Appeals court: Terri Schiavo parents cannot intervene - Page 49 - Big Big Forums

janelle · 03-30-2005, 05:07 PM

Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:34 a.m. EST
Schiavo: 'We Didn't Know What Terri Wanted'

In a bizarre statement on the day Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was disconnected, Michael Schiavo seemed to inadvertently admit that he had no idea what his wife would have wanted if she became incapacitated.

During an appearance on CNN's "Larry King Live," Michael was asked if he could appreciate the distress of Terri's parents:

"Yes, I do," he replied, according to a CNN transcript. "But this is not about them, it's about Terri. And I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want."
Michael's apparent admission that he "didn't know what Terri wanted" - and that her starvation death is "what we want" - followed by moments previous comments to the contrary:

"Terri is my life," Schiavo told King. "I'm going to carry out her wishes to the very end. This is what she wanted. It's not about the Schindlers, it's not about me, not about Congress, it's about Terri."

The full exchange featuring Schiavo's contradiction went like this:

KING: Michael, what do you expect to happen? Congress is in recess now, they have to come back into special session. The Supreme Court could put a stay on it. What do you think is going to happen?

SCHIAVO: I don't think the Supreme Court is going to put a stay on it. And I hope and implore that everybody call their legislators. They have to stay out of people's personal lives. There's no place for government. Call them and tell them.

KING: Have you had any contact with the family today? This is a sad day all the way around, Michael. We know of your dispute.

SCHIAVO: I've had no contact with them.

KING: No contact at all?

SCHIAVO: No.

KING: Do you understand how they feel?

SCHIAVO: Yes, I do. But this is not about them, it's about Terri. And I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want.

KING: You're not – it didn't cost you anything. This is not something where you're looking to save money?

SCHIAVO: No. There's no money involved. We need to move on from that question. That question has been asked me 50 million times. There is no money! ("Larry King Live," March 18)

Jolie Rouge · 03-30-2005, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

Federal Appeals Court OKs Schiavo Review
21 minutes ago

ATLANTA - A federal appeals court early Wednesday agreed to consider a petition for a new hearing on whether to reconnect Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.

The ruling by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals came as the severely brain-damaged woman entered her 13th day without nourishment.

Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, have maintained that Schiavo would want to be kept alive and have asked the courts to intervene. Schiavo's husband, Michael, insists he is carrying out her wishes by having the feeding tube pulled.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._damaged_woman

Appeals court declines new Schiavo review
Parents had gotten green light to ask for new hearing
The Associated Press
Updated: 4:49 p.m. ET March 30, 2005

ATLANTA - Less than a day after allowing Terri Schiavo's parents to file a request for a new hearing, a federal appeals court on Wednesday declined to rehear arguments for having a feeding tube reattached to the severely brain-damaged woman.

The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had overnight agreed to let Bob and Mary Schindler file, raising a flicker of hope for the parents after a series of setbacks. But the court rejected the request 15 hours later.

To be granted, the parents’ request would have needed the support of seven of the court’s 12 judges. The court did not disclose the vote breakdown. “Any further action by our court or the district court would be improper,” Judge Stanley Birch Jr. wrote. “While the members of her family and the members of Congress have acted in a way that is both fervent and sincere, the time has come for dispassionate discharge of duty.”

Judge critical of Bush, Congress

Birch went on to scold President Bush and Congress for their attempts to intervene in the judicial process, by saying: “In resolving the Schiavo controversy, it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers’ blueprint for the governance of a free people — our Constitution.”

Judges Gerald Tjoflat and Charles R. Wilson, the same two judges who issued a dissenting opinion last week when the full court considered the case for the first time, also issued a statement in Wednesday’s ruling. “The relevant question here is whether a rational factfinder could have found by clear and convincing evidence that Mrs. Schiavo would have wanted nutrition and hydration to be withdrawn under these circumstances. The plaintiffs carry a heavy burden, but I do not believe that this question can be determined in this expedited fashion without a hearing on the merits,” wrote Tjoflat, who was appointed to the bench by Gerald Ford. Wilson was nominated by former President Clinton.

The Schindlers visited their daughter Wednesday morning at her hospice in Florida and urged their supporters to keep trying. “I was pleasantly surprised by what I saw,” Bob Schindler said. “So she’s still fighting, and we’ll keep fighting.”

“We know that some of her organs are still functioning. ... It’s not too late,” he said of Terri Schindler, who began her 13th day without food or water.

In requesting a new hearing, the Schindlers argued that a federal judge in Tampa should have considered the entire state court record and not just the procedural history when he ruled against the parents.

Vigil continues

Doctors have said Schiavo, 41, would probably die within a week or two of the tube being removed.

The case has wound its way through six courts for seven years; the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene five times.

Protesters keeping a 24-hour vigil outside the hospice praised the latest order.

"There's a chance for a miracle," said Christine Marriott, 43, who rushed to the hospice after hearing the news on TV. "Anything positive is a breath of life."

Early Wednesday, a man was arrested when he tried to bring a plastic cup of water into the hospice. Police officers stopped him at the gate as he shouted: “You don’t know God from Godzilla!”

He became the 48th protester arrested since the feeding tube was removed.

Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed March 18 on a court order sought by her husband, Michael, who contends she wouldn't want to be kept alive artificially. She suffered catastrophic brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped for several minutes because of a chemical imbalance apparently brought on by an eating disorder.

But the Schindlers have maintained that their daughter would want to be kept alive.

On Tuesday, they asked the appeals court to consider their request for a new hearing based on the seven-year history of evidence in the case, rather than whether previous Florida court rulings have met legal standards under state law.

The request contends that the federal court in Tampa had "committed plain error when it reviewed only the state court case and outcome history."

'Give me back my child'

Attorneys for the Schindlers have argued that Terri Schiavo's rights to life and privacy were being violated.

On Tuesday, Mary Schindler made a terse but emotional appeal to Michael Schiavo and his fiancee: "Michael and Jodi, you have your own children. Please, please give my child back to me." Michael Schiavo and Jodi Centonze have two children, born long after Terri Schiavo's collapse.

Federal courts were given jurisdiction to review Schiavo's case after Republicans in Congress pushed through unprecedented emergency legislation aimed at prolonging Schiavo's life. But federal courts at two levels have rebuffed the family.

Jesse Jackson, Laura Bush weigh in

The Rev. Jesse Jackson prayed with the Schindlers on Tuesday and joined conservatives in calling for state lawmakers to order her feeding tube reinserted.

The former Democratic presidential candidate was invited by Schiavo's parents to meet with activists outside Schiavo's hospice. His arrival was greeted by some applause and cries of "This is about civil rights!"

"I feel so passionate about this injustice being done, how unnecessary it is to deny her a feeding tube, water, not even ice to be used for her parched lips," he said. "This is a moral issue and it transcends politics and family disputes."

First lady Laura Bush also commented on the case Tuesday, saying the government was right to have intervened on behalf of Schiavo. "It is a life issue that really does require government to be involved," Bush said aboard a plane bound for Afghanistan, where she was to promote education and women's rights.

During Jackson's visit, a man was tackled to the ground by officers when he tried to storm into the hospice, police said. The man, who was arrested, had two bottles of water with him but did not reach the hospice door, police said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7334555/page/2/

Jolie Rouge · 03-30-2005, 05:16 PM

Schiavo case raises questions about disabled
Activists challenge 'perception that death is better'
The Associated Press
Updated: 5:54 a.m. ET March 29, 2005

CHICAGO - Grabbing attention with a brief, dramatic demonstration, disabled activists have been raising their voices throughout the final stages of the Terri Schiavo drama to send a message: that Schiavo, too, is a disabled person who is worthy of living. “There is a perception that death is better than living with a disability,” says Mary Lou Breslin, a senior policy analyst with the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, based in Berkeley, Calif.

And that, she says, should not be the case.

Disabled activists went to great lengths over the weekend to make their point, a few of them laying on the ground outside Schiavo’s Florida hospice next to their wheelchairs. “They’re saying, ‘This is who I am. This device here allows me to get around — but this is who I am,”’ says Stephen Drake, a spokesman for Not Dead Yet, a group based in Forest Park, Ill., that focuses on end-of-life issues for disabled people.

Drake’s group is one of a number of disabled advocacy groups that — though even divided within their own ranks — have taken a public stand in the Schiavo case. The groups include the American Association of People with Disabilities and the National Council on Independent Living.

Federal court reviews?

Among other things, they’re asking Congress to consider requiring a federal court review in disputed cases where the wishes of a legally incapacitated person are not in writing and when family members disagree about whether to withhold food and water. They’re also using the issue to push Congress to drop proposed cuts in Medicaid, which many say would decrease the quality of life for disabled people who cannot afford their own care.

The federal review Congress allowed as a special circumstance in the Schiavo case caused a backlash from many Americans uncomfortable with the government intervening in a family matter. But activists say such reviews are necessary to safeguard the incapacitated person’s rights. “We obviously want people’s private life to be private. But to say there should be no review is not practical,” says Harriet McBryde Johnson, a disability-rights lawyer in Charleston, S.C., who’s been physically disabled since childhood.

McBryde Johnson says that, since Schiavo was not suffering from an illness or condition that threatened her life, removing her feeding tube was a decision to kill her. “This belief that withdrawing a feeding tube is different than other killing — why is that a reasonable distinction? I haven’t heard anybody say it would be OK to kill Terri Schiavo if she weren’t on a feeding tube,” McBryde Johnson says.

Uncomfortable juxtaposition of groups

Taking such a stance has placed disabled activists alongside religious conservatives, who have pegged the Schiavo case as a right-to-life issue. Many disabled activists say it is an uncomfortable juxtaposition, since many do not want to be tied to the abortion issue.

But Marvin Wasserman says the terminology he’s heard disabled activists using in the Schiavo debate — calling removing the feeding tube “murder” and referring to Michael Schiavo as Terri’s “so-called husband” — has angered him and others.

Wasserman, a New Yorker whose quadriplegic wife told him of her wish to die after she also got cancer, says it’s wrong for people to second-guess Michael Schiavo and his push to have her feeding tube removed. “I have a very strong feeling that he probably knew her better than anybody else and that he knew what her wishes were,” says Wasserman, whose wife was removed from life support after she was declared brain dead.

“We should be more concerned about fighting for retaining and improving the quality of life for people who are conscious of their physical state,” he adds, “so they know that at least there are some options for having a decent quality of life.”

'Latent prejudice'

Next week, the Senate health committee has scheduled a hearing to discuss the Schiavo case and to examine what committee chairman Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyo., called “current health care practices used in the care of non-ambulatory individuals.”

Some hope the hearings will provide an opportunity to discuss the broader issues facing disabled people — one of which is discrimination, says Lennard Davis, a professor English, disabilities studies and medical education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

He recently wrote a piece in response to the movie popular “Million Dollar Baby,” which received top honors at this year’s Oscars. In the movie, the trainer of a quadriplegic boxer, played by actress Hilary Swank, removes her from life support in secret, at her request. “The issue that it’s better to be dead than to be a quadriplegic indicates that there’s discrimination in this country,” Davis says. “And the Terri Schiavo case is just bringing out that latent prejudice, too.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7324092/

Jolie Rouge · 03-30-2005, 05:20 PM

Hey, Jaidness, maybe we can save a few bucks for ya' over here ...

1.27 million tab for comatose inmates[i]
California wrestling with issues akin to Schiavo case
The Associated Press
Updated: 2:17 p.m. ET March 29, 2005

SACRAMENTO - The California Department of Corrections spent $1.27 million in just six months on medical care for six comatose inmates last year — and that’s not counting more than $1,000 per day for each guard it cost for security.

The debate raging in Florida over whether Terri Schiavo wished to die — and who should decide her fate if she is unable to — is the same debate going on in the California prison system, said Democratic Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero.

One inmate who was at Delano Regional Medical Center from Nov. 7, 2003, until he died Jan. 12, cost the department $851,880 by year’s end.

The state may need to find a way for inmates to sign release forms to indicate their health care wishes and do a better job notifying family members, said Romero, who plans an April 14 hearing on the problem.

Although inmates are in state custody, private doctors make medical decisions once inmates go to outside hospitals, and there is often confusion over when family members should be brought in to help with care decisions. “It becomes very difficult because nobody knows who’s in charge,” Romero said.

That was the case with Daniel Provencio, 28, who was treated under guard for 29 days after he was shot in the head with a supposedly non-lethal foam bullet in a Jan. 16 prison altercation. His medical care cost more than $100,000, not including the $30,624 in security costs, according to the department.

Provencio’s case was unique because he was guarded and treated for 25 days after doctors declared him to be brain dead, four days after the shooting, department Director Jeanne Woodford wrote to Romero.

Woodford said a task force will be reviewing the department policy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7327882/

Jolie Rouge · 03-30-2005, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by janelle

Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:34 a.m. EST
Schiavo: 'We Didn't Know What Terri Wanted'

In a bizarre statement on the day Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was disconnected, Michael Schiavo seemed to inadvertently admit that he had no idea what his wife would have wanted if she became incapacitated.

During an appearance on CNN's "Larry King Live," Michael was asked if he could appreciate the distress of Terri's parents:

"Yes, I do," he replied, according to a CNN transcript. "But this is not about them, it's about Terri. And I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want."

("Larry King Live," March 18)

Freudian slip ??

Jaidness · 03-30-2005, 05:37 PM

Former NIH director Healy misstated facts in Schiavo case

Dr. Bernadine Healy, a senior writer for U.S. News & World Report and former director of the National Institutes of Health, falsely claimed that "several" neurologists who "evaluated" Terri Schiavo determined that she had "a functional mind" and was "minimally conscious." In fact, discredited Dr. William Hammesfahr is the only neurologist who has examined Schiavo to argue that she is not in a persistent vegetative state (PVS).

In 2002, six doctors physically examined Schiavo and conveyed their assessment of her physical condition. Of those, only two expressed the belief that she was not in a PVS and could improve with additional treatment. One such doctor, Hammesfahr, was disciplined in 2003 by the Florida Board of Medicine and has falsely boasted of being a Nobel Prize nominee. The other, Dr. William Maxfield, is a radiologist, not a neurologist, as the Associated Press reported on March 24. The AP noted that two other neurologists, as well as Schiavo's attending physician, have also examined her and concluded that she is in a PVS. Dr. James Barnhill, a third neurologist who concluded Schiavo was in a PVS after he "reviewed the videotapes," according to the AP, actually physically examined her before reaching his diagnosis, as Hammesfahr's testimony noted.

From the March 29 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews (The context of her remarks indicates that Healy was equating the term "evaluation" with a physical examination.):

HEALY: [S]everal doctors who evaluated her, neurologists, believed that she did have a functional mind and she was evaluated at a time before we fully understood that function. And I think 2002 is too long ago to have evaluated her. ... I would agree that it is possible that if she were evaluated and if in fact she was minimally conscious, which several of the neurologists felt she was, which meant she could have feelings, she was aware, but that her husband, who is her legal guardian, said, well, she doesn't want to live with the mental age of a 12-month-old, that you might turn it [the feeding tube] off.

The affidavit of Dr. William Hammesfahr linked to in this item previously was hosted by terrisfight.org, a Web site run by a foundation that opposes the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. The affidavit, along with 27 others, has been removed from the site, as of the posting of this item.

— A.S.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200503300004

Jolie Rouge · 03-30-2005, 05:39 PM

Orwell and Terri Schiavo
March 29, 2005
By Rich Lowry

Denial is not just a river in Egypt, goes the saying. Indeed, it is something very important to supporters of ending Terri Schiavo's life, judging by their head-spinning evasions.

A woman who might (or might not) be in a persistent vegetative state, but who is otherwise not ill and can continue to live for years despite her profound disability, is dying because we are refusing to give her sustenance. We are affirmatively ending her life, perhaps against her will, because there is no way now to know her will. Supporters of this act feel compelled to try to pretty it up.

They say that Terri is being "allowed to die."

No. She is being made to die.

All across America, in hospitals, mental wards and institutions for the severely disabled, there are people who, if we withdrew our care for them, would die. We wouldn't call this "allowing" them to die. We would call it scandalous neglect.

George Felos, the lawyer for Terri's husband, Michael, explains his position in the case thusly: "I firmly believe in the right of individuals to make their own medical-treatment choices."

But Terri is not making her medical choices. Choices are being made for her, perhaps (if you believe Michael Schiavo) on the basis of things she said a decade ago, perhaps (if you don't) in the absence of any stated preference.

After visiting her bedside recently, Felos declared, "In all the years I've seen Mrs. Schiavo, I've never seen such a look of peace and beauty upon her." Maybe Felos has forgotten: If she is indeed in a persistent vegetative state, as he maintains, she can't feel anything, let alone a sense of peace that would make her radiant with beauty.

One expert told The New York Times that "no one is denying this woman food and water." Really? Then why is she dying? Is it merely a coincidence that she might experience kidney failure from dehydration at any time?

This expert's argument is that, since she is in a persistent vegetative state, she has "no knowledge of food." By this logic it would be morally acceptable to suffocate her with a pillow since she has "no knowledge of air." She could be dropped out of a 15-story window because she has "no knowledge of gravity." She could be shot because she has "no knowledge of ballistics."

Then there is the misuse of words that are thrown at Republicans to prove their alleged hypocrisy. For example: Why aren't conservatives respecting the "sanctity of marriage" here? But Michael Schiavo — perhaps understandably, given the wrenching circumstances — long ago moved in with another woman, with whom he has two children. This is no longer a case of simon-pure "sanctified" marriage.

Or how about "federalism," supposedly trampled by the GOP Congress? But federalism means a division of the branches of government, all with their designated powers. When state and federal courts willfully strike down or ignore laws passed by democratically elected legislatures, this is not "federalism," but a perversion of the country's constitutional scheme.

Felos says Terri would want us to "ask ourselves the questions: What's the purpose of my life? And how can I best fulfill that? And how can I be of service to others?"

Those are important questions, but ones liable to produce answers that might confound all our expectations. Terri Schiavo might have believed, before her tragic injury, that her purpose was to be a loving wife and mother. Now, in circumstances that would have horrified her, her purpose might be to give a kind of comfort to her family and to demonstrate to those around her the value of life, even when our capacities are heartbreakingly diminished.

Despite the spiritual-sounding mumbo jumbo, Felos and his allies want to foreclose the possibility of this purpose. They believe that some people's lives are meaningless and expendable. There is something chilling about that, which is why they so often resort to weasel words and gauzy euphemisms.

Jaidness · 03-30-2005, 05:41 PM

ok Jolie I'm all for pullin' their plugs too I mean seriously, people who work hard and try their best can't get decent affordable medical care yet these people can suck 1,000 a day off of taxpayers? Where is the justice in that?

Jaidness · 03-30-2005, 05:42 PM

Limbaugh falsely claimed attacks on Michael Schiavo have been "off limits" to the media

Nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed that the media have treated attacks on Michael Schiavo, husband of Terri Schiavo, as "off limits." In fact, the Los Angeles Times has noted that talk radio and The Wall Street Journal editorial page, among others, have "vilified" Schiavo.

On the March 29 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Limbaugh said: "[W]e're [the media] not to ask any questions about Michael Schiavo. We can put out all the dirt we want about the Schindlers [Terri Schiavo's parents], and we can associate them with the liberal media's most hated people in America. Michael Schiavo? No, no, no, no, no! Off limits!"

The Times reported on March 24 that "Michael Schiavo has become the target of accusations that he caused her [Terri Schiavo's] heart attack and collapse with abusive, violent behavior; that he fabricated the story that she wouldn't want to live this way only after collecting more than $1 million in a malpractice claim; that he has sabotaged her therapy and barred her friends and family from comforting visits; and that he wants her to die so he can marry a woman with whom he has lived for the last few years and fathered two children."

Though Michael Schiavo has "vehemently denied the accusations of abuse, greed and heartlessness in interviews and to investigators, and an independent report to Gov. Jeb Bush and the judicial system two years ago said 'the evidence is incontrovertible that he gave his heart and soul to her treatment and care,'" the attacks have spread through the media, the Times reported, adding: "The attacks on his character have become talk-show fodder and high-profile commentary, from the Wall Street Journal's editorial pages to website chat rooms and morning drive-time call-ins."

http://mediamatters.org/items/printable/200503300001

Jaidness · 03-30-2005, 05:52 PM

Hume allowed McConnell to peddle false claim on Schiavo vote

Fox News Sunday guest host Brit Hume failed to challenge Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell (R-KY) when McConnell falsely claimed there was no dissent in the Republican caucus when the Senate considered and passed a bill on March 20 to move the Terri Schiavo case into the federal court system. "In the Senate, there were no divisions at all. Not only were there no divisions among Republicans, there were no divisions with the Democrats. It passed in the Senate on a unanimous voice vote. So any divisions would have come about more recently," McConnell said.

Hume neglected to mention senior Republican Sen. John Warner (R-VA), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who was "the sole Republican to oppose the Schiavo bill in a voice vote in the Senate, according to a March 23 New York Times article." There were three people in the Senate chamber at the time of the vote. In a written statement in the Congressional Record, Warner said, "I believe it unwise for the Congress to take from the State of Florida its constitutional responsibility to resolve the issues in this case. The Florida State court system has adjudicated the issues to date. This bill, in effect, challenges the integrity and capabilities of the State courts in Florida."

Warner commented further to the Times: "It looks as if it's a wholly Republican exercise ... but in the ranks of the Republican Party, there is not a unanimous view that Congress should be taking this step."

In a graphic showing how Maryland and Virginia congressmen voted on the bill, The Washington Post reported that Warner and Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes (D-MD) "opposed the bill, but agreed to let it go forward out of respect for the majority."

From the March 26 broadcast of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday:

HUME: All right. Let me just ask one further final question. There's been some suggestion in some of the media that there is a division among Republicans about this, with conservatives and, particularly, evangelical Christians feeling one way about it, more libertarian Republicans or conservatives feeling another, and that this spells potential political trouble at the polls. What about that?

McCONNELL: In the Senate, there were no divisions at all. Not only were there no divisions among Republicans, there were no divisions with the Democrats. It passed in the Senate on a unanimous voice vote. So any divisions would have come about more recently.

HUME: Let me ask you about this other question that's sort of in the background but always present, and that is the issue of the judges, of the judicial nominations that the president has made ...

— R.S.K.
http://mediamatters.org/items/printable/200503290001
where is the outcry about this LIE in the media?
maybe we should ask Dan Rather what he thinks about this?

janelle · 03-30-2005, 05:53 PM

Oh let's pull everybody's plug. Life has become more about money than dignity to live and be protected. Get ready when It's your turn. Let them euthanise you, put in your directives.

And what is so insulting about this case is people are saying she is her husband's property. He has the right to decide what becomes of her cause he is her husband. Geesh.I thought our society was way beyond this property thing when it came to women. Guess not.