LG

George W., from Texas, is a graduate of the PFAL series.

Horse, you've committed a terrible blunder. You're not supposed to think!

It's an interesting and humorous story, waterbuffalo. The foulups that resulted in her being pulled over (the humorous part) had nothing to do with whatever may or may not be wrong with the baby. (The extra time in intensive care could be merely extra precaution, due to the unusual circumstances of the birth.)

In his position, I’d do exactly the same thing. I wouldn’t tell them where or when the funeral was and I’d only tell them the burial location after she was buried. Otherwise, they’d turn the funeral into another disgusting spectacle.

Rejoice, you did not see Terri Schiavo respond in those tapes. You saw a carefully filmed and edited deception. Christopher Reeve was not mentally incapacitated and did not compare in any way to Terri Schiavo.

I thought even judges could be Americans. Seriously, if we accept your statement, then what's your problem? Polls show that most people agree with what was done and oppose Congress and Bush sticking their noses into Florida's business, so the courts actually were a reflection of "we the people" in this case.

I don’t agree that the laws failed. The laws enacted by the Florida legislature and signed by the Florida governor were followed. It was proper for the case to work its way through the Florida court system as it originally did. The first improper delay, in my opinion, was when the Florida legislature and governor decided to try to block the implementation, not in general, but in just one case, of laws they had passed and signed. The second improper delay, which was the one I particularly objected to, was when the U.S. Congress and president attempted to block the implementation of Florida law, again in only one case, rather than in general. The Schiavo case was not unusual, except for the degree of rancor in her family. Most people do not have written advance directives. Many families of people in persistent vegetative states decide to terminate artificial sustenance and hydration. Many people who possess their full mental faculties choose that option for themselves. The kind of death Terri Schiavo experienced is just not at all uncommon. It’s provided for in the laws of many States, if not all of them. Now I have no problem at all with people being opposed to withholding artificial nutrition and hydration, whether in some cases or all. I’m all for them working to change the laws in their States, through the normal processes of legislation or public initiatives. I have no problem with people taking their disagreements to the courts. I have a big problem with people wanting to trash our whole governmental system to get their desired results in one particular case that touches their emotions. On a national level, I don’t think much of anything should be done in response to the Schiavo case. It was pretty common in the sense I discussed above, but the attention it got, the ugly spectacle of it all, was very uncommon. I think it will be largely forgotten pretty quickly and that people will go on living and dying, and making private decisions about life and death, pretty much as they did before. Whatever changes are appropriate should be at the State level. Interested people should read and understand the laws of their own States and write their legislators, expressing their opinions about their State laws. For the most part, people of other States should butt out, as should Congress. (That doesn’t mean that a national dialogue is inappropriate. I think that would be a good thing.)

I said three years, outofdafog, because that is unquestionably well documented and undisputed in the record. It appears to me that Michael Schiavo put his whole heart and soul into treatment and therapy for almost 4 years, then slowly accepted the idea that there was no realistic hope. If we presume that the guy is a relatively normal human being, with a heart, and extend to him just the tiniest bit of benefit of doubt, his actions seem pretty normal and understandable, to me at least. He aggresively pursues treatment for a few years. During that time, because he doesn't know the liklihood of success, he doesn't know what Terri's wishes would be. He slowly becomes convinced that there is no hope. Given that conclusion, he then knows (believes, if you prefer) that she would not wish to be kept alive. He likely spends some time wrestling with the difficult decision to halt life-prolonging measures before finally making the decision to do it. He knows that her parents will contest the decision, so he petitions the court to determine Terri's wishes. During the protracted legal battle and resulting public spectacle, he tries to keep himself and Terri out of the spotlight as much as possible. I can't say for sure that the above paragraph accurately portrays Michael Schiavo, but I can easily see myself feeling and acting that way in such a scenario.

That is an outright falsehood. Actually, it's an outright, intentional lie. (That is not to say that you are intentionally lying. I presume that you're simply repeating what you've read and heard.) The record is clear and was undisputed in court that Michael Schiavo aggressively pursued treatment, including the therapy you say he didn't, for some three years.

“We” didn’t do anything, Rejoice. Her will was honored. Those videos, btw, demonstrate careful camera work and editing, not responsiveness. How about honoring her will? She had the right to appoint someone to be her proxy/guardian if she were incapacitated. She (through marriage) voluntarily appointed Michael Schiavo. I am appalled that this poor woman’s wishes were not honored for so long. I am appalled that she was made a public spectacle. I am appalled by delusions, distortions, and outright lies being propounded as truth. I am appalled when good people, good institutions (medical, legal, etc.) and good sense are wrongly savaged. I am appalled by the hypocrisy of people who would not choose for themselves what they tried to force on Terri Schiavo.

Florida law is not unusual. Neither is the sort of death Terri Schiavo is experiencing (death by dehydration, not starvation). At this moment, probably hundreds of people are dying in the same way, in hospitals, nursing homes, and hospices across the country. Many thousands have during the course of the legal battles over her case.

It would be nice if people could state their opinions without others spouting off about "twi mindsets" or "waybrain."

Perhaps not a “need” but definitely a purpose, much like the purpose for flowers and music at a wake.

Accidental double post.

That's a very good, informative site, excathedra. I think the following four documents are critical to having the remotest clue about the Schiavo case. Greer’s February 2000 ruling. Second District’s Affirmation of Greer’s ruling. Greer’s November 2002 ruling. Guardian Ad Litem’s Report to Governor Bush

Cynic, Frist's remarks are among the most shameful in this whole mess. As a doctor, he should know better. No "should" about it. He does know better.

Did this congressman learn syntax from Dubya by any chance? Sorry, it just sounded like a "Bushism"... Bush might have recommended him for the “Noble Peace Prize in NucUlar Medicine.”George, given your feelings for quacks and charlatans, you’ll love Dr. William Hammesfahr. The good doctor’s web site. The “Nomination.” The Real Nominators (U.S. Congressmen not on list). Info on real nominations kept secret for 50 years. In 2003, Hammesfahr was placed on probation for 6 months for charging for services not rendered. (The Judgment) In those same proceedings, he was also accused of false advertising, but the evidence on that charge was held not to be clear and convincing. The judgment quoted some statements from his advertising, including his claim to be “the first physician to treat patients successfully to restore deficits caused by stroke…” He now advertises that statement as being the judge’s, both on the front page of his web site and in this press release. In the second trial in the Schiavo case, the judge noted that Hammesfahr was a self-promoter who made great claims but provided not even a single name or case study to back them up.

Controversial only to those who are unqualified to judge, like us. There is consensus among the doctors who actually examined Mrs. Schiavo. The one exception is a fraud. He's not a Nobel prize nominee, as he promotes himself to be. He got a congressman to write a letter recommending him for the nonexistant "Nobel Peace Prize in Medicine."

If it's murder, Cynic, it's not judicial murder. The applicable laws were written and passed by the legislature and approved and signed by the Governor, all of whom were elected by the people. The judges acted in accordance with those laws, right down the line. Those laws have been on the books for years and have governed hundreds of decisions to terminate artificially provided sustenance and hydration. If people think the laws are wrong, they should work to change them, not castigate judges who faithfully apply them.

My mistake, Mark. I completely missed "(although that is a little low, T8-T12 would be more normal)" when I first read your post, and responded too quickly. What you said was clear and correct. Note to self: Don't try to read and post on Internet forums while fielding phone calls from insane (not really) relatives. (I was getting back and forth calls from my mother and a sister, who were disagreeing about something really stupid.)

Mark, I believe the "L1" refers to lumbar vertebra 1, rather than to rib 1 L.

I don’t really feel like chasing down the info again, excathedra, but compression fractures are consistent with her eating disorder and her having been extremely overweight some years before. Rib fractures are consistent with her having received CPR after her collapse. If there were really any hint that any aspect of her condition were due to abuse, that certainly would have come up as part of the case for the defense in the malpractice suit.

Now there's a concern that seems mostly ignored. What effect are those nuts having on other people in the hospice and their families and friends? Do they care?

WG, the emphasis of the question was not the doing, but the recording. If you think that it is credible for the events that woman reports to have happened repeatedly without there being a single record anywhere of them, that's fine. It's not credible to me, or to any court.

Do you do it (five times, no less) without making any records? Do you suspect or accuse someone of trying to poison a patient with insulin without making any records, filing any complaints, etc.?