Who really has Terry's best interests ? Her Parents or her husband?

[drdon326]

I dont know why but I think the parents do.

[killbotfactory]

1. The courts have ruled again and again

That it was her wish not to go on living the way she is currently. Her parents just don't want to accept it.

[_TJ_]

136. Fill me in please!

How did they know this was her wish?

[Bunny]

2. That's quite a contradiction.

You don't know why, but you think the parents do? Well, why?

[drdon326]

14. I know it is...

he got a million dollars and ONLY THEN CLAIMED 'oh....she didnt want to live like this'.

He moved on years ago and I question his loyalties.


He could have gotten a divorce and turned the care over to the parents....he didnt.

He banned the parents from her room at different times.



I dunno.....I'm confused.

[The empressof all]

22. From what I understand

The money received by the husband was spent on care for Terri. The husband went on to nursing school and received an RN to provide better care for his wife.

His wife is dead. It is healthy that he moved on. What would you have him do? Many, many people move on after the death of a spouse should they be condemned as well?

I have to say that if my husband permitted my parents (or vice/versa) to come in with camera's and expose my condition to the world in the fashion that this birth family has done I would haunt them for the rest of eternity. This husband was protecting his wife's privacy and dignity in the face of irrational parents.

[Cha]

23. Maybe you could sort out something from

this transcript from Oct 2003 on the larry king show.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/27/lkl.00.html

[Quixote1818]

24. Myth, see my post below nt

[gollygee]

3. My husband knows me better than my parents

I would never want to be like that or put my husband in that position. I see her husband as knowing what she would want if she were able to think and talk.

[Lars39]

4. He is still her next of kin.

[Casandra]

5. Not about husband or parents

Terry's best interests were determined long ago by HER! Not up to us, her parents or her husband to make the decision. Decision already made by Terry before this even happened. Certainly her husband seems to be the one respecting that.

Let's get out of their personal business and tend to our own. Surely we each can find something internally, with our own families to fret over and leave this family alone in these darkest of times. Just my opinion

[mondo joe]

6. She CHOSE her husband. And her parents admit they would defy

her wishes even if they KNEW she wanted life support removed.

[Ladyhawk]

9. Really? I hadn't heard this. Where did you find this information?

If this is the case, they need to stay out of the way!

[mondo joe]

28. Right here -

*** Testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive . . . at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it. Throughout this painful and difficult trial, the family acknowledged that Theresa was in a diagnosed persistent vegetative state.***

http://floridahealthinfo.hsc.usf.edu/TheresaSchiavoFinalReport1December2003.pdf (p14)

[sandnsea]

50. This IS NOT Catholic

Every time I find out something more about these parents, it just makes me sicker. Death is part of life, "it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life". They are devaluing human life by keeping a dead body alive and devaluing the promise of Eternal Life by keeping Terri here instead of allowing her to pass. I don't care that the Church is on some sort of wacked out life crusade, this is wrong and would have been considered a sin in saner times.

[drdon326]

51. Good info......

its clear they love their daughter and i'm sure at the time they said that they were trying to express how much they love their daughter.

[Lindacooks]

118. Um, what?

It's not love when you want to keep a body alive just so you can sit by her side.

If they would have her limbs amputated and perform heart surgery on her when her brain is gone - that isn't love. That's selfishness. That's an inability to let go. That's a crime against her human dignity.

[drdon326]

21. I hadn't heard that either.

any info ?

[mondo joe]

30. Excerpt from 38 page report

http://floridahealthinfo.hsc.usf.edu/TheresaSchiavoFinalReport1December2003.pdf

From page 14:

***Testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive . . . at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it. Throughout this painful and difficult trial, the family acknowledged that Theresa was in a diagnosed persistent vegetative state. ***

[Pithlet]

7. I believe they think they have her best interests at heart.

But, I don't believe they really do any more than Michael. He is the one that has been caring for her all these years. And, they fully admitted that their daughter never let them know what her wishes would be. They stated they never talked about it. Plenty of people talk about things with their spouse that they wouldn't with parents. It's a different kind of relationship. I think that a spouse should come before a parent as a next of kin for that very reason.

[blm]

8. If my parents showed my brain-dead face all over the country I'd HATE THEM

for it. It would mean that THEIR wish to control my image for a rightwing cause was more important to them than my privacy and dignity.

NOONE would want to have their image used like that. NOONE.

[drdon326]

10. They only did that when her husband wanted to pull the plug.

.

[blm]

11. Would THEY want to stay alive like that? Most sane people would NOT

agree to being kept in that state for over a decade. She's not in a coma.

[ProgressiveConn]

13. Says you. nt

[blm]

65. Says me and 87% of the rest of the country, if the polls matter.

.

[Pithlet]

15. He wanted to pull the plug

Becaust that's what Terri wanted, according to him. And HE is her legal next of kin.

[ProgressiveConn]

12. I would.

I have no delusions of pride. If I was seriously brain damaged and my parents thought I was still alive I would want them to do everything they could to preserve that and I would do the same for them if I thought that is what they would want.

I think that unless she signed a living will or what not officially saying she wanted to be killed should she not have higher functions than her husband should be blocked from having her slowly starved to death.

[Pithlet]

17. Well, if you want to remove the law

that says spouses are legal next of kin, then you work hard to get that done. I thik you'll find that you'll face quite a bit of opposition. Despite whatever opinion they have on this case, most people think that a marriage is a legal as well as emotional bond, and would probably fight anyone that wants to weaken that bond.

You've decided for yourself that you wouldn't want the plug pulled. Shouldn't others get to make that decision for themselves?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProgressiveConn]

46. Yep they should and they can.

Its called a living will. If she wanted to be starved to death in the case of a major disability she could have said so. She didn't so it isn't her asking to be starved to death it is her husband murdering her.

[Pithlet]

49. Most people don't have living wills.

I think they should still be protected from the government forcing them to live as a vegetable. A spouses word should be enough. She DID say she didn't want to live that way. YOU are the one who has decided not to believe her spouse, who SHE chose to marry. A spouse that you do not know personally.

If this kind of thing ever happens to me or a family member of mine, I kindly hope that you and everyone else butt out.

[ProgressiveConn]

53. It can only be her fault that she didn't have one.

And even if she did and she wrote "I do not wish to be kept alive by un-natural means." It wouldn't even have an impact here. It would have to say that if she was in a serious accident where she could not speak for herself any longer that she wished for someone to help her die.

I'm cool with that no problem. I guess you should get out and get a living will if you want to be starved to death should you not be able to feed yourself any more. Otherwise yes if it comes up in conversation I will voice my opinion against you being starved to death.

[Pithlet]

55. Butt out.

You have no bussiness making that decision for me or anyone else, unless they're your spouse or family member that you are next of kin over.

The fact that anyone has neglected to get a living will does NOT mean that you or anyone else gets a say. Sorry.

[ProgressiveConn]

62. No you Butt out.

Stop trying to murder the woman through possibly the most slow and most painful way to die.

[Pithlet]

63. I'm not murdering anyone!

I'm supporting her husband as next of kin, whom she chose!

[mondo joe]

64. Painful? You REALLY don't know what you're talking about.

You should do some research on this and on hospice before you continue to spread disinformation.

[ProgressiveConn]

69. Maybe you should go a week or two without eating.

And see how painful it is.

[mondo joe]

76. I don't need to. The hospice process is well documented.

And there will be ample morphine as a precaution.

[ima_sinnic]

105. (biting my tongue to keep myself from calling you something)

you need to educate yourself my friend: No brain, no pain. I don't know how to say it any more clearly than that.

How can a brain-dead person feel "pain"?

HUH? can you answer that?
I didn't think so.

All IGNORANT sanctimonious holier-than-thou judgmental busybodies should just BUTT OUT of a matter that is between a husband, wife, and her doctors.

[mondo joe]

56. She was very young. But she DID make her wishes known.

Her chosen next-of-kin AND other witnesses testified to it.

[Horse with no Name]

117. 15 years ago

Living wills were almost unheard of.
Now it is mandatory that all patients over the age of 18 be informed of them so they can make that decision, but back when all this happened, they were a rarity.

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed this right in 1990 and 1997 stating "An individual has a constitutional right to request the withdrawal or withholding of medical treatment, even if doing so will result in the persons death" (Kaplan 3). Today, all 50 states authorize and use written advance medical directives in the form of Living Wills or medical power of attorneys. These allow for the withdrawal of extraordinary means that prolong life such as intravenous feedings, respirators, and artificial kidney machines, decided by a person prior to illness or injury. According to a 1991 Gallup poll, 75% of all Americans approve of living wills (Kaplan 3).

[Lindacooks]

120. That's ridiculous.

She DID say so.

And she is already dead - no EEG. Do you know what that means?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

124. if he is her spouse, then is he committing adultery?

Michael Schiavo, after spending over a million of Terri's rehab money on himself, has lived with another woman for 10 years, siring two children.

Who is his wife?

Does he get two?

If he was so concerned with Terri, why was rehabiliation stopped once Michael Schiavo received the huge rehabilition money for her in a lawsuit?

Not all spouses are loving and caring as some folks would hope.

Ask Laci Peterson who she would preferred to have making decisions of life or death for her.

[mondo joe]

127. When did he spend "over a million of Terri's rehab money on himself"?

You have no idea what you're talking about.

[mondo joe]

31. You want people to override your choice of a legal guardian?

Odd.

[ProgressiveConn]

33. Yep.

Just like I would fight for your children if you decided that feeding them was to much of a burden to continue.

[mondo joe]

38. That doesn't answer my question. You want someone to override YOUR

CHOICE for YOUR legal guardian?

Why appoint a legal guardian at all?

[ProgressiveConn]

40. If my legal guardian ever decides that feeding me was to much of a burden

to continue yes override it without a second thought.

[mondo joe]

42. I see - so you know what I would want better than the person I choose

to be my guardian?

Talk about bad boundaries.

[ProgressiveConn]

44. Glad to know you are argueing for someone chosen decades ago

should be able to starve you to death.

[mondo joe]

52. I'm arguing for the right of the individual to choose their guardian

But since you know better than anyone what's right for EVERYone, we don't need guardians. We can just consult with you.

[ProgressiveConn]

58. No you're not.

You're arguing for the right of a guardian to murder the person they are supposed to be looking out for.

[mondo joe]

60. I'm arguing to respect Terri's expressed wishes and HER choice

of the person to make medical decisions on her behalf.

And I'd argue to respect YOUR wishes on both those counts for yourself, even though you have no respect for anyone else's choice.

[girl gone mad]

47. Your twisting the facts.

He hasn't decided that it's too much of a burden to feed Terri. It was simply AGAINST HER WISHES to be forced live under such circumstances.

[ProgressiveConn]

48. No. She isn't being kept alive using un-natural means she is merely being

fed.

[mondo joe]

54. She has chemicals being pumped into her gut. It's as artificial

as any respirator or any other form of life support.

[ProgressiveConn]

59. Good to know that being fed is unnatural.

Here is hoping that you are never shown the illogical nature of your assertion.

[mondo joe]

61. By your rationale a respirator is natural breathing.

A machine breathing for you is no different than a machine eating for you.

[ProgressiveConn]

67. Good to know that I should have been starved to death because I couldn't

feed myself. My digestive system worked just fine but since it was impossible to get food from my mouth to my stomach I guess it was a bad thing that my parents didn't have me starved to death.

I guess we shouldn't be feeding babies since we know that feeding them is un-natural.

[mondo joe]

68. Funny how you ignore my argument is based on the CHOICE

of the individual.

You want to use a feeding tube, use it. You want to not use it, don't.

I am willing to respect your choices for yourself - I don't know why you can't extend that to others.

[ProgressiveConn]

71. All you need to do is prove that she didn't want to be fed should she

be unable to feed herself. Do so and you win the arguement and get me to never mention it again. However you can't do that because if you could there would have never been an issue about her husband's efforts to starve her to death.

[mondo joe]

74. It's already proven by her statments as testified to by her

next of kin and other witnesses.

[ProgressiveConn]

77. Please show me anything that says that she wants to be

euthanized should she be unable to feed herself.

[mondo joe]

79. Again, she expressed her wishes about being kept alive

on tubes and machines to multiple people.

It's not exactly an unusual position. Just the same, there are multiple witnesses who confirm her saying it.

[ProgressiveConn]

80. Let her husband feed her by hand.

There is nothing keeps her on the feeding machines other than efficiency. Her husband could come in and feed her liquids by hand three times a day every day.

[mondo joe]

83. Oh are you one of the specialists who examined her?

How thrilling to have you here - please tell us about the swallow test and how you determined she could be fed.

[ima_sinnic]

106. sheesh!! UNFUCKIN REAL!!

do tell how a brain-dead person can open her mouth to receive those liquids, and how she could swallow them.

I'm waiting.

Michael Schiavo has gone way beyond the call of duty in providing every kind of care and attempted therapy possible. You my friend are talkin out your you-know-what. You are completely ignorant of any real facts in this case.

But you know what? That doesn't even matter, because it's none of your frikkin business! It is between Michael, Terri, and her doctors.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

130. only hearsay

Only according to Terri's husband in name only did she allegedly state that she would not want to be kept alive by artificial means.

Further, the corroborating testimony to that was made by Michael Schiavo's sibling, and based on that sibling repeating what Michael told them, not based on hearing this straight from Terri Schiavo.

Only Michael Schiavo claims to have directly heard such statements from Terri.

They were young, I doubt she ever thought about whether he would have the power of life or death over her, most people don't think about that when they take marriage vows.

If they did, some folks might avoid some terrible marriages.

Let this be a lesson to the un-married - if you marry an abuser, he can beat you half way to death, and later deny you rehab, and put an end to your life.

[mondo joe]

132. You're wrong AGAIN. It's not only Michael but other witnesses as well.

And Michael is Terri's chosen next of kin, not some stranger on the street. The whole POINT is that he is empowered to make medical choices for her when she can't.

As to her feelings about marriage, your psychic hunch is irrelevant.

Funny how we're supposed to disregard her choice, her husband, the law, the doctors, but trust your mental telepathy.

[Horse with no Name]

123. Whether you like it or agree with it or not

Artificial tube feedings are considered life support.
She is also not being euthanized, they are withdrawing life support.
There is a huge difference.

[sandnsea]

57. Terminally brain damaged?

She has lost the most basic human reflex, sucking and swallowing. A fetus develops the ability to suck between 12-15 weeks. She is in nearly an embryonic state. And will continue to deteriorate. You would want to be kept hooked up to a feeding tube under those conditions?

[KayLaw]

16. Both

It's just such a tough situation and horrid for everyone (except posturing politicians) involved. I believe the parents just can't bear to lose their baby and the husband can't bear knowing a sad ember oh his once beautiful and spirited wife.

[Old Deuteronomy]

18. I think the hubby

knows what his wife wanted... and is working on that... I told my wife I would never want to be kept alive -- she said I better have it in writing because some ARSE would fight it just to do so now...

[molly]

98. Hubby?

has another illegal wifey and 2 children.

[drdon326]

99. MINO.....Married In Name Only

I think the courts should have re-evaluated his motives after he started a new family.

In addition only ONE judge decided this.

[Old Deuteronomy]

135. And?

That makes a difference how?

[Quixote1818]

19. PLEASE READ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AND LEARN!!!!!

I was trying to move away from this. Someone is really going to have to kick me now. Here is your answer!!!!!

The courts based their decision on what was best for Terri!!!

Why did Terri’s husband get to make the decision about whether she should live or die?

Michael Schiavo did not make the decision to discontinue life-prolonging measures for Terri.

As Terri's husband, Michael has been her guardian and her surrogate decision-maker. By 1998, though -- eight years after the trauma that produced Terri's situation -- Michael and Terri's parents disagreed over the proper course for her.

Rather than make the decision himself, Michael followed a procedure permitted by Florida courts by which a surrogate such as Michael can petition a court, asking the court to act as the ward's surrogate and determine what the ward would decide to do. Michael did this, and based on statements Terri made to him and others, he took the position that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures. The Schindlers took the position that Terri would continue life-prolonging measures. Under this procedure, the trial court becomes the surrogate decision-maker, and that is what happened in this case.

The trial court in this case held a trial on the dispute. Both sides were given opportunities to present their views and the evidence supporting those views. Afterwards, the trial court determined that, even applying the "clear and convincing evidence" standard -- the highest burden of proof used in civil cases -- the evidence showed that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures.

[KayLaw]

26. You are so right

That is the whole point, isn't it?

[drdon326]

29. Excellent post.

my only question is how many years ago was that and does the fact that his life has changed make any difference ?

i'm not fully clear how i feel.

[Quixote1818]

34. Read this whole thing

Here is where I got that from: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

[soothsayer]

81. Based on what he SAID terri said to him (not sure about the others)

what a mess. Maybe parents and hubby are after her money and could care less about her. Maybe they both love her. Maybe one side loves her and the other doesn't.

It's a mess.

[Cha]

20. Well, I think Michael does...

so do the courts..but tom the exterminator delay agrees with you.

[medeak]

25. If it's about dignity...it's her husband

not her parents.

[KharmaTrain]

27. This Is What Legal Marriage Is About

The day daddy turned over his girl to Mr. Schiavo, he also handed all legal rights (not that he had any since I would assume she married after the age of 18)...and according to most state laws, the husband has the fiduciary responsibility for the health and welfare of his partner and visa versa.

From what I've read, Terri had a will, but not a living will with a DNR or other orders that would have specified her treatment in the case (and who really thinks about this in their 20s or 30s) of being fully incapacitated. According to the law, and since her husband was specified as her benficiary and had written power of attorney, he had every right to act in her behalf and has.

Had he decided to pull the tube without a doctor signing off on this or ceased assets or went fishing on Christmas...or anything that a court could have found suspicious about his motives, they would have put restraining orders on the tube and examined the custody issue. That has never happened and allowing the parents and their proxies to win this case would be a disaster to any spouce, partner, child or loved one in assisting another in passing with dignity.

Somehow the wingnuts found the Schindlers and found another "Paula Jones puppy" here...someone they could grab their private grief and exploit it for their political and economic benefits. The ignorance expressed by even "qualified lawyers" in this case is mind boggling and the corporate media's distortion has turned a tragic situation into a macbre one.

[cornermouse]

35. Oh really?

Two different sources that Schiavo was offered $1,000,000 to walk away and didn't. How does that fit in with your premise?

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43259

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7150458

[drdon326]

37. It doesnt. I admit it.

I just reeeeally feel bad for the parents who have ZERO to say in the matter and they seem like truely loving parents.

[cornermouse]

45. I feel bad for the parents also.

The fact is that everyone and I do mean everyone has to face up to the loss of someone they love sooner or later. Sometimes they die quickly and sometimes they don't. The trick is to have the common sense to recognize when it is kinder to let them go. What you're seeing on the tv (Frist) is cruel to Terri Schiavo.

[fasttense]

36. This is none of our business.

This is a private family tragedy that a bunch of crooks are using to advance their careers. This is disgraceful and bizarre.

[DemExpat]

41. The parents may seem to have more love/interest in her welfare

but this to me comes from their understandable attachment to her physical body and inability to let go. To me this stems more from their own feelings than consideration of their daughter's wishes and state.

Whereas the husband to me seems more distant, but has, all along, had her best interests foremost.

:shrug:

DemEx

[Bettie]

43. Her Husband

Her husband would have known her wishes. Her parents may not have.

It is difficult to lose a child, but Terri has been gone for a long time, her body just doesn't realize it. She's not in a coma, she's in a persistent vegetative state.

This could also open up a nasty can of worms in terms of marriage.


For example: I don't have my medical papers done and I get into a horrible accident. I am in a PVS. My husband, who knows that I wouldn't like to live like that, decides to discontinue tube feeding and life support. However, my father (who I have not spoken to in years) decides that it is against his principles to allow me to die. Suddenly, this case is precedent...my husband no longer can make that decision.

Plus, it seems to say that if you don't like the ruling of the courts, just go to your congressman, they will make a brand new law up to cover whatever you need it to!

The people who are in charge of our country are frightening right now.

[Riding this Donkey]

72. Terri was not estranged from her parents, in fact Michael

only became estranged with them after the settlement.

[gollygee]

78. I'm not estranged from my parents

but I haven't discussed this kind of thing with them (I will soon!!) I have discussed it with my husband.

Spouses have a different relationship than parents have with their adult children. These are the kinds of discussions we have with our partners, not our parents.

[Toucano]

66. Irrelevent.

The husband is the next of kin. It's his legal and ethical responsibility to make the decision.

If that weren't the case, however, I see the parents as serving their own self-interests. The mother always talks about HERSELF and how SHE feels. The parents project their feelings onto the blank slate that is Terri's "mind".

[Yupster]

113. I just have trouble giving him rights because he's married

when in my opinion he's not.

When you move in with another woman, have two kids with her, I have a tough time listening while you try to assert your rights as someone else's husband.

It's a difficult case for me because I sure wouldn't want to live as she is living.

On the other hand, I can't believe we'd starve people to death either.

I would want a shot so I would go, quickly, quietly in some dignity, not starving and dehydrating to death over days or even weeks.

Terrible case.

[mondo joe]

121. It's not up to you to give him the right. Terri did already.

And I think you have a mistaken impression of what happens when the feeding tube is removed.

You should look into hospice and what a painless and peaceful process it can be.

[Toucano]

125. This is so amazing.

You're not in a position of "giving him rights".

It's the LAW that has given him his rights. Over and over, court after court, judgement after judgement.

What he's done, who he's fucked - also IRRELEVENT. Since when has ANY husband's non-criminal behavior toward his wife been cause to automatically vacate his rights and responsibilities? Marriages don't become nullified simply because one partner has sex outside the marriage.

It's not a difficult case at all, really. People are laboring far too intently over this case because they keep being distracted by IRRELEVENT issues.

The fundamental problem is people think about what THEY would want. What YOU would want is IRRELEVENT! For you see, you have a brain that isn't jello.

Literally every person I've encountered who has a problem with case says something like "I wouldn't want to STARVE!" But Terri isn't going to starve. She doesn't get cravings between lunch and dinner. People have to stop projecting THEIR feelings onto the shell that was Terri Schiavo.

When a person is dying, the body shuts down the need for nourishment. It's a fundamental part of the process of dying. It isn't painful. She won't be kept awake by hunger pains like 20% of the children in America do each night.

[imenja]

70. I'm not comfortable making such judgments

In fact, my views of the issue don't revolve around whether or not I think her feeding tube should have been withdrawn. Rather, I see this as a privacy issue--that we as individuals have a right to make these choices without interference from state or federal legislatures. The court decided Terry's husband best represented her wishes. That was adjudicated through seven years of law suits. I can only assume they judged correctly.

[hollywood926]

73. Husbands still own their wives in this country

Didn't you know that? Even though they were married for all of 5 years before her incident, he owns her and what he says goes.

He wanted to remarry, but didn't want a divorce because he wouldn't get her life insurance. But he loves her far more than the two people who brought her into this world.

:eyes:

[mondo joe]

75. If the situation were reversed it would be her choice. Please stop lying.

The right of next of kin is mutual between spouses.

[molly]

90. Please stop lying?

isn't this what you said to me in another thread?

[mondo joe]

93. Yes, and again, please stop lying.

[molly]

95. Do you only say this to women?

[mondo joe]

109. I have no idea what any poster's gender is.

I suggest you document your accusations.

[Yupster]

115. But what if the husband moved out on Terri,

had two kids with another woman, and then Terri won the lottery.

Now the husband comes back claiming half the prize money as the spouse.

I bet the prevailing opinion on DU wouldn't be that he was the legal spouse and entitled to the money in that case.

I bet the prevailing opinion would be that he gave up his marriage rights when he moved in with another and had two kids.

That's a tough hurdle for me to get over.

[mondo joe]

126. He didn't move out. She's HOSPITALIZED.

And it's a VERY unusual circumstance.

But if I were in Terri's position I'd want my spouse to do the same thing: fulfill his obligation to me AND find love and support in his own life.

[soothsayer]

82. Ah! A like-minded person! That "husband owns wife thing" strikes

me so funny to see on DU! Seems so very right wing and biblical, but it's all over the place here.

[mondo joe]

84. And the fact that if positions were reversed SHE would be the decision

maker doesn't even put a dent in that for you, huh?

[Pithlet]

110. Come on!

DUers have been using words like "Spouse" and "Next of kin". You know damn well that no one arguing the case thinks that men own their wives. You're just being disingenuous. Can't argue your case, so you attempt to paint those that disagree with you as misogynist idiots? Pretty lame.

Man. First I'm a murderer, according to some of the anti-choicers regarding the Schiavo case. Now I'm against equal rights for women. Utterly ridiculous.

[Cha]

85. I don't know where you're getting your

"facts" from but this is from a transcript on the larry king show on Oct 2003..
SNIPS`
"FELOS: From people in the public. Letters, e-mails, telephone calls. He has nothing to gain. He's not going to receive a penny upon Terri's death.

KING: No insurance here?

SCHIAVO: There's no money. There's no insurance. There's probably about $50, 000 left in her estate. I will not receive a penny from this. Now, it's funny about that, because you know, back about two years, the Schindlers offered me $700,000 to walk away.

KING: They have that kind of money?

SCHIAVO: They get money from the right-wing activists. The right wing -- the right-to-life groups.

KING: The right-to-life group was willing to pay you $700,000 to walk away?"

More at..
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/27/lkl.00.html

[gollygee]

86. It isn't a case of owning, and if it were I'd think you'd be equally

outraged by the thought of her parents owning her.

She *chose* her husband to be her husband. He is the person with whom she would have discussed this kind of thing. He's the person she was closest to and he is in the best position to know what she'd want.

Why are you suprised he'd have another relationship at some point during the decade or so she's been unable to communicate?

[Coexist]

87. If anyone dared to keep me, with a liquid cortex

on a machine for 15 years so they didn't have to feel guilt at the slow manner of my final passing - when I was finally allowed the dignity of death, I would haunt them for the remainder of their lives. Mercilessly.

Michael Schiavo tried to help his wife for 5 years. When he finally realized it was hopeless, he sought to help her end her suffering.

Does quality of life mean nothing? Would any of you trade places with Terry?

[molly]

91. He should have divorced her then

he's been given that option over and over and over. What are his motives?

[mondo joe]

92. His motive is to carry out her wishes rather than abandon her to scum

who admit they don't give a fuck about her wishes.

[gollygee]

94. To do what his wife would want?

to keep her from being continually left in this perpetual awful state she's in?

[Coexist]

97. I would have to say his motives are

respect for the woman his wife was, and not what she had become. His wife's parents have stated that they would have all of her limbs removed if they became gangrenous, and allow open-heart surgery on her remaining body, if necessary. That is not a healthy attitude to have about your child - let them become a non-functioning stump rather than deal with their passing. I have three children and would never degrade the vibrant lives they live to that horror.

It was when he Mr. Schiavo realized their intent "life at any cost" that point that he began to fight for the remaining shreds of her dignity. It is not his desire to be "rid of her". He could have done that years ago. It is his desire to end her suffering.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/columnists/orl-locmiket25022505feb25.story

[molly]

89. You said it best!

he started to try to have her feeding tube removed when there was still money left from the lawsuit.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

133. He used up all her funds, not on her but himself

and now he does not want her to have any therapy, although
it has been offered for free.

Her family begged to be allowed to feed her jello, nurses testified that Terri could eat, but Schiavo refused to allow her to be fed.

Family was banned from her room for trying to feed her.

Maybe he doesn't want her to talk?

And why does he want to cremate her?

[mondo joe]

137. This is absolutely false.

[Pithlet]

111. I'll just copy and paste

my response to someone else making your claim:

DUers have been using words like "Spouse" and "Next of kin". You know damn well that no one arguing the case thinks that men own their wives. You're just being disingenuous. Can't argue your case, so you attempt to paint those that disagree with you as misogynist idiots? Pretty lame.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

131. Exactly

It is all about someone being owned by another.
Exactly.

Why should he have the right to kill her?

Where is her right to have rehabilitation?

I guess those that want to kill Terri should thank themselves for aligning themselves with the Florida republican legislators who origionally modified the law to say that tube feeding was an artificial means of life support.

Some of these same politicians have ties to hospices and insurance companies.

You see, after the insurance runs out, these folks become useless to the system, and have to be eliminated.

I have huge doubts about the spouse.

[pacifictiger]

88. Hard to know

But I just saw her mother interviewed and formed the opinion that she wants to keep Terry alive because, without Terry, she wouldn't know what to do with her own life. Seems to me another case of a parent projecting their life onto their child and vicariously living through them. SICK!

Her words were "we laugh together, we cry together, we talk together. She is my life. Please save my little girl."
Only a person out of touch with reality would speak of talking with her braindead daughter!!

[kentuck]

96. Nobody knows....

Why can't they come to a consensus? Why can't the husband agree with the parents" Why can't the parents agree with the husband? Can they not communicate with each other to come to a decision about what is the best thing to do and what the patient would have wanted? Why are they at loggerheads?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

100. The husband certainly seems to.

My wife and I recently made out living wills just to prevent such a miserable, ghoulish, thing happening. She comes from a strong Catholic family and it's not beyond possibility that they could intervene just as this woman's is, despite her desire to die in dignity.

I find it utterly unimanigable that there are people here who wish to prolong a life that is no more than a plant being watered and fertilized for years.

It's grotesque.

[the_spectator]

101. I'm with you but - and also ...

Between her parents and her husband, I'd vote for her parents, hands down. However, I am pretty well convinced she is basically brain dead at this point. Her parents may love her deeply, but they are in denial about her state.

But that husband! He is an overgrown neanderthal with a history of threatening behavior. He took up with another women IMMEDIATELY when Terri's lights went out. I'll be interested to see if, after Terri's body passes on, he will get his wish and see her quickly cremated, so that no autopsy can be done. I'm ready to believe that yes, he was physically abusing her, and this was part of, if not the whole reason, she ended up they way she did.

And to the "the courts have spoken" people. There is often evidence that cannot be admitted in court for valid legal reasons that would nevertheless convince any reasonable person of one thing or another.

That being said, the brain scans convince me, Terri "is" already dead. This would not be such a huge issue if her husband wasn't such a transparent villain.

[crispini]

103. He didn't "take up with another woman IMMEDIATELY"

He lived with HER PARENTS for TWO YEARS while he was trying therapies and so on:

February 1990… Terri suffers cardiac arrest and a severe loss of oxygen to her brain
May 1990… Terri leaves hospital and is brought to a rehabiliation center for aggressive therapy
July 1990… Terri is brought to the home where her husband and parents live; after a few weeks, she is brought back to the rehabilitation center
November 1990… Terri is taken to California for experimental therapies
January 1991… Terri is returned to Florida and placed at a rehabilitation center in Brandon
July 1991… Terri is transfered to a skilled nursing facility where she receives aggressive physical therapy and speech therapy
May 1992… Michael and the Schindlers stop living together

more...
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

[Corgigal]

114. 8 months later a nice pay day

My family got a nice settlement years ago. I know how this game gets played. No one knows how much love a family has until someone is up for money. Moving out, well of course. His attorney must have clued him in that they were getting close. Our's did.



May 1992… Michael and the Schindlers stop living together

January 1993… Michael recovers $1 million settlement for medical malpractice claim involving Terri's care

[mondo joe]

104. Please, please, please stop repeating lies about Michael Schiavo.

It's quite appalling.

[the_spectator]

107. "immediately" may have been too strong a word but

alllegedly, Michael Schiavo began relations with another woman (not the one he's with now) in late 1991. That is, admittedly, 1 and a half years after the incident that left Terri incapacitated.

Look, I'm not arguing that her life support should not be pulled. I just think that the only reason this HAS become such a cause celebre is because Michael Schiavo is an undeniably unsavory character, for many reasons. Don't ignore this. This guy cannot become the poster-child for anyone, no matter how strongly they support the right to die / spousal rights, what have you.

[mondo joe]

108. Michael Schiavo provided EXTRAORDINARY care for Terri

And that is undisputed by any court, and by the Guardian ad Litem.

There is nothing unsavory to be said about the man. Rather than abandoning Terri to her parents who have ADMITTED they would defy her wishes, he had held out to carry out his final responsibility to his wife.

[Horse with no Name]

122. What are you going to autopsy?

A woman who has been in a persistant vegetative state for over 15 years on feeding tubes will have organ damage.
What exactly are you looking for?

[Walt Starr]

102. Michale Shiavo is a HERO and her parents are GHOULISH MONSTERS

Her parents have admitted that if they knew her wishes, I I sincerely believe they lied when they said they did not know her wishes, they would still fight to keep her animated corpse alive.

[Yupster]

112. Since the husband has two kids

with another woman while he's married to Terri, I have trouble taking his views seriously.

Why doesn't he just divorce her?

[mondo joe]

116. Because that would mean abandoning her to 2 people who ADMIT

they would defy her wishes.

He is carrying out his final obligation to her.

[AuntPatsy]

119. Having experienced this very issue, The Parents are the Selfish Ones NT

[Hippo_Tron]

128. Who gives a shit?

Not me

[Quixote1818]

129. All this is OUT of Michaels hands now! Michael waved his authority

to the courts at the very beginning of all this. He decided to let the courts decide what was in Terri's best interest. Six different courts have decided Michaels testimony was more convincing than the parents. EVEN if Michael wanted to grant authority to the parents he could NOT.

[Quixote1818]

134. Easy Answer!!!!! Tom DeLay

:silly:

[ljm2002]

138. Talk about buying in on the spin

The thing is, none of us has the ability to make that call. We can't see into the hearts of her husband or her parents. Fortunately, we don't have to. That's why there are laws and court systems, to sort cases like this out when the interested parties cannot agree.

The courts have come down on the side of Terri's husband time after time. They have seen and considered the evidence in great detail, and they have concluded that (a) she is in a persistent vegetative state; (b) there is no chance of recovery (the missing cerebral cortex cannot be regenerated); and (c) she would not have wanted to be kept alive in such a state by artificial means.

Now, courts are not always correct. But public opinion molded by shrill right wing fundamentalist hysterics is even less likely to come to a correct conclusion.

What you or I think of the parties in question or their motives is simply a moot point. It does not matter. What matters in this case at this time is that our Congress arbitrarily undercutting the state of Florida's court system. Come to think of it, that's just what the Supreme Court did in 2000. Is there some reason the attack on states' rights in the 21st Century begins in Florida? Inquiring minds want to know...