Terri Schiavo case

[yellowfan]

sp;unbelievable to deny her parents guardianship over their daughter. He has moved on with his life and has a family. Her parents want to care for their daughter whatever time she has left. He is very cruel to do this to her family. I could not imagine having to stand by and let this man make decisions for a relative of mine. In his interviews he seems uncaring and no emotions but hatred. I feel very bad for her parents and relatives.

 

[ammayernyc]

This is an extremely emotional issue. The husband''s point of view (from what I have read) is that Terri did not want to live like the way she is now. He is just standing by her wishes for herself. By that view, you can view her parents as the one being cruel for making her continue on in a state from which she will never recover.

One way or the other, it is unconscionable for the federal government to try to overturn many courts'' decisions on this issue based purely on politics.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Yikes, this is one nasty case. I guess all of us should be taking what we''ve seen in this case as motivation to write up a living will!

Personally, I think the government is demonstrating how much they especially suck by stepping in and taking over this situation.

 

[yellowfan]

It is a emotional case. I just feel that it should be up to her parents not husband to decide her care. She did not have a will and CNN reported that her husbands ex girlfriend said he was lying about Terri''s wishes. I feel that he cannot be trusted. It is a mess and its very sad.

 

[ammayernyc]

It is a mess and it is very sad. Just be thankful that Terri doesn''t know what''s going on around her, cannot feel any pain or cannot feel any sadness. Right now the people that are suffering are the people around her -- including her husband. Also, the American people are suffering due to how the government is reacting to this case. They are not protecting, they are intruding.

There are many thing written about this case -- in favor of both sides. Only the courts know who is telling the truth -- that is why such decisions are not made by the general public based on gut feelings.

 

[bar01]

If there is any good that can come from this sad situation - it is that it will help to spur conversation among husband’s wives and families.

My fiancé' and I spent about an hour talking about this difficult and complicated topic after watching the news. We did have some different opinoins. We discussed our feelings and beliefs about what each of us would want - and what each of us could/would do for the other. We had planned on meeting with an attorney to review trusts, wills and durable powers of attorney anyway - but this just spured some difficult discussions.

I think Terri was under 30 when this happened, so it probably was not even in her mind to have documents with her husband – but I think all married couples regardless of age should have something documented on their wishes, and assign powers of attorney to those they trust (and have discussed their wishes) to make difficult decisions for them when they can't.

Edited -

P.S. - This Link on legal directives may provide some useful information for couples thinking about setting up something legally.

 

[jenwill]

Date: 3/21/2005 3:56:29 PM
Author: Feydakin
There are FAR too many issues in the case to be resolved..

Her 1.3 milllion dollar trust fund that becomes HIS when she dies
The lack of any meaningful treatment for years
The fact that no one knows what her wishes may have been

In the end, all things being unknown, I prefer to err on the side of life..

The trust fund is out of money....over 700k was spent on her treatment, the rest on defending the lawsuits that her parents have been filing. She has been on Medicaid for quite awhile now, with her treatment being paid for byt he gov''t. If it was about money, her husband would have jumped at the million dollars that was offered by a right to lifer to give up any custody claims to her parents.

Even if he had taken the money, the courts had already decided that her wishes had been not to be kept going...so it is basically a court issue now. The courts said to pull the tubes, and if her guardian had decided not to, the courts would have had to legally override that decision as they had already ruled that her wishes were not to be kept alive.

Just a reminder to put everything in writing.....even though I have specifically told all pertinent parties involved that I do not want to be kept alive in that type of scenario, unless it is in writing, anyone who is appointed as your guardian can override your wishes.

 

[movie zombie]

the Republican party used to stand for States rights, less interference in peoples'' lives and fiscal responsibility. all that seems to have gone out the window and the Republican party is now the party of Big Government. the following is an interesting article and only hints that this is another attack on the US Constitution but it is food for thought for all of us no matter our party affiliation. this case highlights the importance that each of us should make sure we have left written instructions to cover what our wishes are should fate put us in the same position.

peace, movie zombie

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-schiavo21mar21,0,2140071.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials
EDITORIAL
The Midnight Coup

March 21, 2005

Republican leaders, eyeing an opportunity to appease their radical right-wing constituents, convened Congress over the weekend to shamelessly interject the federal government into the wrenching Schiavo family dispute. They brushed aside our federalist system of government, which assigns the resolution of such disputes to state law, and state judges. Even President Bush flew back from his ranch to Washington on Sunday to be in on what amounts to a constitutional coup d''etat.

Conservatives are the historical defenders of states'' rights, and the supposed proponents of keeping big government out of people''s lives, but this case once again shows that some social conservatives are happy to see the federal government acquire Stalinist proportions when imposing their morality on the rest of the country. So breathtaking was this attempted usurpation of power, wresting jurisdiction over a right-to-die case away from Florida''s judiciary, that Republican leaders in the end had to agree to limit this legislation''s applicability to the Schiavo case.

In other words, according to the bill passed by the Senate Sunday afternoon, and which the House passed after midnight, among all the cases of patients in a persistent vegetative state nationwide, Terri Schiavo''s case is the only one in which parents are able to have a federal court review state court rulings on the fate of their loved one.

Last Friday, after years of litigation and medical evaluations, the Florida judge presiding over the case ordered the removal of Schiavo''s feeding tube, pursuant to her husband''s wishes.

House and Senate committees outrageously tried to intervene then by issuing subpoenas to the Schiavos and Terri''s doctors, and by asking federal courts to order the feeding tube reinstated. But since this was not a case within federal jurisdiction, their efforts failed. Hence the effort to wrest jurisdiction the old-fashioned way, by passing a law.

Congress does act in other extraordinary cases on behalf of a specific individual, such as when it grants someone U.S. citizenship. But here, Congress is breaking new ground, trying to overturn a judicial decision by altering the Constitution''s federalist scheme. This is the family law equivalent of the constitutionally banned "bill of attainder," legislation that seeks to convict someone of a crime.

Lost in all the political and legal maneuvering is the gut-wrenching conundrum of removing life support from a patient like Schiavo.

Bedridden for 15 years since she was resuscitated after she stopped breathing, Schiavo now breathes but is incapable of communicating or eating or drinking on her own. Her persistent vegetative state puts one in mind of the final stages of Alzheimer''s disease, except that it can last for decades. Whether she can experience the simplest emotion is now the purview of politics, not medicine.

Schiavo''s parents stand on one side of the gulf, demanding that she be kept alive by a tube that puts nourishment directly into her stomach. Her husband, whose motives the parents question constantly, says she would not have wanted to live in this dark twilight between physical life and humanity.

In law, a spouse''s decisions about care of a mentally incompetent patient have long trumped parents''.

The praying, chanting protesters outside the Florida hospital where this drama plays out are a hint that this is the new front in what began as the abortion war, an effort to translate religious dogma into law under the right-to-life banner.

The feeding tube removed Friday at the order of a Florida state judge is not high medical technology. There are some people, children and adults alike, who may live nearly ordinary lives despite being forced to feed themselves or be fed through a tube because of other medical conditions. The line on removing such a tube is not as bright as removing a patient clearly at the end of life from artificial breathing or a heart machine. Ethical questions surrounding a case like Schiavo''s are blurry and difficult, evidenced by the years of waiting and hoping for a miracle that have passed since she collapsed.

This case, headed like a bullet to the Supreme Court, must have most of the justices wishing for a Kevlar vest. The case is a marker for other battles — about medical assistance in ending a terminally ill life, as in the much-fought Oregon law and a similar proposal working its way through the California Legislature. About the rights of gay couples to assume spousal rights in medical decisions. Most painfully, about abortion.

Federal judges, regarded with contempt by moral conservatives on other issues, are being dragged into another swamp. No decision they make in the Schiavo case and those certain to follow can be the right one.

 

[mightyred]

ammayernyc , I was about to say the same things.

It''s a tragic case and one which both sides face a multitude of accusations, hatred, expense and judgements not to mention the many, many myths out there , often used to grab quick headlines by the media. My hearts breaks for all those involved.

My personal opinion is that once he asked the courts to make the decision for him (as the wards surrogate) as to whether to remove the tube, the courts made a decision, it was affirmed and reaffirmed based on the testimony of all (many) sides and because of that it''s the best estimate of what she would have wanted.

That doesn''t mean to say I don''t understand and appreciate the emotional side of it - I just think that those closest aren''t always the best to decide.

I have found this blog quite interesting not least just to look at the timeline of events:

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


As with most others here.....this has prompted a debate at home and whilst we know how each other feels unless we create a living will we leave ourselves open to the consequences. I in no way want the federal government involved in my personal and private life to aid any political agendas.

 

[sparklish]

I agree with ammayernyc - the courts have seen tonnes of evidence and weighed and balanced it all. It''s a real concern to judicial independence to have politicians overturning this at this time. If they want to make new legislation to prevent it in the future, sure go ahead. But to retroactively mess with decisions is messed up.

What isn''t being made clear in all the reports is that much of Terry''s brain is gone. Not damaged, GONE. She can''t get better. It will not regrow. The judge found that on the balance of evidence, she did not want to live as a vegetable. In court, the evidence showed that she would not have consented to the treatment. This was reviewed at several levels of the court.

While this article presents one point of view, I found it very interesting and informative. It talks about the difference between "euthanasia" and just denying medical treatment. Check out the scan of Terry''s brain.

If I were Terry, and clearly I''m not, but I wouldn''t want the political system interfering with my private and personal choice with regard to my life.

 

[Mara]

Definitely spurs conversations, we are going to do our ''right to live'' legal document, or whatever it is called very soon...

If I were in this position she has been in for so long, I definitely would not want to be kept alive. For me it is not just about having life, but also quality OF life. In this case, there is none.

 

[fire&ice]

This one is a tough one. I would have far less of a problem with removal of breathing apparatus. This women may take weeks to die a very slow death.

And, NO ONE can be sure she can''t feel what is going on. There are sides of this story that believe she DOES react to her surroundings.

I know nothing about how much was in the trust fund. Numbers have been bantered about. It is my understanding that she won a malpractice lawsuit and it was bigger numbers than 1.3 million. I have seen no evidence that the money is gone. Yet, I would imagine care to be very draining.

Just like with everything, plenty has been written on the subject. Again, it''s my *informed* by *whom*? A friend who tends to get her news from more conservative sources claim that as soon as the lawsuit was won, the rehabilitation stopped. She indeed was not kept at home as indicated the reason for needing a big number settlement. And supposedly, he refused to have Terry''s doctors discuss her case with her parents.

I certainly don''t fault the guy for moving on with his life. But, I don''t know - and couldn''t be sure - that he wants the feeding tube removed for only altruistic reasons that it would be Terry''s wishes. It may be & the parents are just clinging to hope.

In the end it''s not a black & white issue, mainly because the path is not clear. But, my heart would sign over rights to the parents.

I don''t think the Fed. government should get involved though. From what I read though, the "Shiavo" bill is pretty well received by both dems & repubs.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 3/21/2005 5:59:46 PM
Author: fire&ice
And, NO ONE can be sure she can''t feel what is going on. There are sides of this story that believe she DOES react to her surroundings.

This part about her reacting to stimuli really bothers me because someone is obviously lying. Either she''s brain dead or not. Let''s at least get this part figured out! From there a humane decision can be made.

I think the husband has a right to move on to a complete extent. . .possibly remarrying, not just living with another woman. The parents are being selfish here in that as long as their daughter is hooked up, they don''t have to feel the pain of having their daughter pass on. I can understand their reasoning, but don''t understand why this should continue for 15 years when there''s more than just them involved.

 

[icekid]

as someone who is currently in the process of becoming a physician, i''ve given a lot of thought to this issue as it relates to so many things we''re learning in our "doctoring" coursework.

i feel that terry''s parents are being extremely selfish. i''ve heard quotes where they admit that she is suffering, yet... they want to keep her around for their own happiness (or so it seems to me). her husband has been trying to let her die peacefully for many years! the courts have ruled- the fed govt has should NOT be stepping into this matter. i''m rather annoyed at how this is all going.

terry is NOT there. she''s a moderately functoinal body, from what i have heard. the fact that she is unable to swallow speaks volumes to me- swallowing is a very basic bodily reflex. and i don''t mean to trivialize her as a human, but our brains are essential to BEING. i have a problem with keeping her alive with govt funds (there are questions about if she still has money left? doubtful, IMO- the kind of care she requires is EXPENSIVE). there are so many sick people out there who could truly be helped with the amount of money that is being poured into her care, which has no rehabilitative function. neurons cannot regenerate. in a country where 15% of our gross national product is spent on healthcare, we need to start spending more efficiently and effectively. IMO, a woman that the courts have decided would not want to live in such a condition and has no hope of recovery... this is not the best place to spend our tax dollars.

of course, there is a huge emotional compotent here too. my guess is that MOST people would not want to live like that, and of ALL people- i think terry''s husband would know her wishes best. i can understand the parents'' desire to keep her alive... but at what cost? if my parents were in this situation, i hope they could let go and not prolong my suffering.

get your living wills guys!

 

[ForteKitty]

I''ve had mine drawn up since I was 18. Everyone thought I was crazy back then, but it seemed perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 3/21/2005 7:27:11 PM
Author: icekid

terry is NOT there. she''s a moderately functoinal body, from what i have heard. the fact that she is unable to swallow speaks volumes to me- swallowing is a very basic bodily reflex. and i don''t mean to trivialize her as a human, but our brains are essential to BEING.

That''s just it...I have heard - again from my "informed" (and yes, i do quote) that she has not been given the opporuntiy to "swallow" - for fear of choking.

Honestly, I wouldn''t like to live like that. My husband would *clearly* know & legally does.

 

[Bethanying]

I work with patients who cannot swallow everyday. Personally, to me, while it stinks, I don''t think the swallow issue is an indicator of her functional status. A lot of my patients cannot swallow and still have a good quality of life. They were rendered unable to swallow for a number of reasons, tracheoesophageal trauma, cancer, stroke, Parkinsons disease, and are all fed through a PEG tube, or something similar. I work with patients to help them regain the muscle tone and give them techniques so that it is safe for them to eat. If the food goes down the wrong "tube", that can cause aspiration pneumonia and possibly death.

I wouldn''t deny someone a feeding tube, and I certainly wouldn''t want to starve to death. It''s an ugly process, and painful/uncomfortable. But if I were in a vegetative state, I''d want someone to let me go. I haven''t researched her story a whole lot as of yet, but the swallow thing to me is not an indicator of her status (to me). I guess it''s because she will probably never regain that function that it is a big issue in this case. I wouldn''t ethically try to rehabilitate her because she is not functionally able to comprehend the therapy techniques.

Also, Bertrand, thanks for the "five wishes" link. My fi and I will be ordering it soon.

 

[jenwill]

Swallow tests are an incredibly routine practice for anyone with brain injuries. Evaluation by a trained therapist of the patient's capabilites to swallow are done several times while the patient is in the acute care hospital setting, and usually at least once after entering long term rehab facilities. Observing whether a patient has the ability to even swallow their own saliva is a huge clue- since that is the most basic of human responses after breathing. Once a person is in an advanced enough vegetative state that they cannot respond to commands such as 'blink your eyes' or 'squeeze my fingers', the chance of them being able to swallow well enough to not aspirate and develop life threatening pneumonia is slim to none.

Her care is costing approx $80k per year...and that is for just the basic care. Her care when she was receiving therapy routinely ran much higher. The 1 million she got for care from the malpractice would be used up very quickly at that rate. The $300k that her husband received was used up early on in his legal battle to let her go.

I think we are all too far away from the center of this to know any of the real facts of her care...plus HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) wouldn't allow us to know anyway...we can only use this as a guide to follow for what not to do in stating our preferences for healthcare.

 

[Bethanying]

Date: 3/21/2005 8

0:53 PM
Author: fire&ice

Date: 3/21/2005 7:27:11 PM
Author: icekid

terry is NOT there. she''s a moderately functoinal body, from what i have heard. the fact that she is unable to swallow speaks volumes to me- swallowing is a very basic bodily reflex. and i don''t mean to trivialize her as a human, but our brains are essential to BEING.

That''s just it...I have heard - again from my ''informed'' (and yes, i do quote) that she has not been given the opporuntiy to ''swallow'' - for fear of choking.

Honestly, I wouldn''t like to live like that. My husband would *clearly* know & legally does.

She probably has not been given the opportunity to swallow because it wouldn''t be safe, and it is a legal matter, allowing someone to attempt to eat when you cannot assess their swallow status is endangering their life. Of course, patients with normal cognitive functions have the right to ignore swallow precautions, but this is not the case. As a professional, my suggestion would be for her to have nothing by mouth because I probably could not say for certain that her food is going in the right place. Aspiration pneumonia (from food/liquids entering the lungs and sitting there growing bacteria) is often deadly. I''d be interested to know if she has or had overt signs/symptoms of aspiration.

 

[Momoftwo]

There are also questions about abuse by Michael Schiavo. Her family and at least one doctor felt she was strangled which caused her collapse in the first place. If true, he really has no say in her care. He apparently also has denied her medical care and therapy for most of the time since her heart stopped as well as moved her around to several nursing homes. My feeling is she has every right to live as does everyone. She breathes on her own. Starving her is the only way to kill her. She is not terminal. She is also not on life support in any way. We have living wills and they require brain death confirmed by 2 doctors before any machine is to be shut off.

There are thousands of people in this country on feeding tubes and liquid diets due to a variety of illnesses and disabilities. Where do you draw the line? Who is brain damaged enough to be killed because of it? This is really a civil rights issue. Death row inmates have more rights than she does right now. Sad isn't it. All life is precious and sacred. And no one has proven that she doesn't feel pain. There are also nurses that say she can swallow and is very aware of the world around her. Here are 2 websites: http://www.helpterri.com and http://www.terrisfight.net

Check them out before you believe everything the mainstream media reports. There are a lot of inconsistencies and inaccuracies in their reports.

 

[mightyred]

The accusation that Michael Schiavo abused his wife and caused her death is also heresay Momoftwo.

I have spent some time on her family backed websites in an effort to learn more but in cases so emotionally charged it''s always best to look for the other side of the case too.

I found that court documents state she had an inbalance or potassium and suffered cardiac arrest because of this. He sued her physicians who were treating her prior to her collapse, he charged they failed to diagnose her bulimia which led to her heart failure and that''s how he won the malpractice suit. The family are the ones arguing it was not cardiac arrest (and contest the buimia) but this has never been proved otherwise so is hearsay.

I read the statements about her not receiving treatment, was appalled, but then the court documents showed he was ''aggressively motivated'' to pursue the best medical treatment for her - he took her to California for a month for experimental treatment and they state he has been one of her most frequent visitors .

He and her parents were still living together from 1990 until 1993 so presumably up until that point they were satisfied with the diagnosis and subsequent treatment.

There are always two sides to a highly, emotionally charged case.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 3/21/2005 10:15:15 PM
Author: Momoftwo
Here are 2 websites and http://www.terrisfight.net

This is the first time I''ve seen a "before" photo of Terri. She was very pretty!

What a sad case.

 

[Momoftwo]

It is very sad and the fact is she has the fundamental right to life. He does not have the right to kill her. The heresay as you call it I heard from the mouths of her brother and sister in a live interview yesterday and they are the ones that stated at least one doctor at the time felt the same way. Regardless of how she got there, she is not terminal, not on a ventilator, not brain dead. She is alive and has the right to stay that way. No one knows what she feels or thinks Her husband also quit having her treated upon receiving his settlement in the lawsuit. Coincidence, I doubt it. The fact also is that the state of Florida has been investigating these charges of abuse against him. It comes down to no one really knows what she wants since it was never written down and supposedly told to Michael. I've watched interviews with him. He does not come across as sincere to me, and her family, all of her family, wants to take care of her. I ask again, where do you draw the line? Who deserves to live and who deserves to die? There are a lot of mentally incapacitated people out there for a variety of reasons and some can't feed themselves, are we just going to start doing away with those who some feel add nothing to our society ? That's what Hitler did. Turning off a ventilator to a terminal person is not playing God. Withholding food and water from someone who has time ahead of her is.

 

[crafftygrrl]

There are no good or comfortable answers to this situation. I have not read about it in depth to render a judgement. I only read it with great sadness and pity.

All we can do is learn from this situation, and get our wishes known through living wills. Personally, I would NOT want to live that way.

My only true frame of reference is the decisions my family made when my Mother passed away from Alzheimers.

Almost exactly one year ago, my father (who was visiting) received a call from my Mom''s nursing home. She was not thriving. It was time for hospice care. I drove with my father to the nursing home ( a 3-day drive), so he would not have to deal with this alone. We discussed (as a family) what to do. We decided that only palliative care was in order. No feeding tubes, she was 82 years old. We just wanted her as comfortable as possible. Four weeks later she stopped eating and drinking. She passed away May 1. It was a wrenching decision, but one that I believe was the right one for our situation.

A good friend lost her Father to Alzheimers. She was my guiding light and mentor through this. Her mother was unable let go, so the feeding tubes were inserted. My friend said this extended her Father''s life in a really bad way for 2 months. Tragic.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 3/21/2005 11:42:24 PM
Author: mightyred


There are always two sides to a highly, emotionally charged case.

I agree. No one is a winner in this. But, I have to disagree with the statement that Terry''s parents are being selfish. Could they be clinging to hope? - perhaps. But, trying everything to keep your daughter alive is a basic instinct - not one to call selfish. I don''t know any parents that could watch their daughter starve to death.

Tragic.

 

[ammayernyc]

This is a sad story on every front. Poor woman for being in a state that she will never recover from. All of the doctors who have said she can recover have literally never examined her. Poor parents for having to see their daughter like this. Parents should never have to see their children die. However, they have stated that it is against their religious beliefs to let her go. So even if she were brain dead they wouldn''t turn off the machines. Poor husband for having to see his wife like this. Whether he loved her or not is not an issue anymore. No one should have to see someone they are close to go through this. Look how upset all of us are and we don''t even know her!

She has been in this state for 15 years. If he had abused her, there would have been proof, a trial, something other than her family stating it at the very end...

All of this is horrible.

However, it is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG for the legislative and executive branches to interfere. You don''t see the President or the governor of California interfering in the court system because they don''t like the outcome of the Scott Peterson case.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 3/22/2005 10

1:37 AM
Author: ammayernyc
...

All of this is horrible.

However, it is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG for the legislative and executive branches to interfere. You don''t see the President or the governor of California interfering in the court system because they don''t like the outcome of the Scott Peterson case.

What exactly are they doing?

If you are referring to the Shiavo bill, it''s bipartisan.

Agreed, all of this is horrible.

 

[ammayernyc]

Just because it is bipartisan doesn''t make it right. I don''t care which politician or what party they belong to, if they voted for this bill, they are interfering with my civil liberties and my rights to die as I please, how I please.

 

[yellowfan]

There are too many unknowns in this case. No one knows if her husband abused her, if she can feel pain, what her wishes were, and how much brain function she has now. Why in the world would we want to remove her feeding tube and let her die? We should err on the side of life not death. If they allow her to die it will be a very sad day for everyone. If Michael Schiavo has nothing to hide he should let her parents run the tests they want to and get her the therapy they think she needs. He has denied therapy for many years and I think its odd that her wish to die came about after his lawsuit settlement. Her parents brought her into this world out of love and should be able to care for her as they wish not her husband who may be an abusive one! It is flat out wrong that her parents have to stand by and watch their child die. No parent should have to battle a spouse/former spouse over the child they birthed into this world.

 

[ammayernyc]

This will be my last post for this topic (unless someone says something completely outragous and I must reply)...

What we are all feeling are emotions. Strong ones. I seriously doubt anyone will ever change their minds on how they feel about this. However, my point is that the government is involving itself where it shouldn''t. Imagine one of your fundemental rights being taken away from you because the president or the governor or congress does not like it. Their morals being applied to your life. Horrible, horrible, horrible.
The courts have over and over stated that her husband is the best judge of how she wanted to live her life or not live her life and that he could make the decisions for her. Whether you agree with that is not my issue. My issue is that had the courts decided that her parents should be her guardians, there would have been no governmental involvement. Supposed it is later learned that she is in excrusiating pain and her parents are keeping her alive because they don''t belive it''s her right to die. The government still would not have involved itself. They are only involved because there are serious political implication attached to this issue. There is a memo to prove that stating that the right-to-life crowd will be thrilled if they insert themselves into this case and that it would be a good topic for them to weigh in on.