Appeals court: Terri Schiavo parents cannot intervene - Page 3 - Big Big Forums

Jolie Rouge · 01-25-2005, 06:09 PM

Kin of Brain-Damaged Woman at Crossroads
By VICKIE CHACHERE

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - With their legal options dwindling, the parents of brain-damaged Terri Schiavo renewed a plea to their son-in-law and legal adversary: divorce our daughter and give up the fight.

Hours after the U.S. Supreme Court said Monday it would not intervene in the dispute, attorneys for Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, asked Michael Schiavo to dissolve his marriage and leave them in control of her destiny. ``If there is any way for Michael to walk away... just please, please, please let them keep their daughter and just walk away,'' said David Gibbs, the Schindlers' attorney.

Michael Schiavo intends to withdraw the tubes that feed and hydrate his 41-year-old wife as soon as legally possible, maybe as early as next month. Terri Schiavo's parents have vowed to keep her alive. The Schindlers have three legal avenues still open to them: an appeal to a state appeals court in a request for a new trial based on recent comments by Pope John Paul II; a request that Michael Schiavo be removed as his wife's guardian; and a motion to set aside the original decision that Terri Schiavo did not want to be kept alive artificially.

That motion will go before Pinellas Circuit Court Judge George Greer on Friday. Greer has twice granted Michael Schiavo permission to withdraw his wife's feeding tube. The latest legal blow to Terri Schiavo's parents came Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene in the case at the center of one of the nation's most bitter right-to-die disputes.

Without comment, the high court declined to hear an appeal brought by Gov. Jeb Bush's attorneys arguing the governor did not overstep his authority when he ordered Terri Schiavo's feeding tube reattached six days after it had been removed under court order. ``I'm disappointed, but not surprised,'' Bush said in Tallahassee.

The Florida Supreme Court had earlier ruled Bush's action were an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers between the executive and judicial branches. ``I really don't know what options we have available, but I will take whatever options I think there are,'' Bush said. ``I'm not sure what the legal options are, though.''

Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, said his client was pleased with the high court's decision but is still concerned that the Schindlers will delay their daughter's death with more ``frivolous appeals.'' ``We are just hoping that the court sees through this abuse of the legal system and says no,'' Felos said. ``This case is not going to end until the courts summon up the courage and resolve to say we are not going to permit this abuse anymore.''

Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain damage 15 years ago when she collapsed in her home when a chemical imbalance, brought on by an eating disorder, caused her heart to stop beating. Michael Schiavo, who is engaged to another woman with whom he has two children, initially attempted experimental procedures in hopes of rehabilitating his wife, but later had a falling out with her family.

Terri Schiavo can breathe on her own but depends on a feeding tube to stay alive because she cannot swallow. She left no written directive. Her parents contend their son-in-law is trying to rush her death so he can inherit her estate and be free to marry again.

Ken Connor, who represented Bush in the legal challenge to Terri's Law, said he was disappointed in the court's refusal to hear the case involving ``the protection of an innocent life.'' Connor said the best legal hope for keeping Terri Schiavo alive now rests with the pending filings brought by her parents. And he said other branches of government need to consider if added protections for the disabled need to be in place.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which had joined with Michael Schiavo in challenging the governor's action, said Monday's court sends an important message to the governor and legislature not to attempt to thwart judicial decisions because of public pressure. ``I think this terrible, tragic case has been used for larger political purposes,'' said Howard Simon, the ACLU's executive director in Florida. ``That is the shameful history of this case.''

01/25/05 09:14

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/sto...88.htm&sc=1110

Jolie Rouge · 01-26-2005, 12:25 AM

Schiavo's Ex-Guardian Calls for Tests
By VICKIE CHACHERE

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - A former court-appointed advocate for a brain-damaged woman at the center of a right-to-die battle says the woman should undergo new medical tests to put to rest lingering questions about whether she has any hope of recovery. But first her warring husband and parents would have to agree to drop their legal fight in favor of whichever side the independent medical experts support, the former advocate told The Associated Press.

The comments by Jay Wolfson, a University of South Florida professor, were his first on the case since he served as Terri Schiavo's guardian ad litem. They came as the legal options of Schiavo's parents have dwindled to two pending matters in state courts that have ruled against them before in their effort to keep her on a feeding tube.

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to take up ``Terri's Law,'' the measure pushed by Gov. Jeb Bush in October 2003 to keep Schiavo alive. The Florida Supreme Court struck down the law as unconstitutional. Wolfson served as Schiavo's guardian for two months in 2003 under ``Terri's Law.'' He tried to broker an agreement between the two sides, but was unsuccessful.

Wolfson said it is not too late to revisit the original question in the long-running legal saga - is the 41-year-old woman disabled, or brain dead? "There is so much at stake here, not just for Terri, but for the issue,'' said Wolfson, who is both a doctor and a lawyer. ``If we were serious about addressing this, we would say, 'What are the interests of the parties and how can we use science, medicine and good law to take away from the clouding factors in this case?''' he said.

Attorneys for her husband, Michael Schiavo, did not return calls for comment Tuesday. A new independent medical review has been suggested, and rejected, by both sides at different stages in the case.

Barbara Weller, an attorney for parents Bob and Mary Schindler, said the offer of an independent medical panel was made by Michael Schiavo as late as the end of last year, but the Schindlers were hesitant to accept such a suggestion. ``The problem is finding truly neutral doctors,'' Weller said.

Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain damage 15 years ago when her heart stopped beating because of a chemical imbalance. She left no written directive and Michael Schiavo has said his wife would not have wanted to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that she has no cognitive abilities and say she communicates with them and reacts to her environment.

Terri Schiavo breathes on her own, but requires a feeding tube for nutrition and hydration.

01/25/05 18:56

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/...53.htm&sc=1110

sweetstar · 01-26-2005, 01:52 AM

I agree with all of the other posters who think the parents are being unbelievably selfish when they say she should be kept alive. She has been in a persistent vegetative state for 14 years!

And as for those who bash the husband for living with another woman with whom he has fathered kids... Do you guys realize that this has been 14 years? You all expect him to sit next to his essentially dead wife for 14 years? I understand this thing about the divorce, but maybe he doesn't want to divorce her...divorce means falling out of love, falling out of a relationship.

And about him just wanting the money... trust me guys, the money it's costing to keep this dead woman alive is a lot. I don't think you should ever MAKE someone live when it's fairly obvious that it won't do any good. Now THAT sounds like cruel and unusual punishment to me.

qwestgirl · 01-26-2005, 07:16 AM

I agree with you 100%, sweetstar....I live in Clearwater FL and hear about this EVERYDAY!!! The parents need to let go of their selfishness and let go of their daughter. NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE LIKE THAT!!

The husband has the right to move on with his life..These parents are making this a personal vendetta against the husband...At this point, I don't really think Terry has anything to do with the fighting...Now, it has become a war between the parents and hubby. Everybody wants to win, however, someone has to lose this war, as well....I think the parents will be waiving the white flag in the end!!

P.S. And yes, the money is gone!!

***lassss*** · 01-26-2005, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jedmatters

Her parents had no right to intervene. Once you marry, you place all the control in your spouse's hands whether your parents agree or not.
And, yes, the governor and her parents over stepped. No one knows if she told him prior to 14 years ago what she wanted, but him. And it was his call.
14 years is too long for this mess to have gone on. He had every right to do what he did, and the saddest part is that people punish him for his rights.
I hope he can have a reasonable life now, and be happy.

ITA ! the woman is NOT a minor....she was an adult and married and I agree that the husband should make the call, not her parents. I know it is a sad time all around but the parents need to let go.

Jolie Rouge · 01-26-2005, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Do you guys realize that this has been 14 years? You all expect him to sit next to his essentially dead wife for 14 years? I understand this thing about the divorce, but maybe he doesn't want to divorce her...divorce means falling out of love, falling out of a relationship.

The man is engaged to marry another woman with whom he has two children. I think he has already passed the point of "falling out of love; falling out of a relationship."

My question is - how old are these children ? I had the impression ( and I am sure someone can sorrect me if I am wrong ... ) that he was already "involved" with the "other woman" when Terri's ordeal began.

dangerousfem · 01-26-2005, 11:11 AM

once again.. you are talking about STARVING A LIVING, BREATHING, FEELING, HELPLESS PERSON TO DEATH.. and you guys think that is ok?? Do you have kids? If so picture them there instead of Terri.. now is it still ok? He has NO REASON not to divorce her.. none.. unless he stands to gain from her death. He has been living with another woman for years.. has kids with her.. why can't he divorce Terri?

Jolie Rouge · 01-26-2005, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dangerousfem

once again.. you are talking about STARVING A LIVING, BREATHING, FEELING, HELPLESS PERSON TO DEATH.. and you guys think that is ok?? Do you have kids? If so picture them there instead of Terri.. now is it still ok? He has NO REASON not to divorce her.. none.. unless he stands to gain from her death. He has been living with another woman for years.. has kids with her.. why can't he divorce Terri?

Michael Schiavo intends to withdraw the tubes that feed and hydrate his 41-year-old wife as soon as legally possible ....

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to take up ``Terri's Law,'' the measure pushed by Gov. Jeb Bush in October 2003 to keep Schiavo alive. The Florida Supreme Court struck down the law as unconstitutional. Wolfson served as Schiavo's guardian for two months in 2003 under ``Terri's Law.'' He tried to broker an agreement between the two sides, but was unsuccessful. Wolfson said it is not too late to revisit the original question in the long-running legal saga - is the 41-year-old woman disabled, or brain dead?

Terri Schiavo breathes on her own, but requires a feeding tube for nutrition and hydration.

Quote:

I don't think you should ever MAKE someone live when it's fairly obvious that it won't do any good. Now THAT sounds like cruel and unusual punishment to me.

Appearently it is not obvious.

You don't think it is "cruel and unusual" to remove all sources of food & water and allow someone to slowly starve to death ? If you had a sick animal and allowed it to die in such a manner you would be up on charges so fast it would make your head spin. At least the Dutch use medication and sedation to effect euthenasisa

firechick · 01-26-2005, 01:03 PM

This whole case has me heartbroken fro TERRI!!!! I agree that this has become a was between the parents and the husband. HOWEVER I don't believe it should be legal to starve a living human being to death. INHO this is now worse than killing an innocent child who can't defend themselves! Makes me sick that people think its okay to starve someone. Micheal had been having an affair with this other woman when Terri was fine. Hell, I'd have an eating diorder as well as a million other things if I knew my husband had been involved with another woman. He makes me want to puke thinking that he kill his "wife" so he can marry this other woman. The man could divorce her and be done with it. As far as someone saying he feels divorce is a falling out of love. He didn't love Terri when he was procreating with another woman!!!!!!!! Put yourselves in this moms shoes, would you try to fight her husband to let go??? YES you would DON'T LIE!! WE ALL WOULD!!! I would not want to live this way either but I see the videos of the womans change of demeanor when she is visited by her family. I don't believe she is brain dead. Sorry!! Flame away if you feel you must. I have my flame retardent suit on....

babydoll_jen · 01-26-2005, 03:18 PM

What about their marriage vows? "Till death do us part". He took those vows and nowhere in those vows does it say "hey, if something horrible happens to you, where your body doesn't function right, I have the right to kill you and move on with my life." If he is soooo worried about falling out of love and ending the relationship, let her parents take over her care. And the statement about her not wanting to live that way, how do we know she really said that and that he isn't making the whole thing up? I mean, come on. If the guy really did have this lady friend for a while and fathered children with her and saw $$$ signs, we would all assume that he was doing it for the money. And as far as her parents go, this is "THEIR" child, not his. I don't think there are a lot of us here who had to go through this situation, so we don't know how we would react under these circumstances. She has been their child longer than she has been his wife. Let her parents care for her. That is why they became parents, isn't it? It is their one duty in life to care for their children, so let them.

Also, I thought if you were in a vegetative state, that nothing functioned in your body. I mean she is breathing on her own, isn't she? There are a lot of people in this world who depend on a feeding tube to live.

YNKYH8R · 01-26-2005, 04:42 PM

Now I don’t know the whole story. But I will say this. 14 years? I mean come on. What exactly are they holding out or onto for? Sorry to be so blunt but the woman that everyone knew is gone has been for a while she is the equivalent of a breathing piece of meat with no consciousness. People say how could you let your child go? I say how could you let your child live like that? It isn’t even life. She doesn’t play, work, socialize, vote, nothing. She does nothing. The only thing left is the outer shell, the body. The mind is what we truly love about people the body just holds the mind. In her case the mind is gone; everything they loved is gone only the body remains. I think it is cruel to the parents and all who loved her to keep the body alive. Especially for 14 years. If my child was in a position where I would never be able to enjoy his/her company the way that I am used to I would let go. What is the sense? What if her parents and husband passed away on the same day tomorrow? What do they do then? How long do you let a living corpse live? Starving her to death I don’t like. There are other human ways. Regardless of whatever family situation the husband is in it is not fair. When I say I do not want to be left alive on tubes it isn’t because I don’t want medical costs to mount or I don’t want to be on display for the world to see and become a spectacle it is because I want my loved ones to move on. The person that lived in her died 14 years ago let her go……