not want to be maintained in her current condition.

Ah - but by that reasoning, then, why must "society's" involvement end with the decision of a single judge (I know there were many appeals, but Judge Greer was always the sole finder of fact)? Why cannot society - in the person of the Congress - at least examine the situation, particularly where a legitimate due process issue involving life and death exists? Putting a black robe on a lawyer doesn't make him Jesus Christ.

Maybe Ann Coulter is right: Perhaps America is just spooked by the black robes. From now on, we should - as she suggests - have all judges wear lime green leisure suits.

Congress got it right on this one. No unconstitutional or even vaguely improper action took place. Federal intervention in a state matter was the appropriate choice - perhaps for the first time in forty years. No usurpation of power was attempted. The wheels aren't coming off and the sky isn't falling. Terri got her shot at due process.

Much good it did her - but, then, that's another issue entirely.

 

[musicman]

Just to clarify, and perhaps save some time and bandwidth, I am not quarreling here about Florida law, the appeals process, Michael Schiavo's actions, Judge Greer's actions, Mr. and Mrs. Schindler's actions, or anything else that happened before Congress decided to step in and determine jurisdiction in this matter. In the first place, I don't know enough about the intricacies of all these subjects to muster a decent argument, and, secondly, it wouldn't do anybody any damned good anyway - not at this stage of the game.

I am simply stating that Congress acted properly.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Just to clarify, and perhaps save some time and bandwidth, I am not quarreling here about Florida law, the appeals process, Michael Schiavo's actions, Judge Greer's actions, Mr. and Mrs. Schindler's actions, or anything else that happened before Congress decided to step in and determine jurisdiction in this matter. In the first place, I don't know enough about the intricacies of all these subjects to muster a decent argument, and, secondly, it wouldn't do anybody any damned good anyway - not at this stage of the game.

I am simply stating that Congress acted properly.

80% disagree. I'm one of them. but hey, we'll agree to disagree.

 

[musicman]

80% disagree. I'm one of them. but hey, we'll agree to disagree.

Ah, but that 80% drops like a rock when respondents are given better information than the loaded poll questions that toss around words like "vegetable" and "life support" (Wall Street Weekly).

Whenever I see a poll, the first thing I want to know is "Who's conducting it"? The second is, "What's the poll-takers agenda?" Then, if it's available, I try to examine the precise language used and methodology employed by the poll-taker. This is usually a real eye-opener. If Mark Twain were alive today, he'd probably say, "There are lies, damned lies, and POLLS".

 

[Gem]

MissileMan,

Numerous articles have been placed on this board already that discuss these issues. I posted one that discussed in depth the neurologists that disagree with the original assessment of PVS by the one doctor...and discussed what tests should have been done and have not been. I'm sure you will be able to find them with very little effort.

To address the poll question...I have seen numerous polls, posing the question numerous ways....the bottom line seems to be that the majority of Americans, myself included, would not want to live if they were in a similar state to Terri Schiavo. That holds whether the poll refers to "braindeath" or "mentally handicapped," "machines," or a "feeding tube." The numbers vary somewhat based upon the question...but the "I would want to die" option always wins out regardless of how the question is posed.

 

[dilloduck]

Ah, but that 80% drops like a rock when respondents are given better information than the loaded poll questions that toss around words like "vegetable" and "life support" (Wall Street Weekly).

Whenever I see a poll, the first thing I want to know is "Who's conducting it"? The second is, "What's the poll-takers agenda?" Then, if it's available, I try to examine the precise language used and methodology employed by the poll-taker. This is usually a real eye-opener. If Mark Twain were alive today, he'd probably say, "There are lies, damned lies, and POLLS".

Agreed---- it's simple to change a few choice words to get completely differerent results--I ignore em---remember the election exit polling????

 

[no1tovote4]

Assume? Now Merlin we both know how dangerous that word is. So let's not.

I prefer not to assume that the courts have made a correct decision in this case, nor to assume that they haven't but to explore the area and see if there is a way to make it so it will be more clear and people will be uncovered by the media when the situation next arises.

I personally would prefer not to be in a situation where I was fighting my wife's family over her disposition in such a case, but what if it did happen? We both have a living will but there are examples where a living will is being disputed as well. Having a just system that looked into more than one aspect would be better than simply saying it is a private matter.

This case has so many doubts built right in that people took notice that the law may be creating an area where injustice may have been doled out by the courts themselves in accordance with the laws, and that we may need to look into the laws and see if there is a way that we could be more assured of the issue in the future.

Had I been sure of her wish to die and the gentleman's goodwill for his wife I would be on his, and your, side 100%, but it doesn't appear that that was the case in this matter.

There is more to this than anti-abortion or pro-life, there are many aspects of this case not covered under those two issues. I think the legislature in FL should change the laws requiring a higher level than clear and convincing evidence and to err on the side of life when it is not clear.

 

[MissileMan]

MissileMan,

Numerous articles have been placed on this board already that discuss these issues. I posted one that discussed in depth the neurologists that disagree with the original assessment of PVS by the one doctor...and discussed what tests should have been done and have not been. I'm sure you will be able to find them with very little effort.

I was hoping someone could provide some concrete evidence that Judge Greer has mishandled this case by disallowing testimony, etc. All I have heard in that regard so far has been speculation and inuendo, e.g. your remark above that only one doctor came up with PVS.

 

[Gem]

Why would I try to prove that Greer had mishandled the case? I have never stated that I felt he did, in fact, just the opposite, I have in several places on this board stated that I think Greer did his job correctly.

Every appellate court and the federal court involved ruled that he followed the law to the letter. I have no problem with that, the numerous appellate court decisions ruling in favor of upholding his original findings demosntrate clearly to me that he handled the case professionally and appropriatly.

The medical expert who testified before Judge Greer that Terri Schiavo was PVS is a right-to-death activist, as I said before, you can verify that information in several of the articles I linked to in various threads here. There is nothing misleading about that fact. I did not state that only one doctor believed that Terri was PVS...many, many doctors believe this diagnosis. I will apologize if you misread my statement, I did not mean "the one doctor" as in the only doctor...but rather the "one doctor" meaning the one who testified in court before Greer that she was PVS...sorry for the misunderstanding.

As for Greer disallowing evidence...he did, and has. The nurses that wanted to testify about the things they saw, Terri's "alertness" Michael Schiavos "abuses," were dismissed by Greer as being too "incredulous" to be believed.

I think you are a bit confused, MissileMan...and therefore are attributing beliefs to me and others that we do not hold.

 

[Mr. P]

Why would I try to prove that Greer had mishandled the case? I have never stated that I felt he did, in fact, just the opposite, I have in several places on this board stated that I think Greer did his job correctly.

Every appellate court and the federal court involved ruled that he followed the law to the letter. I have no problem with that, the numerous appellate court decisions ruling in favor of upholding his original findings demosntrate clearly to me that he handled the case professionally and appropriatly.

The medical expert who testified before Judge Greer that Terri Schiavo was PVS is a right-to-death activist, as I said before, you can verify that information in several of the articles I linked to in various threads here. There is nothing misleading about that fact. I did not state that only one doctor believed that Terri was PVS...many, many doctors believe this diagnosis. I will apologize if you misread my statement, I did not mean "the one doctor" as in the only doctor...but rather the "one doctor" meaning the one who testified in court before Greer that she was PVS...sorry for the misunderstanding.

As for Greer disallowing evidence...he did, and has. The nurses that wanted to testify about the things they saw, Terri's "alertness" Michael Schiavos "abuses," were dismissed by Greer as being too "incredulous" to be believed.

I think you are a bit confused, MissileMan...and therefore are attributing beliefs to me and others that we do not hold.

What beliefs do you hold then Gem? I read your posts the same as MissileMan, and had the same thoughts. Clear it up for us.
Please...You know I have a high regard for your opinion.

 

[Gem]

Mr. P.,

So nice to know that you hold such a high level of respect for my opinion. It warms my heart....really....it does.

I'm a bit concerned for you though. I mean, obviously someone who values my thoughts and statements on this board as much as you claim to would have read at least some of my posts on this issue, there have been many...and would know that I have defended Greer, argued that I felt Terri should be allowed to die, while also arguing that many doctors disagree with the original diagnosis due to the lack of appropriate testing. I've posted links discussing why Greer did nothing wrong, as well as links to respected, board-certified neurologists who disagree with the diagnosis of PVS...you must have seen them...being such a big fan of mine and all...

Perhaps your reading comprehension isn't what it used to be, old friend?

 

[Mr. P]

Mr. P.,

So nice to know that you hold such a high level of respect for my opinion. It warms my heart....really....it does.

I'm a bit concerned for you though. I mean, obviously someone who values my thoughts and statements on this board as much as you claim to would have read at least some of my posts on this issue, there have been many...and would know that I have defended Greer, argued that I felt Terri should be allowed to die, while also arguing that many doctors disagree with the original diagnosis due to the lack of appropriate testing. I've posted links discussing why Greer did nothing wrong, as well as links to respected, board-certified neurologists who disagree with the diagnosis of PVS...you must have seen them...being such a big fan of mine and all...

Perhaps your reading comprehension isn't what it used to be, old friend?

Oh no..the comprehension is fine....So that brings me to my question. What are you arguing or are you arguing at all?

 

[dilloduck]

Oh no..the comprehension is fine....So that brings me to my question. What are you arguing or are you arguing at all?

Mr.P--many of us had made detailed arguments and links about why we oppose the way this case is being handled. READ. I would like to hear more about you defense of your position that everyone should just BUTT OUT.

 

[Mr. P]

Mr.P--many of us had made detailed arguments and links about why we oppose the way this case is being handled. READ. I would like to hear more about you defense of your position that everyone should just BUTT OUT.

First my post wasn't directed at you. Second as I told you last night my posts are out there YOU need to be the one who reads.

 

[dilloduck]

First my post wasn't directed at you. Second as I told you last night my posts are out there YOU need to be the one who reads.

Sorry mr. p-----you don't have the luxury of picking and choosing who responds to your post. If you have a personal question that is for Gem only I suggest using the PM function.

edit---and I took your advice and looked through a weeks worth of posts on this issue and all you said was the the government should butt out of this issue because it would be illegal to get involved.
I see no where that you have elaborated further so you are in no position to demand further explanation from anyone !