Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder (Village Voice)

[barb162]

Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder
Her crime was being disabled, voiceless, and at the disposal of our media

by Nat Hentoff
March 29th, 2005 10:59

For all the world to see, a 41-year-old woman, who has committed no crime, will die of dehydration and starvation in the longest public execution in American history.

snip

Among many other violations of her due process rights, Terri Schiavo has never been allowed by the primary judge in her case—Florida Circuit Judge George Greer, whose conclusions have been robotically upheld by all the courts above him—to have her own lawyer represent her.

snip

While lawyers and judges have engaged in a minuet of death, the American Civil Liberties Union, which would be passionately criticizing state court decisions and demanding due process if Terri were a convict on death row, has shamefully served as co-counsel for her husband, Michael Schiavo, in his insistent desire to have her die.

Months ago, in discussing this case with ACLU executive director Anthony Romero, and later reading ACLU statements, I saw no sign that this bastion of the Bill of Rights has ever examined the facts concerning the egregious conflicts of interest of her husband and guardian Michael Schiavo, who has been living with another woman for years, with whom he has two children, and has violated a long list of his legal responsibilities as her guardian, some of them directly preventing her chances for improvement. Judge Greer has ignored all of them.

snip

Copyright © 2005 Village Voice Media, Inc., 36 Cooper Square, New York, NY 10003 The Village Voice and Voice are registered trademarks. All rights reserved. View our privacy policy.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0513,hentoff,62489,6.html

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Everyone on the "disability" bandwagon!

[Warpy]

2. Oh, please

The only reason she didn't die 15 years ago is that her body was kept artificially and technically alive through force feeding.

Hentoff needs to get a grip and an educatiion.

[hinachan]

16. No, YOU need the education

There are many people who can't eat, for various medical reasons, yet they aren't brain-dead.

You're mistaking the feeding tube for life support (such as a respirator). A feeding tube is used in many patients, but that doesn't mean they're brain-dead. People with oral cancer, for instance, can often be fitted with a feeding tube, but that's not life support--that's simply feeding!

Hell, Christopher Reeve would've died 15 years ago, if somebody would have just kept food out of his reach...after all, he wasn't capable of feeding himself, either!

[slackmaster]

19. The difference is Christopher Reeve wanted to live

Courts have ruled repeatedly and consistently that Terri Schiavo would not want to live in her present condition.

Keeping her alive is cruel and against her wishes.

[barb162]

24. she didn't write her wishes out

[slackmaster]

27. That's correct

And the courts have ruled repeatedly that the testimony of her husband and of several other people who knew her well is sufficient evidence of her wishes as expressed by her husband.

[Discord]

63. THREE witnesses testified under oath about a specific

occasion where Terri stated she would never want to live under these conditions.

PLEASE>>> Turn off FAUX, put down the remote, and go learn the facts, and not post other peoples OPINIONS and state them like they are facts.

[hinachan]

36. They've ruled, but haven't proven anything.

<<Courts have ruled repeatedly and consistently that Terri Schiavo would not want to live in her present condition.>>

A lot of evidence was not allowed in these court proceedings, so you have absolutely no proof of this. There is NO written document proving this.

And you still won't face the very real fact that Michael never told ANYONE that Terri "wouldn't have wanted to live", until AFTER he won a huge malpractice suit!

[Lindacooks]

39. Actually, court rulings become fact.

That's the rule of law in America. If you don't like it, work to change the law. As the law now stands, what she wanted has been proven.

[slackmaster]

43. The judiciary is the system we have for solving this kind of dispute

A lot of evidence was not allowed in these court proceedings...

Do you think that is unusual?

Have you ever participated in or witnessed a real court proceeding?

...you have absolutely no proof of this. There is NO written document proving this.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but the courts' decisions ARE written documents establishing the fact of Mrs. Schiavo's wishes. They're the best we have and can ever have.

And you still won't face the very real fact that Michael never told ANYONE that Terri "wouldn't have wanted to live", until AFTER he won a huge malpractice suit!

You have absolutely no proof of this. There is NO written document proving this.

BTW - Here is a link to a timeline that has links to all of the court decisions that have been made in this matter up to March 23. There is some deep and thoughtful commentary in many of them. I encourage anyone who is even slightly interested to check this out:

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

[Discord]

64. Could you please link the specific court document

in this case which support YOUR claims?

[endarkenment]

21. Yes there are people who can't eat but are not 'brain dead'

but that does not address the case of people who are effectively 'brain dead' and are on life support, such as in the case at hand.

In either case such a person has the right to terminate life support.

When the person has no capacity to communicate, a living will is considered pretty much the last word, as long as the document is legal and all the prerequisite conditions in the document are met. When unforunately no such document exists, as in the case at hand, other actions have to be taken to decide what the appropriate course of action is. That has been done in this case to the letter and ad nauseum. Stop already. Terri ceased to exist as a sentient human being a long time ago. Let her die in peace.

As for your other point, I have heard this conterfeit meme several times now: a feeding tube is not 'life support' a respirator is 'life support'. On what basis are you making this distinction? Defend this bogosity or stop spreading it. I see no valid distinction, remove either artifical device and the patient dies, ergo they are both 'supporting life'.

Oh, I know, suffocation is humane but starvation is inhumane, is that it?

[hinachan]

40. Clearing up misconceptions

<<When unforunately no such document exists, as in the case at hand, other actions have to be taken to decide what the appropriate course of action is. That has been done in this case to the letter and ad nauseum.>>

No, it hasn't. How many times do you have to be told, that Michael NEVER claimed Terri wouldn't want to live, until AFTER he won a great deal of money in a malpractice suit? Quit ignoring this very important fact, all of you!

<<Terri ceased to exist as a sentient human being a long time ago. Let her die in peace.>>

So your definition of "peace" involves getting morphine suppositories shoved up the ass, does it? Talk about dying with dignity! ;)

<<As for your other point, I have heard this conterfeit meme several times now: a feeding tube is not 'life support' a respirator is 'life support'. On what basis are you making this distinction?>>

"Life support" involves supporting basic involuntary functions (heartbeat, breathing, kidney function, etc.). Eating is a necessary function, too, but it's something voluntary that we control. In other words, one might need assistance with eating and/or drinking, but that doesn't mean they're on life support. I've had food poisoning, and couldn't keep anything down; I was hooked up to an IV replacing my fluids, but that's NOT life support.

<<Oh, I know, suffocation is humane but starvation is inhumane, is that it?>>

Unlike most of the people on this board spouting bullshit opinions (including you), I've had relatives who really were PVS patients, secondary to massive strokes, so I can answer your smart-ass question with actual facts.

Unplugging a respirator causes death within a short time; a person whose brain is so dead that they can't even breathe passes quietly and painlessly; I've sat at the bedside of someone who died this way, and the only person feeling pain was me. Dehydration and starvation, as evidenced by Terri's case, take a lot longer to kill a person. Terri may be profoundly brain-damaged, but she clearly responds to stimuli; she's being given morphine for a reason. (And no, not because it's to "please her family", as one doctor said on TV last night in a pathetic attempt to cover his ass.)

IMHO, even those who wish to die should be given a lethal injection, because it would ensure that no pain would be felt by the patient.

[Discord]

65. I am STILL waiting for you to post ANY factual information.

Please. If you have FACTUAL information please feel free to post it and I will give your OPINION due consideration.

You are merely parroting the OPINIONS of others who likewise have no legal or legitimate proof of their OUTRAGEOUS and POLITICLY MOTIVATED claims.

[ultraist]

41. Well said endarkenment!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[RuleofLaw]

37. Education time:

"You're mistaking the feeding tube for life support (such as a respirator). A feeding tube is used in many patients, but that doesn't mean they're brain-dead. People with oral cancer, for instance, can often be fitted with a feeding tube, but that's not life support--that's simply feeding!"

Now, before you claim that other people are mistaken, please be sure that you are correct. (Youre not).

If you want to know the legal implications of the Schiavo case I can strongly encourage you to visit abstractappeal.com. A legal blog hosted by Matt Conigliaro, an attorney with a major lawfirm in Tampa, Florida:

This is the law in Florida:

Terri is given food and water through tubes. Is disconnecting a feeding tube the same as ending life support?

Yes, under Florida law, which governs the ability of each person to determine, or to appoint someone to determine, whether each of us should receive what the Legislature terms "life-prolonging medical procedures." The Legislature has explained:
The Legislature recognizes that for some the administration of life-prolonging medical procedures may result in only a precarious and burdensome existence. In order to ensure that the rights and intentions of a person may be respected even after he or she is no longer able to participate actively in decisions concerning himself or herself, and to encourage communication among such patient, his or her family, and his or her physician, the Legislature declares that the laws of this state recognize the right of a competent adult to make an advance directive instructing his or her physician to provide, withhold, or withdraw life-prolonging procedures, or to designate another to make the treatment decision for him or her in the event that such person should become incapacitated and unable to personally direct his or her medical care.

§ 765.102(3), Florida Statutes.

The Legislature has also defined what is a "life-prolonging procedure":

"Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous vital function. The term does not include the administration of medication or performance of medical procedure, when such medication or procedure is deemed necessary to provide comfort care or to alleviate pain.

§ 765.101(10), Florida Statutes (2004).

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html#qanda

[ultraist]

49. Yes, legally and logically, a feeding tube is life support

Administering H20/nutrition via medical technology is no different than administering oxygen via medical technology.

After 15 years of no improvement, being on life support, a nearly flat EEG, and a missing cerebral cortex, there can be only one reason people are so adamantly opposed to carrying out this woman's wishes: to push their prolife agenda and gain support to legislate their religious beliefs.

It is despicable that they are using this woman's body and end of life process as an opportunity to force their religious beliefs into our laws and have massive press/tv coverage. Shameless opportunists.

[mmonk]

3. Court appointed attorney?

[democracyindanger]

4. Nat Hentoff: Anti-choice hack.

[ultraist]

48. Yes, Hentoff is an anti choice hack. Antichoicers have created this circus

Antichoice to make end of life decisions about our own bodies and antichoice to make reproductive decisions about our own bodies.

excerpts
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0513,lerner,62490,6.html

The Schiavo Circus
The Brothers Bush turn flips—no net!—for right-to-lifers

by Sharon Lerner
March 29th, 2005 11:43 AM write to us

Have a family dilemma? No worries. The Bush brothers are on the way! As the parents of Terri Schiavo will tell you, George and Jeb will do anything to resolve your wrenching personal crisis. These guys will leap over state courts in a single bound, tromp with their alligator boots on a woman's wishes for her own death, and shred a couple hundred years of governing precedent as if it were written on that old, crumbly Constitution stock—as long as it serves their political purposes. Or as long as they think it does.

This personal tragedy might have been just that, if Jeb hadn't latched on to it, using every power of his office—and then some—in an attempt to get what he wanted. Although state courts had repeatedly agreed that her tube could be removed, the Florida governor ordered it reinserted in 2003. Then he appointed a physician and lawyer to be Schiavo's guardian; after reviewing the case, the guardian found that Schiavo was in fact in a persistent vegetative state and that the courts had done their jobs. Frustrated, Jeb joined with Schiavo's parents in taking the remarkable step of asking Congress to transfer their case to federal court.

Cue the all-out culture war.

Suddenly, Terri Schiavo was on her way to being the great political issue that would excite the pro-life base, as a Republican memo floating around Washington recently put it. The case would pluck the same nerves fired by the anti-abortion movement—but without ever mentioning the tricky A-word. Her death, and the macabre fight to stop it, would be the new partial-birth debate, only more heartrending. Or so religious conservatives believed.

Soon George was cutting his vacation short to show his concern (a first for the president). Terri's parents were off to see the first of three federal judges. And Jeb was trying to get custody of Schiavo transferred to the state of Florida after finding an expert who finally told him what he wanted to hear: that Schiavo may not really be in a persistent vegetative state. George Bush's change of heart should resolve any doubt that, at least on the president's part, the Terri Schiavo showdown has been a matter of politics rather than principle. While the religious conservatives pushing to "save" Schiavo insisted that she wasn't in a persistent vegetative state and had a chance of improving, most want a person in her condition kept alive no matter the prognosis. "Her worth in God's eyes makes her physical condition truly irrelevant," as the Focus on the Family website put it. The connection between a woman with no cognitive function and other people's fetuses and embryos isn't lost on Operation Rescue, the National Right to Life Committee, the Pro-Life Action League, and the like, which have shifted their single-minded obsessiveness from abortion to Schiavo.
con't

[ixion]

5. this, from the Village Voice?

*sigh*

:eyes:

[jonnyblitz]

45. it's Nat Hentoff though.

a long story I am too lazy to get into.

[Demit]

6. She was represented by a Guardian ad Litem, appointed by the court

to make an evaluation independent of both sides. Hentoff is an ass.

[barb162]

12. the first GAL was tossed by Greer for "bias" after M. Schiavo filed a

complaint against the first one. The first GAL recommended that a permanent GAL be appointed and of course that was never done.
The second GAL was on the job for about a month around 12/2003 and his (Jay Wolfson) recs were not followed. Out of the whole 15 years I think she has only been "represented" by a GAL for a few months.
In my county there is a public guardian system so what was going on in Florida in all seems very strange to me.

[K-W]

32. That isnt true.

The first Guardian completed his task and applied to either get more power or to be dismissed, and was desmissed. The judge never desmissed him for bias, but Michael did present evidence of bias showing that the guardian ignored evidence that disagreed with his conclusions about Michael's motives.

What part of Wolfson's report wasn't followed. I read it and it backed Greer up pretty well.

[barb162]

50. points 3 through 7 as noted below

"3. The GAL will select competent, neutral, clinical specialists to make a formal determination about the feasibility and value of swallowing tests and therapy for Theresa. The specialists' identities will be kept confidential from the public. The specialists' determination will have value to the process of gaining a common and agreed-upon understanding among the parties.

4. The GAL will select competent, neutral, clinical specialists to conduct appropriate examinations and tests to make a formal determination about neurological capacity and prognosis. The specialists' identities will be kept confidential from the public. The specialists' determination will have value to the process of gaining a common and agreed-upon understanding among the parties.

5. The GAL should be permitted and authorized to move forward with a plan, designed to gain the data regarding swallowing tests/therapy and neurological capacity in a manner consistent with items 3 and 4, above, with and through the advice and input of the parties' counsels and the Court.

6. The parties agree in principle to establish in advance, parameters for their respective actions based upon the outcomes of the examinations and tests. These parameters will be developed, through the auspices of the GAL, within 10 days of the presentation of this report to the Governor, and said parameters, agreed upon by the parties, shall serve as the predicate for proceeding with the initiation of the testing and examination.

7. The successful recruitment and deployment of the clinical experts to perform the exams will be under the direction, supervision and discretion of the GAL, with advisement proffered to the attorneys for each of the parties."
------------
These points above I considered important, not that the others weren't but they were objected to by M. Schiavo's attorney and were never done. The GAL tried to get the parties to agree to these points; the Schindlers agreed.

[Demit]

33. It is my understanding that a GAL is appointed for the duration of

whatever matter is at trial--a guardian during the period of litigation. Terri Schiavo didn't need a guardian for the other times because her husband is her legal guardian. Perhaps orphans or people with no relatives need a permanent public guardian. Wolfson had pretty positive things to say about Michael Schiavo's care of Terri in his evaluation presented to the court.

[moobu2]

42. In Florida that isnt true

It's up to the judge whether or not to appoint a legal guardian (GAL).

Richard Pearse, the first guardian didn't disclose that he had the opinion at the time that feeding tubes should never be withdrawn and he also made several factual errors in his report. In the end, Pearse himself asked to be given more powers, or that he be dismissed. Pearse was dismissed.

Richard Pearse later gave an interview where he said he completely changed his position and thought Terri's feeding tube should be removed.

[Demit]

52. Michael Schiavo was appointed Terri's legal guardian in 1990.

A Guardian Ad Litem is a different thing. Guardian Ad Litem literally means "guardian for the suit", and reports to the judge in matters pertaining to the suit.

[GOPFighter]

7. Nat, Nat

She's been this way 15 YEARS, do you think ANYONE in the frickin' world would WANT to be kept alive in that condition? It's inconceivable that anyone would want to be a burden on their husband, parents, the hospice, and society forever. She's 41. She could live 41 more years like this. Have you no compassion?

[barb162]

15. I understand your point BUT have her civil rights been

violated? A judge has based this on hearsay evidence. I saw M. Schiavo on Larry King Live about 10 or so days ago say "We don't know what Terri wants. This is what we want." I think a permanent GAL should have been appointed in this case.

[slackmaster]

22. Not just "A" judge, case has been in court almost two dozen times

With the same result every single time: Clear and compelling evidence that she would not have wanted to be kept alive in the manner she has been kept alive.

[barb162]

28. or are the courts just saying they don't have jurisdiction...

that probate/guardianship, etc., are state /local issues, not federal issues. I don't know as I have not read every single appeal.

[slackmaster]

31. I'm talking about the state courts

Federal courts have no jurisdiction. It didn't get to federal court until Congress passed that silly bill over the weekend of 3/19-3/20.

When there is no written expression of the patient's will the matter is best handled by the family.

If there is no family or the family is in dispute, state court is the proper venue. It's been decided there, repeatedly.

Terri Schiavo officially wants to die. If you think the courts got it wrong, then work on changing the law or changing the courts.

[barb162]

61. I think the state courts are ruling on procedure, not facts of the case

I think today or late yesterday, the Schindler side did an appeal based on request for a review of the facts of the case.

[Discord]

66. No they have SUPPORTED the ORIGINAL rulings

on a matter of procedure.
Because there was no legal basis for the case being brought to federal courts.
It has been reviewed many times by state courts, and in order to appeal, you need to have NEW evidence that would have had a direct impact on the case to refute its outcome. The Schindlers have failed repeatedly to provide any new evidence that would have changed the original ruling. The original rulings we done after weighing all the evidence presented by both sides in the case. They upheld the rule of law, and ruled accordingly.

Judges are NOT allowed to rule based on their beliefs or emotions, as the fundie right wing would rather they do and throw written law out the window.

Courts are impartial, unlike the parties involved, and the many sudden medical and legal pundits who have sprung up on every show, blog, and forum across the country, who have their opinions on the case based on their beliefs.

[slackmaster]

62. Please read and learn

I don't know as I have not read every single appeal.

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

It's all there in 1s and 0s.

[hinachan]

26. I think I'm going to puke

<<She's been this way 15 YEARS, do you think ANYONE in the frickin' world would WANT to be kept alive in that condition? It's inconceivable that anyone would want to be a burden on their husband, parents, the hospice, and society forever.>>

She's not a BURDEN! She's a human being, for God's sake!! Just because she can't work and pay taxes so you can have a nice, smooth road to drive on doesn't mean she's no longer human. She loves being with her family, and her family loves her...they feel joy from being with each other.

<<Have you no compassion?>>

Kindly look in the mirror when you ask that.

You know, a few years ago, I was very ill, confined to a wheelchair, lost so much weight that I was unrecognizable. I got jerked around by a lot of doctors who thought they knew what was wrong (only one of them was right, and all the rest were wrong...typical odds for anyone with chronic illness). People like you made me think I was worthless...between that and the frustration of not being mobile anymore, I became depressed and suicidal.

Without going into details, let's just say that, while having some extensive testing done, I came very close to dying. Mind you, even though I had been suicidal for weeks (being watched 24/7 by my caretakers, that's how bad off I was), the prospect of REALLY almost dying scared the hell out of me. Had I given anyone written orders of "do not resuscitate", I would have really regretted it; I thank God every day for the first nurse who heard me calling for help.

It's real easy to be healthy and spew bullshit about how tough you are, how you wouldn't want to live, and all this crap. But it's a lot different when you're in a hospital bed and death is right there, nearby. Especially if -- as many coma and so-called PVS patients can attest -- you're unable to vocalize, and your mind is screaming for help, trying desperately to tell people around you that you're aware and don't want to die.

Finally, how DARE you call someone a "burden" just because they're severely ill! I've had relatives suffering from PVS, and nobody in our family was so low-class as to call them a "burden". George W. Bush isn't in a hospital bed, but he's a hell of a lot bigger burden on this world than any hospice patient.

[barb162]

30. thank you... very insightful and from your head and heart.

much love,

B

[GOPFighter]

60. Give me a break!

Of course she's a burden. "Burden" and "human being" are not mutually exclusive.

My kids were a burden when they were growing up, but a burden I was more than willing to bear. (I believe calling me low-class for using the word burden was pretty low-class, dammit! There, now we're even in the name calling contest!) However, if I ever become a vegetable with no chance of recovery, I most definitely DO NOT want to be a burden on anyone, and I daresay very few others would want their loved ones, nurses, and society to care for them like that. It's too bad hypocritical fundie right wingers had to get involved in this. It scares me that they might just get the rules changed so that even with a living will, religious nuts will insist my vegetative body lay on a hospital bed year after year after year after year after year until my heart gives out decades later.

[grumpy old fart]

8. There was a Guardian ad litem appointed by the court...

His report said Terri was in a persistent vegetative state, and would not have wanted to "live" this way. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/23/33847/9273

Sheesh, this is journalism??? Generally, I like the Voice....

[barb162]

18. go further down in the Wolfson GAL report and you will find

he makes recommendations for swallow tests and a new impartial neurologist to examine Terri S. This was never done. That link from DailyKos only shows about 10 or 20 % of the entire GAL report by Jay Wolfson.

[moobu2]

47. Obviously, Wolfson didn't think a swallow test would be beneficial

or he would have recommended one be done regardless of the outcome, but he didn't do that. What Wolfson was doing was attempting to bring the opposing parties together and was using the swallow test to negotiate a settlement. He recommended a swallowing test only if the apposing parties agreed before hand, what to do with the results.

Again, If Wolfson thought a swallow test would have been warrented, he would have just said so without conditions.

[barb162]

54. I can see your point and it can well be valid.

But I can see the other side too, and that is, maybe if the docs decided there was no way she could swallow, why force a swallow test on her and gag her/ choke her. He is not an MD and I can see why he framed his language so carefully. Also, his trying to get an agreement from these two sides who had been fighting so long, I really can see why he framed things as he did. And there are possibly other reasons he wrote this in this fashion which I and others don't know.

[barb162]

20. here's the entire GAL report by Jay Wolfson

http://jb-williams.com/ts-report-12-03.htm

[Must_B_Free]

9. better stick with the "hip" liner notes, Nat...

[mmonk]

10. Does Hentoff's accusation of murder

meet the definition?
murder. The unlawful killing of one human being by another, especially with malice aforethought.

I think not.

[LdyGuique]

11. Nat Hentoff isn't grandstanding

Nat Hentoff has a long history of being a lefty who is pro-life--

take a look at this list of articles:
http://swissnet.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/nvp/hentoff.html


At least he is consistent with his past beliefs

[mmonk]

13. Good for him

but accusing people of murder is pretty heady stuff and inciteful.

[ultraist]

51. Typical prolifer inflammatory language: "murderers"

Women who have abortions are "murderers" in their eyes too.

[asjr]

14. Somehow, someway, someone has to take a dig

at Michael Schiavo because he continued with his life with another woman. And we must tell this to the fundies--that woman did not have an abortion. Would they have preferred that? I think not!

[barb162]

17. Personally, I don't care that he is living with this woman and their

two kids other than I have to question if he has an obvious conflict of interest in representing Terri's wishes because of his relationship.

[slackmaster]

25. The courts have been over that again and again and again

Every single time they've ruled that she would not have wanted to be kept alive in her present state. Every single time they have ruled that her husband is NOK and the only person qualified to make the final decision on her behalf.

Keeping alive a person who does not wish to live is cruel. It's sad there is no legal way to end her life quickly and without the possibility of additional suffering. We treat cats and dogs better than we do people. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

[barb162]

34. this has been going on 11 days now... eleven days. Yes we treat

pets better.

[moobu2]

46. We sure do, we would never

hook a cognitively brain dead pet up to a feeding tube for 15 years would we?

[barb162]

55. let's be corrrect in terminology okay? She is in PVS, she is not

brain dead.

[ultraist]

53. That animal example is so lame. What about research animals?

We do not treat animals better.

Would you want to be kept artificially alive like that for 15 plus years?

Do you realize how many people will die today from preventable illness due to lack of medical care?

3 MILLION children will die next year from malaria, a preventable illness because people are so selfish and apathetic.

MILLIONS of healthy children are starving to death around the world.

This situation has gotten so blown out of proportion it's sickening.

Let the woman go, as she wished, she has no cerebral cortex and is NOT going to recover.

[barb162]

58. Research animals are treated deplorably and cruelly in many cases

which is why PETA and Anti-Vivisection , etal., groups are active. We do treat stray dogs better if they get to animal control or a shelter

I just can't see starving/dehydrating someone for days on end. Can't see it. Human rights...civil rights....

[RoyGBiv]

23. The Other Woman

This sort of thing is really a part of a very deep problem in our dominant culture, the notion that happiness is wrong. People will deny that this is a part of our culture, but if you really pay attention, it's everywhere. And, truthfully, you don't have to pay that close attention, just allow yourself to see what it means when you see to people having a good natured (or sometimes not-so good natured) argument about who has it worse at work, in a marriage, etc. Work that doesn't break your back is decried as "not real" work. People out having a good time on a weekday are "loafers." And, in this case, having a relationship with another human being rather than drop down into the pit of a deep despair from which one never emerges is somehow an indication of poor behavior, one that would lead a person to commit something so heinous as murder.

His girlfriend is not and never has been an issue in any of this, not a tangible one at any rate. People yammer on endlessly about the girlfriend and what it might suggest, but they don't mention how he's actually not gone as far with that relationship as he easily could have had he entirely given up on his obligations to Terri. It's stupid, quite frankly.

[K-W]

29. Wow what a pack of lies and misdirection.

There is a valid disabled rights point to be made, but it is amazing how few people can make it without relying on Republican lies and deception.

[barb162]

35. I think this commentator who writes for Village Voice

can separate his own thoughts and ideas from the pugster theocrats, the pugster liars, the pugster propagandists, etc

[K-W]

38. You clearly thought wrong.

Since he relies on almost the exact same lie and rhetoric filled argument as the republicans.

Heres a tip, a good rational disability rights argument doesnt need to mention anyone in this case by name.

[barb162]

56. actually, I am right and think that you are entitled to your opinion

[moobu2]

44. Nat gets his info directly from the Schindler families website.

He's written several factually inaccurate articles about Terri Schiavo.

[ultraist]

57. He is also a prolifer who calls people murderers when they exercise choice

[UTUSN]

59. HENTOFF Is One of Those Libs (PAGLIA, HITCHENS) Who Loop Around

Start off as Libs then go off into the ether, so out there that they make their own definitions.

As for the canard that she has "never had an attorney"----I can't imagine any legal proceeding where an attorney ad litem (distinct from WOLFSON/GUARDIAN ad litem) is not appointed from the get-go.