The brainwashing around the "Schiavo" case...

by Brummie 138 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Slick Willie

  Jeannie, thats exactly what Michael's afraid of - that Terri would get rehab and be able to let people know what really happened.

  IMO the family should make the decision about what happens to Terri - not Michael who did not stand by her 'until death do us part' - but went out and created another family. BTW, Michael is NOT Catholic so there's no reason he couldn't have divorced Terri and remarried. Of course then he would have lost guardianship. Taking up with another woman and having children is a de facto divorce IMO.

  Just saw the Supremes declined to review the case. So sad. Let's hope Gov. Bush will step in and prevent them from killing this innocent woman.

  And BTW I have always been a pretty liberal democrat - didn't vote for George Bush either time and could never even imagine myself agreeing on anything with Tom Delay. But look at the video of Terri - there's a person there! Let her parents take her home and care for her, get her rehab and every sort of therapy they think is appropriate, and if there is no improvement, at least her parents don't have to watch her starve to death. I can't believe the state is making these poor parents go through this. This is just wrong!
• 

  Slick Willie

  Yes, they can remove the implants to do an MRI. Not a big deal considering the alternative!
• 

  Slick Willie

  If Michael would allow an MRI this could provide some comfort to Terri's parents. If the MRI reveals that Terri's brain is nothing but jello then at least the could comfort themselves with the fact that she did not suffer. If you were in this position wouldn't you want every available diagnostic test done before they pulled the plug on you? I know I would.
• 

  JustTickledPink

  If an MRI was done today the MRI would serve as a magnet and pull the metal through her head killing her.

  If they do neurosurgery that could kill her too, at what expense, at what cost? and for what purpose?
• 

  144001

  Michael Schiavo has moved on with his life. He has a girlfriend and kids with the new girlfriend. I wonder why he is so intent on starving his wife to death? At this point in time, do Terry's wishes really mean that much to him? Why is he unwilling to transfer the responsibility for Terry to her parents via a transfer of guardianship? Is he seeking revenge on the Schindler family by starving their daughter to death?
  
  If he was my brother in law or son in law, he'd be very bruised right now and wouldn't be safe anywhere.
• 

  target

  My mother said often that she never wanted to be kept alive by artificial means. When she suffered a stroke at the age of 86, she was in a vegetative state. My brother, who could not let go, insisted on a feeding tube. My mother never put her wishes in writing, so the doctors did the tube.She lingered like that for several months and was skin stretched over a skeleton when she died. All my brother did was postpone the inevitable for his own emotional purpose. He was not thinking of what was best for our mother, but what made him feel better. She died with that stroke, her body just didn't know it yet. What he put her through was cruel. Also, the family can not have closure and get on with their lives and long as this continues.

  When there is no chance of recovery, and family members do not accept that, all they are doing is dragging out the suffering so they can continue to feed their fantasy of a recovery. There is a time to let go. We all die some time. For some it is sooner. It is not easy, but it is reality.

  Target
• 

  undercover

  Michael Schiavo has moved on with his life. He has a girlfriend and kids with the new girlfriend. I wonder why he is so intent on starving his wife to death? At this point in time, do Terry's wishes really mean that much to him?

  That's it...he's moved on. He's realized that there is no recovery and he is ready for closure. He isn't intent on starving her, he's intent on letting her pass on and not be in the miserable state she is in now. From what I understand her wishes were not to be kept alive in such a way so why blame him?

  Why is he unwilling to transfer the responsibility for Terry to her parents via a transfer of guardianship? Is he seeking revenge on the Schindler family by starving their daughter to death?

  If he was just wanting to be shut of this whole experience that would be the easy way out. Just sign her over to her parents and wash his hands of the whole matter. And I have questioned why he doesn't do it. But according to him, her wishes were not to ever be kept alive in this type condition, so maybe he feels a responsiblity to end this the way she wanted. I don't think he's seeking revenge on her parents but her parents are definitely not thinking clearly on this situation, so between him wanting what he says Terri wanted and the parents wanting to believe she can recover they are now pitted against each other as enemies.
• 

  Little Red Hen

  I weep for Terri and her Parents. What a travesty. However, I really think that this case, Terry, her parents, and her husband?s guardianship and the right to make this decision are but a small part of an overall plan, one beyond the parent's ability or desire to care for Terri.
  
  I truly feel this is somehow related to the current administrations take on social security, and the retirement age. Bear with me a moment, this is not a thread hijack. On 2-15-05 I saw Pat Robertson at the National Press Club Luncheon played on C-SPAN (god, wish I had tivo! no ref of it on google). talking about the president's plan for social security, and raising the retirement age. He said to the effect of people are living longer, and should work to support themselves. He used himself as an example. (of course, he is wealthy beyond any our imaginations). When asked about all those who are in ill health, and what the responsibility of the government was in their care, he replied to the effect of they should have taken better care of themselves.

  The central legal point of this case with Terri is whether she would have wanted to remain alive in a state other than a fully functioning person. Her husband insists that she would want to have the 'plug pulled' if she was in such a state. That and the fact that the medical opinion given the most weight by the court supports the theory she will never recover, and is a veg.

  I think we will see legislation come from this case that will make mandatory a living will for all Amerikans. Further, whether there will be a choice of DNR or artificial life support will be based on the law that the right to life president who was then governor of Texas passed on state funded life support. If one has the ability to pay for one's support, or family willing to do so, one will have the choice. Else, the precedent will have been set by this case. The Schiavo Precedent.

  And yes, her husband is a sleaze. But then, to my eyes, this whole issue is a conflicted-vested interest circle jerk, and unfortunately, there is a real person in the middle, named Terri, who has been sentenced to die.
• 

  Odrade

  CAT scans have already shown conclusively that Mrs. Schiavo's cerebral cortex is in a state of gross disintegration. Most, if not all of it has been replaced with cerebro-spinal fluid. The only thing having surgery to remove the implants so she could have an MRI would do is to show whether or not a small isolated amount of "normal" tissue remains in her brain.

  If the brain, (meaning cerebral cortex) is not gone, there are documented cases of recovery to varying degrees. The critical factor though, is whether enough cerebral cortex remains to take over the lost functions, and whether or not it can be trained to do so. If the cerebral cortex is too severely damaged, or as in this case, mush, the brain stem is not neurologically or functionally capable of developing the new synaptic connections needed to take over higher functioning.

  Earlier, I used the word "emotionalism." I did not mean "emotional," as this case truly is. I used "emotionalism" because many people have decided that the multitude of unanimous court decisions about Mrs. Schiavo's care are wrong. Why? Because it feels wrong. I believe the Schindlers have done a superb job of providing the right bits of information so that people think Mr. Schiavo, and the courts are monstrous. Emotionalism is the undue reliance on emotion, rather than fact, to make a decision.

  Also earlier, I stated that Mrs. Schiavo had received four years of rehabilitative therapy. I was wrong. For that I apologize. In my research through various information sites not funded by SaveTerri.org, and in reading available court transcripts, I have learned that Mrs. Schiavo only received THREE years of aggressive rehabilitative therapy. My bad.

  For the record, I am not in favor of "killing" Mrs. Schiavo. I am in favor of the unanimous courts' decisions not being trampled on because of propaganda, politics and emotionalism.

  Odrade
• 

  Big Tex

  Well said as always Odrade