Scientology and Terri Schindler Schiavo: The Death Connection Updates
http://tinyurl.com/8zppk
Saturday, 16 April 2005
Terri Was Advised Not To Go Home The Last Night
From Dee Rohe drrohe@bellsouth.net
10-25-03
This is a letter written by Kathleen Walker to the St. Petersburg Times
Dear Mr. Levesque,
I am sure that you wrote your article on Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo in what you believed was the truth. However, I can stay quiet no longer.
It is a proven fact that Mr. Schiavo had at least one affair and fathered an illegitimate child while still married to Terri before she was injured,
He is paying child support. Since her injuries, it is also a proven fact that he has been with numerous women one with whom he now has one child with another on the way.
No one has investigated nor seems to even care that the night that this happened to Terri they had had a huge fight. She had confided to family members and friends that he had become abusive and controlling. She was advised not to go home that night but to spend the night with a girlfriend but she went home. Hours later he called Bob Schindler saying Terri was on the floor hurt. He did not call 911 first.
There are medical records that sustain the fact that Terri suffered multiple broken bones that night and came to the hospital with a rigid neck. I have all that info if you are interested and would be happy to send to you.
To say that Mr. Schiavo loves Terri is nonsense.
He lost the ability to say "my wife" with any credence a very long time ago.
I wish that just one person would print the truth about this guy. I truly believe that the only reason he wants her dead so much is because he never wants her to come out of this and point the finger at him for battering her almost to death. He wants to finish what he started that night.
You probably won't investigate any of this. No one seems to care what happened to Terri but at least I know I have tried.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Walker St. Petersburg, Fl.
copied from http://www.rense.com/general43/tere.htm
http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/terri_was_advised_not_to_go_home.html
Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Legalized Murder
By Wesley J. Smith
Spence Publishing
PB, 336 pg. US$17.95
ISBN: 1-8906-2648-1
The most important book you will read this year
By Linda A. Prussen-Razzano
web posted June 30, 2003
Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Legalized
MurderWhen I received the preview of Welsey Smith's revised version of
Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Legalized
Murder, to be released this month by Spence Publishing, I was not
overly enthusiastic about reading it. Forced Exit deals with the
controversial issue of euthanasia, otherwise described as "mercy
killing." Typically, I can breeze through over 100 pages an hour with
complete retention.
This work was so compelling, so chillingly thorough, and so
horrifyingly complete in its review of the issue, it took me several
hours to read and absorb it. Where before I had viewed the subject
with a rather detached mindset, I am now prepared to make several
necessary changes to my legal documents to ensure my future survival.
I now accept fervently that there is no "mercy" to these "mercy
killings," that the agenda behind the "pro-death" movement holds the
same debasing mentality as those supporting the abortion industry, and
that changes must take place to prevent this from ever becoming
socially acceptable in America.
Wesley plumbs the depths of the pro-death culture promoting euthanasia
as an efficient means of eliminating end-of-life care. With a strong,
fluid, and decisive writing style, Wesley decimates the arguments used
by pro-death proponents to promote their agenda. Using studies from
the Netherlands, where euthanasia has been practiced for years, Wesley
dryly points out that approximately 50 per cent of the people that die
by euthanasia do so at the doctor's request, not their own, even if it
is against their expressed wishes.
Don't fool yourselves into believing that it can't happen here. It is
already happening here. Wesley details numerous instances were
premature babies, infirmed elderly, and conscious but cognitively
impaired people are denied life-saving treatment at the behest of the
hospitals and doctors, against the wishes of the patients, the family
members, or the agents authorized to act for the patients. In one
instance, parents fighting to save their premature newborn had their
parental rights revoked because they didn't want their baby to die.
The hospital sued to have the rights revoked and the child
subsequently died.
Euthanasia, or doctor assisted suicide, is not as painless and easy as
the proponents portray it, either. Some may not object to shutting of
a ventilator for a person who is brain-dead with no hope of recovery,
but a good many people should be horrified to discover that conscious,
alert, and functioning individuals, who may be cognitively impaired
but are working towards independence, can have their feeding tubes
removed and are allowed to slowly starve to death if the hospital
determines that their "quality of life" is not worth living.
Do you know how long it takes people to starve to death? Days. Days of
agony, with people moving around you, knowing you are dying and not
doing a thing to help you. Instead of working to improve your
condition, recognizing your accomplishments, they shuffle you off to a
corner and patiently wait while your body slowly feeds on itself until
you expire in a gruesome and painful manner.
That's compassion? On what planet, exactly?
Don't fool yourselves into believing it can't happen to you. Wesley
also details cases where patients, who were not experiencing a life
threatening illness or near the end of their life, were denied
necessary medical treatment because the hospitals or HMOs viewed it as
excessive. Further, more and more hospitals now employ bioethicists
who embrace the pro-death culture, which presumes you have a right to
die but not a right to live, and direct care in that manner.
There is so much more to Forced Exit that it would take several
reviews to list it all. This is a must have for anyone who cares about
their loved ones, their liberty, their civil rights, and the condition
of society. It will horrify you, anger you, and enlighten you.
But above all, it will educate you.
Linda Prussen-Razzano is frequent contributor to Enter Stage Right and
a number of other online magazines.
Buy Forced Exit: The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Legalized
Murder at Amazon.com for only $12.57 (30% off)
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0703/0703forcedexit.htm
Subject: Why Progressives Should Oppose Doctor Assisted Suicide
Subject: Why Progressives Should Oppose Doctor Assisted Suicide
From: "Marilyn Golden"
Date: 12 Apr 2005 18:23:45 -0500
Marilyn Golden 12.APR.05
Today the Assembly Judiciary Committee begins hearings on AB 654, which would legalize assisted suicide in California. There is a widespread public perception that those opposed to legalization are
religious conservatives, and the logical position for a liberal is in support.
But the coalition that's formed to oppose the bill, Californians Against Assisted Suicide (http://www.ca-aas.com/) shows a diversity of political opinion that may be surprising to those who have not looked closely at the issue. In opposition are numerous disability rights organizations, generally seen as liberal-leaning; the Southern
California Cancer Pain Initiative, a group associated with the American Cancer Society; the American Medical Association and the California Medical Association; and the Coalition of Concerned
Medical Professionals, which does anti-poverty work in poor communities. Catholic organizations are in the mix, but no one could consider this a coalition of religious conservatives. They represent many groups coming together across the political spectrum. Why?
. MANAGED CARE AND ASSISTED SUICIDE-A DEADLY MIX.
Perhaps the most significant reason is the deadly mix between assisted suicide and profit-driven managed health care. Again and again, health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and managed care bureaucracies have overruled physicians' treatment decisions,
sometimes hastening patients' deaths. The cost of the lethal medication generally used for assisted suicide is about $35 to $50, far cheaper than the cost of treatment for most long-term medical conditions. The incentive to save money by denying treatment already
poses a significant danger. This danger would be far greater if assisted suicide is legal.
Though the bill would prohibit insurance companies from coercing patients, direct coercion is not necessary. If patients with limited finances are denied other treatment options, they are, in effect,
being steered toward assisted death. It is no coincidence that the author of Oregon's assisted suicide law, Barbara Coombs Lee, was an HMO executive when she drafted it.
A 1998 study from Georgetown University's Center for Clinical Bioethics underscores the link between profit-driven managed health care and assisted suicide. The research found a strong link between
cost-cutting pressure on physicians and their willingness to prescribe lethal drugs to patients, were it legal to do so. The study warns that there must be "a sobering degree of caution in legalizing [assisted suicide] in a medical care environment that is characterized by increasing pressure on physicians to control the cost of care."
. OREGON IS A DEEPLY FLAWED MODEL
The California bill is modeled after a nearly identical law that went into effect in Oregon in 1997. Assisted suicide advocates laud Oregon's example. But Oregon shines only if you don't look too
closely. Californians concerned with good government have reason to be highly skeptical.
Each year, Oregon publishes a statistical report that leaves out more than it states. For example, several of these reports have included language such as "We cannot determine whether assisted suicide is being practiced outside the framework of the law." The
statute provided no resources or even authority to detect violations. All we know comes from doctors who prescribed the drugs, not family members or friends who probably have additional information about
the patients. Doctors that fail to report their lethal prescriptions face no penalty. The state doesn't even talk to doctors who refused to assist the very same patients other physicians later helped to die, though these doctors who first said "no" may have viewed the patients as not meeting legal requirements, important information if one wishes to evaluate the law's outcomes. Autopsies are not
required, so there's no way to ascertain the deceased was actually terminally ill, opening the door to another Dr. Kevorkian. The state's research has never reported on several prominent cases inconsistent with the law - these cases came to light only via the
media. Last month, an editorial in The Oregonian complained that the law's reporting system "seems rigged to avoid finding" the answers.
Also disturbing, end-of-life care in Oregon has been touted as improving because of this law, but when the full situation is taken into account, the claim lacked data or the improvement has been explainable from other factors - for example, assisted suicide
advocates have lauded an increase in the use of hospice, but hospice referrals have increased dramatically across the U.S. Then, in July 2004, a study in the Journal of Palliative Medicine showed that dying patients in Oregon are nearly twice as likely to experience moderate or severe pain during the last week of life, as similar Oregon patients around the time the Oregon law came into effect, suggesting a significant decline.
Most troubling, the California bill and Oregon's law also legalize negligence, by means of the "good faith" standard, which says that no practitioner of assisted suicide will be subject to any legal
liability if they act in good faith, something nearly impossible to disprove, making all other rules unenforceable. For everything else doctors do, they are liable if they are negligent. But on assisted suicide, even if negligent, health care practitioners
cannot be found violating the law, as long as they practice in good faith.
There are many more reasons progressives should oppose the legalization of assisted suicide. We must separate our private wishes for what we each may hope to have available for ourselves someday and, rather, focus on the significant dangers of legalizing assisted suicide in this society as it operates today. This column is sure to bring howls from those already ideologically supportive of legalization, but anyone who wants to look deeper, beyond the simplistic mantras of choice and "right to die," are encouraged to read other articles and testimony that can be found in these locations:
A longer article by this author at http://dredf.org/assistedsuicide.html
Commentary by Dr. Herbert Hendin, Medical director of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, at
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040201b.html
Testimony by Dr. Gregg Hamilton, Physicians for Compassionate Care, at http://www.pccef.org/articles/art32HouseOfLords.htm
Analysis of the first six years of Oregon's assisted suicide law by the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide at http://internationaltaskforce.org/orrpt6.htm
Subject: Why Progressives Should Oppose Doctor Assisted Suicide
From: "Marilyn Golden"
Date: 12 Apr 2005 18:23:45 -0500
Marilyn Golden 12.APR.05
Today the Assembly Judiciary Committee begins hearings on AB 654, which would legalize assisted suicide in California. There is a widespread public perception that those opposed to legalization are
religious conservatives, and the logical position for a liberal is in support.
But the coalition that's formed to oppose the bill, Californians Against Assisted Suicide (http://www.ca-aas.com/) shows a diversity of political opinion that may be surprising to those who have not looked closely at the issue. In opposition are numerous disability rights organizations, generally seen as liberal-leaning; the Southern
California Cancer Pain Initiative, a group associated with the American Cancer Society; the American Medical Association and the California Medical Association; and the Coalition of Concerned
Medical Professionals, which does anti-poverty work in poor communities. Catholic organizations are in the mix, but no one could consider this a coalition of religious conservatives. They represent many groups coming together across the political spectrum. Why?
. MANAGED CARE AND ASSISTED SUICIDE-A DEADLY MIX.
Perhaps the most significant reason is the deadly mix between assisted suicide and profit-driven managed health care. Again and again, health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and managed care bureaucracies have overruled physicians' treatment decisions,
sometimes hastening patients' deaths. The cost of the lethal medication generally used for assisted suicide is about $35 to $50, far cheaper than the cost of treatment for most long-term medical conditions. The incentive to save money by denying treatment already
poses a significant danger. This danger would be far greater if assisted suicide is legal.
Though the bill would prohibit insurance companies from coercing patients, direct coercion is not necessary. If patients with limited finances are denied other treatment options, they are, in effect,
being steered toward assisted death. It is no coincidence that the author of Oregon's assisted suicide law, Barbara Coombs Lee, was an HMO executive when she drafted it.
A 1998 study from Georgetown University's Center for Clinical Bioethics underscores the link between profit-driven managed health care and assisted suicide. The research found a strong link between
cost-cutting pressure on physicians and their willingness to prescribe lethal drugs to patients, were it legal to do so. The study warns that there must be "a sobering degree of caution in legalizing [assisted suicide] in a medical care environment that is characterized by increasing pressure on physicians to control the cost of care."
. OREGON IS A DEEPLY FLAWED MODEL
The California bill is modeled after a nearly identical law that went into effect in Oregon in 1997. Assisted suicide advocates laud Oregon's example. But Oregon shines only if you don't look too
closely. Californians concerned with good government have reason to be highly skeptical.
Each year, Oregon publishes a statistical report that leaves out more than it states. For example, several of these reports have included language such as "We cannot determine whether assisted suicide is being practiced outside the framework of the law." The
statute provided no resources or even authority to detect violations. All we know comes from doctors who prescribed the drugs, not family members or friends who probably have additional information about
the patients. Doctors that fail to report their lethal prescriptions face no penalty. The state doesn't even talk to doctors who refused to assist the very same patients other physicians later helped to die, though these doctors who first said "no" may have viewed the patients as not meeting legal requirements, important information if one wishes to evaluate the law's outcomes. Autopsies are not
required, so there's no way to ascertain the deceased was actually terminally ill, opening the door to another Dr. Kevorkian. The state's research has never reported on several prominent cases inconsistent with the law - these cases came to light only via the
media. Last month, an editorial in The Oregonian complained that the law's reporting system "seems rigged to avoid finding" the answers.
Also disturbing, end-of-life care in Oregon has been touted as improving because of this law, but when the full situation is taken into account, the claim lacked data or the improvement has been explainable from other factors - for example, assisted suicide
advocates have lauded an increase in the use of hospice, but hospice referrals have increased dramatically across the U.S. Then, in July 2004, a study in the Journal of Palliative Medicine showed that dying patients in Oregon are nearly twice as likely to experience moderate or severe pain during the last week of life, as similar Oregon patients around the time the Oregon law came into effect, suggesting a significant decline.
Most troubling, the California bill and Oregon's law also legalize negligence, by means of the "good faith" standard, which says that no practitioner of assisted suicide will be subject to any legal
liability if they act in good faith, something nearly impossible to disprove, making all other rules unenforceable. For everything else doctors do, they are liable if they are negligent. But on assisted suicide, even if negligent, health care practitioners
cannot be found violating the law, as long as they practice in good faith.
There are many more reasons progressives should oppose the legalization of assisted suicide. We must separate our private wishes for what we each may hope to have available for ourselves someday and, rather, focus on the significant dangers of legalizing assisted suicide in this society as it operates today. This column is sure to bring howls from those already ideologically supportive of legalization, but anyone who wants to look deeper, beyond the simplistic mantras of choice and "right to die," are encouraged to read other articles and testimony that can be found in these locations:
A longer article by this author at http://dredf.org/assistedsuicide.html
Commentary by Dr. Herbert Hendin, Medical director of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, at
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/p040201b.html
Testimony by Dr. Gregg Hamilton, Physicians for Compassionate Care, at http://www.pccef.org/articles/art32HouseOfLords.htm
Analysis of the first six years of Oregon's assisted suicide law by the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide at http://internationaltaskforce.org/orrpt6.htm
An Epitaph For Terri
Posted to apfn.org.
Dear Sirs/Madams,
Enclosed is my epitaph for Terri.
Best wishes,
Thomas Crane
An Epitaph For Terri
Dear Terri,
I want you to know that as I write this epitaph to you, I do so with sadness of thought and sorrow in my heart. Rather than face any congregation, I hope that some small part of the world will have the
opportunity to read my thoughts as well as my words. If I did not write these words, I would feel that there is a vacancy in my heart as well as my soul.
Hopefully, you will accept the idea that you did not die in vain for there were many who had your best interests at heart and you will serve as an example of the injustices that we all must face on any
given day. Your memory will serve as a symbol for those of us who struggle to protect those who are unable to protect themselves. The only weapons that we have at our command are the prayers that we pray
to our God and the voices that we raise towards those who would unjustly rule over us.
No matter how incapacitated you might have been, our thoughts were that as long as your breathed life, there was hope for your eventual recovery and a place for you in this world. Admittedly, others thought differently and they sought to end your life and
unfortunately, they succeeded. Now, we must go on and face the onslaught that will be presented to us because, sadly, there will be others like you where the curtain of life will be drawn and in many
cases, prematurely. All that we asked was that you be given a chance to live and not to die. We have all been enveloped by a Culture of Death and it remains to be seen if we have the strength and fortitude
to defeat it. The forces that we face are quite schooled in forcing their will upon others and are devious at best because they oftentimes come with a smile on their faces, but with evil in their hearts.
I have lived long enough to gain some experience in life and it saddens me to witness how far our Nation has deteriorated in it's respect for and the preservation of life. There was a time when the
citizens of our Country acted in valor to save lives and no matter as to race, creed or color. These rescuers were not out to prove a point nor did they act in selfish interest by expressing a particular
ideology whether that ideology be one of politics, religious belief or personal gain. Many of them acted according to the situation at the time and without any regard to their own well being. Their only
thought was to save another human being and oftentimes at great risk to themselves. In your case, I did not witness any valor on the part of others, but rather, they were willing to sacrifice your life in order to prove a point or relieve themselves of the obligation that your continued existence placed upon them. It was no act of valor to deny you food or drink, but rather a callous act of deprivation.
Their only design was to make you die. The only example they provided for the rest of us was how ruthless they could be towards another human being. Theirs is not an example that I would wish to pass on to my own children as it is an evil one and evil corrupts and destroys the soul. It is like a beast in the jungle. Once it kills, it is easy for it to kill again.
As for your own family, I have to tell you that from what I have seen and read, they fought the good fight, but oftentimes the pure of heart don't often win. The fact that they stood and faced those who were intent on taking your life speaks volumes for the rest of us who, for all practical purposes, might not have had the strength to do the same. Because of them, you should be most proud and I hope that in
some way, my words might reach them. If anything, they can take heart in knowing that many of us shared their agony throughout your final ordeal.
Where my Country is concerned, I must tell you that I am quite disappointed because wherever our flag has flown it has always served as an example for other peoples and lands. The principles for which that flag once stood now has had a stain placed upon it. True, we have gone to war to protect not only our own principles, but, in many cases, to spread the ideals for which our flag stood. Wherever death has occurred while fighting under that flag it has always been for a noble purpose. Never has it been known that we would deprive another human being the essentials of life, but now we have and worse yet, we have denied those essentials to one of our own. We now must bow our heads in shame because we have been corrupted by the very same ruthless ideologies that we oftentimes have fought against throughout the ages.
So, Dear Terri, we now have come to a turning point in our long history of protecting human values and worth. The question remains as to whether or not we will gather together the forces necessary to prevent what has happened to you from happening to others. Or, do we slide further into the abyss and repeat what other great cultures have done before our own and that is to start to destroy those things that
we considered most sacred. Is it not time to say enough is enough? If you can take any satisfaction in your sacrifice, you can trust that you have awakened our Nation to a new cause. We are now called upon
to reaffirm the values that were written in our Nation's Constitution and that is to, "...protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
May you rest upon Angel's wings,
Thomas J. Crane
1354 Hirsch
Calumet City, IL 60409
Copyright (C) 2005 All Rights Reserved
Posted to apfn.org.
Dear Sirs/Madams,
Enclosed is my epitaph for Terri.
Best wishes,
Thomas Crane
An Epitaph For Terri
Dear Terri,
I want you to know that as I write this epitaph to you, I do so with sadness of thought and sorrow in my heart. Rather than face any congregation, I hope that some small part of the world will have the
opportunity to read my thoughts as well as my words. If I did not write these words, I would feel that there is a vacancy in my heart as well as my soul.
Hopefully, you will accept the idea that you did not die in vain for there were many who had your best interests at heart and you will serve as an example of the injustices that we all must face on any
given day. Your memory will serve as a symbol for those of us who struggle to protect those who are unable to protect themselves. The only weapons that we have at our command are the prayers that we pray
to our God and the voices that we raise towards those who would unjustly rule over us.
No matter how incapacitated you might have been, our thoughts were that as long as your breathed life, there was hope for your eventual recovery and a place for you in this world. Admittedly, others thought differently and they sought to end your life and
unfortunately, they succeeded. Now, we must go on and face the onslaught that will be presented to us because, sadly, there will be others like you where the curtain of life will be drawn and in many
cases, prematurely. All that we asked was that you be given a chance to live and not to die. We have all been enveloped by a Culture of Death and it remains to be seen if we have the strength and fortitude
to defeat it. The forces that we face are quite schooled in forcing their will upon others and are devious at best because they oftentimes come with a smile on their faces, but with evil in their hearts.
I have lived long enough to gain some experience in life and it saddens me to witness how far our Nation has deteriorated in it's respect for and the preservation of life. There was a time when the
citizens of our Country acted in valor to save lives and no matter as to race, creed or color. These rescuers were not out to prove a point nor did they act in selfish interest by expressing a particular
ideology whether that ideology be one of politics, religious belief or personal gain. Many of them acted according to the situation at the time and without any regard to their own well being. Their only
thought was to save another human being and oftentimes at great risk to themselves. In your case, I did not witness any valor on the part of others, but rather, they were willing to sacrifice your life in order to prove a point or relieve themselves of the obligation that your continued existence placed upon them. It was no act of valor to deny you food or drink, but rather a callous act of deprivation.
Their only design was to make you die. The only example they provided for the rest of us was how ruthless they could be towards another human being. Theirs is not an example that I would wish to pass on to my own children as it is an evil one and evil corrupts and destroys the soul. It is like a beast in the jungle. Once it kills, it is easy for it to kill again.
As for your own family, I have to tell you that from what I have seen and read, they fought the good fight, but oftentimes the pure of heart don't often win. The fact that they stood and faced those who were intent on taking your life speaks volumes for the rest of us who, for all practical purposes, might not have had the strength to do the same. Because of them, you should be most proud and I hope that in
some way, my words might reach them. If anything, they can take heart in knowing that many of us shared their agony throughout your final ordeal.
Where my Country is concerned, I must tell you that I am quite disappointed because wherever our flag has flown it has always served as an example for other peoples and lands. The principles for which that flag once stood now has had a stain placed upon it. True, we have gone to war to protect not only our own principles, but, in many cases, to spread the ideals for which our flag stood. Wherever death has occurred while fighting under that flag it has always been for a noble purpose. Never has it been known that we would deprive another human being the essentials of life, but now we have and worse yet, we have denied those essentials to one of our own. We now must bow our heads in shame because we have been corrupted by the very same ruthless ideologies that we oftentimes have fought against throughout the ages.
So, Dear Terri, we now have come to a turning point in our long history of protecting human values and worth. The question remains as to whether or not we will gather together the forces necessary to prevent what has happened to you from happening to others. Or, do we slide further into the abyss and repeat what other great cultures have done before our own and that is to start to destroy those things that
we considered most sacred. Is it not time to say enough is enough? If you can take any satisfaction in your sacrifice, you can trust that you have awakened our Nation to a new cause. We are now called upon
to reaffirm the values that were written in our Nation's Constitution and that is to, "...protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
May you rest upon Angel's wings,
Thomas J. Crane
1354 Hirsch
Calumet City, IL 60409
Copyright (C) 2005 All Rights Reserved
Hospice Woodside hired snipers to protect themselves while starving Terri
--------------------
Thanks to PH for forwarding this piece of news
I just heard a report on Bay News 9 www.baynews9.com) that the bill for extra security to the Hospice Woodside during the two weeks they were starving Terri Schiavo to death is well over $100,000. Hospice of the Florida Suncoast (of which Woodside is a subsidiary) requested the added 'protection' for their staff.
This 'protection' for their staff included snipers on the rooftops of nearby buildings. It included several armed officers at Terri's bedside and outside her door.
Mind you: Snipers used in the event they had to shoot at the people who believe in the preservation of LIFE; they were not there to shoot at the people who were inhumanely KILLING a girl.
Even more outrageous than that is the fact that Pinellas Park's city management is proposing that Hospice Woodside be relieved of their obligation to pay for this 'protection' and that the bill be footed by the citizens of Pinellas Park, Florida instead.
Hospice of the Florida Suncoast takes in over 75 Million Dollars annually. Hospice Woodside had allowed Terri to be confined to her room with no access to common areas or the outside grounds. Hospice Woodside also allowed her to be admitted even though she was not terminally ill. And Hospice Woodside's staff refused to administer food and water naturally in violation of Florida's 825.102 statute
that defines abuse, neglect and exploitation of an incapacitated person.
Let them pay their own bloody bills.
Pinellas Park City Management contacts -
http://www.pinellas-park.com/Contact/emailcouncil.asp
Fight4Terri @aol.com
Theresa Marie Schindler
December 3, 1963 ~ March 31, 2005
Light a candle For Terri at her online Memorial Website Memory-of.com - Memorial website in memory of Theresa Schindler
(1963-2005)
http://theresa-schindler.memory-of.com/about.aspx
Visit: www.fight4terri.blogspot.com
Fight4Terri does not wish to forward unsolicited mail. Please type the word "unsubscribe" in subject heading if you prefer to not receive anymore updates about Terri and your screen name will be
immediately deleted from Fight4Terri's address book.
--------------------
Thanks to PH for forwarding this piece of news
I just heard a report on Bay News 9 www.baynews9.com) that the bill for extra security to the Hospice Woodside during the two weeks they were starving Terri Schiavo to death is well over $100,000. Hospice of the Florida Suncoast (of which Woodside is a subsidiary) requested the added 'protection' for their staff.
This 'protection' for their staff included snipers on the rooftops of nearby buildings. It included several armed officers at Terri's bedside and outside her door.
Mind you: Snipers used in the event they had to shoot at the people who believe in the preservation of LIFE; they were not there to shoot at the people who were inhumanely KILLING a girl.
Even more outrageous than that is the fact that Pinellas Park's city management is proposing that Hospice Woodside be relieved of their obligation to pay for this 'protection' and that the bill be footed by the citizens of Pinellas Park, Florida instead.
Hospice of the Florida Suncoast takes in over 75 Million Dollars annually. Hospice Woodside had allowed Terri to be confined to her room with no access to common areas or the outside grounds. Hospice Woodside also allowed her to be admitted even though she was not terminally ill. And Hospice Woodside's staff refused to administer food and water naturally in violation of Florida's 825.102 statute
that defines abuse, neglect and exploitation of an incapacitated person.
Let them pay their own bloody bills.
Pinellas Park City Management contacts -
http://www.pinellas-park.com/Contact/emailcouncil.asp
Fight4Terri @aol.com
Theresa Marie Schindler
December 3, 1963 ~ March 31, 2005
Light a candle For Terri at her online Memorial Website Memory-of.com - Memorial website in memory of Theresa Schindler
(1963-2005)
http://theresa-schindler.memory-of.com/about.aspx
Visit: www.fight4terri.blogspot.com
Fight4Terri does not wish to forward unsolicited mail. Please type the word "unsubscribe" in subject heading if you prefer to not receive anymore updates about Terri and your screen name will be
immediately deleted from Fight4Terri's address book.
Wednesday, 6 April 2005
Terri's slow-motion torture death
Terri's slow-motion
torture death
Posted: March 22, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Msgr. James C. Brunner
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
As this is written, the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo has been removed
by order of Judge George Greer and, unless a federal court intervenes,
she will die a painful death by starvation in a period ranging from
four to 20 days. In all the discussion of this case it seems to me
that its essential morality has been overlooked. The argument seems to
rage about who has the final authority in sentencing her to death.
Which legislature or court, state or federal? The husband or the
family? This misses the central point: Should any political entity or
any individual have the right to sentence a person in a "persistent
vegetative state" to death?
We need to be clear. Removing the feeding tube from Terri is not
"allowing nature to take its course" or "allowing her to die." If a
man locks his daughter in a closet for two weeks and gives her no food
or drink, he is causing her death. Nobody would speak of letting
nature take it course but about homicide. We have here a court-ordered
homicide. No governmental agency or private individual should have
authority to impose a sentence of this sort on an innocent human being.
ANH, or assisted nutrition and hydration, means only the giving of
food and water to persons who get hungry and thirsty. Pope John Paul
II teaches that even when provided by artificial means, it remains a
natural method of preserving life and not a medical act. No one thinks
that spooning food into an infant's mouth when he is incapable of
feeding himself is an unnatural or medical act.
Even convicted criminals and terrorists who have tried to kill us are
entitled to three meals a day. On what grounds do we deny food to
Terri? Judge George Greer must have graduated from the Dr. Kevorkian
school of law. If he wanted to impose a death sentence why did he not
just have the tube capped instead of imposing on her the additional
pain of having the tube removed?
Terri is supposed to be in a "persistent vegetative state." That
description has an unfortunate, dehumanizing aspect. A vegetable is
something that we eat. Ironically, it derives from the Latin vegetare,
which means to enliven, activate, animate or quicken. Terri is not
brain-dead or comatose. She is a human who cannot function at full
capacity. Humanity is something that we are, not something that we do.
We are human beings, not human "doings." Dehumanizing the handicapped
not only lessens them but us.
Michael Schiavo, Terri's estranged husband, reported (five years after
she became handicapped) that Terri once remarked that she did not want
to live on life support. If the report is accurate, does it also mean
that she wished to undergo an agonizing death by starvation? Does the
so-called right to die include the right to be tortured? There seems
to be little difference between starving her and giving her strychnine
except that the latter would be faster and perhaps less painful.
Either set of circumstances would be a homicide.
How did we come to a point that we are arguing about denying food to a
human being, about a culture of death rather than a culture of life? A
review of developments in Nazi Germany might be enlightening. The Nazi
atrocities were based on a philosophy that made the "quality of life"
more important than the "sanctity of life."
The Nazis slipped into the holocaust by seven recognizable steps. 1)
There was an acceptance of mercy killing to put people out of their
misery. 2) When Germany suffered a severe economic crunch efforts were
made to remove "useless" expenses from the budget. That led to the
killing of the chronically ill with no hope of recovery (Terri
Schiavo?). 3) Next came killing of the elderly who were without
relatives and resources but were a burden to the state. 4) This was
followed by the elimination of bums, beggars, gypsies and hopelessly
poor people. 5) Then came the economy of eliminating people who were
drawing welfare. 6) It was then the turn of the ideologically
unwanted, political enemies of the state, "religious extremists,"
"disloyal" individuals who were holding the government back from
providing every citizen a better quality of life. 7) Finally there
came those who in the ideology of the Nazis were evolutionally unfit
such as Jew and those who were not pure Aryans. Once the first step,
acceptance of euthanasia was taken, all other steps followed logically.
Could a holocaust happen here? Yes. A philosophy like that of Peter
Singer that would permit the killing of infants under certain
circumstances could serve as its intellectual underpinning. Indeed,
one may say it has already begun with the killing of 40 million unborn
infants by "legal" abortion. Abortion, euthanasia, cloning and
embryonic stem-cell research represent a belief that certain humans
should control the making and taking of human life. This is not unlike
the Third Reich. Things that were once condemned as a crime against
humanity at Nuremberg are now regarded as acts of compassion.
Terri's death sentence has many implications. Women's and civil-rights
groups are notably absent from defending Terri. Also missing are
leftists who seem to believe in government by the judiciary since
their positions do not gain approval in legislatures. They would like
Judge Greer to be upheld because, as Cardinal Renato Martino remarked
on Vatican radio: "If Mr. Schiavo succeeds legally in causing the
death of his wife, this not only would be tragic in itself, but would
be a great step toward the legal approval of euthanasia in the United
States."
Liberals rightfully are opposed to torture – except for Terri. They
give the "right to die" priority over the right to live. Some liberals
complain that intervention by Congress is a violation of states'
rights, but they had no such concern for authority of states in court
decisions overturning sodomy laws and gay marriage bans.
Do we want the government to allow people to be starved to death? We
are not speaking here of extraordinary means of life support, but
human feeding. Are we now going to kill Alzheimer's patients who have
lost all capacity for memory and are unable to function without
guidance? What about Parkinson's patients? If sentencing the
handicapped to death continues, people are going to die under the
guise of compassion and understanding when the decision will not
really be about them at all but about the convenience of others. We
will be making life-and-death decisions based on how much trouble it
will be for us to let them live.
There are millions in nursing homes who cannot wash and feed
themselves. In that sense they are very much like Terri. Her lot may
soon be theirs. Roe v. Wade allowed killing human beings in the womb.
Now, beginning with Terri, human beings outside the womb can be
destroyed. Now judges decide who gets food and water.
Dr. Kevorkian was jailed for helping to dispatch people who wanted to
die. How is Terri's case any different?
Msgr. James C. Brunner is pastor of St. Mary's Church in Victoria, Texas.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43415
Terri's slow-motion
torture death
Posted: March 22, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Msgr. James C. Brunner
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
As this is written, the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo has been removed
by order of Judge George Greer and, unless a federal court intervenes,
she will die a painful death by starvation in a period ranging from
four to 20 days. In all the discussion of this case it seems to me
that its essential morality has been overlooked. The argument seems to
rage about who has the final authority in sentencing her to death.
Which legislature or court, state or federal? The husband or the
family? This misses the central point: Should any political entity or
any individual have the right to sentence a person in a "persistent
vegetative state" to death?
We need to be clear. Removing the feeding tube from Terri is not
"allowing nature to take its course" or "allowing her to die." If a
man locks his daughter in a closet for two weeks and gives her no food
or drink, he is causing her death. Nobody would speak of letting
nature take it course but about homicide. We have here a court-ordered
homicide. No governmental agency or private individual should have
authority to impose a sentence of this sort on an innocent human being.
ANH, or assisted nutrition and hydration, means only the giving of
food and water to persons who get hungry and thirsty. Pope John Paul
II teaches that even when provided by artificial means, it remains a
natural method of preserving life and not a medical act. No one thinks
that spooning food into an infant's mouth when he is incapable of
feeding himself is an unnatural or medical act.
Even convicted criminals and terrorists who have tried to kill us are
entitled to three meals a day. On what grounds do we deny food to
Terri? Judge George Greer must have graduated from the Dr. Kevorkian
school of law. If he wanted to impose a death sentence why did he not
just have the tube capped instead of imposing on her the additional
pain of having the tube removed?
Terri is supposed to be in a "persistent vegetative state." That
description has an unfortunate, dehumanizing aspect. A vegetable is
something that we eat. Ironically, it derives from the Latin vegetare,
which means to enliven, activate, animate or quicken. Terri is not
brain-dead or comatose. She is a human who cannot function at full
capacity. Humanity is something that we are, not something that we do.
We are human beings, not human "doings." Dehumanizing the handicapped
not only lessens them but us.
Michael Schiavo, Terri's estranged husband, reported (five years after
she became handicapped) that Terri once remarked that she did not want
to live on life support. If the report is accurate, does it also mean
that she wished to undergo an agonizing death by starvation? Does the
so-called right to die include the right to be tortured? There seems
to be little difference between starving her and giving her strychnine
except that the latter would be faster and perhaps less painful.
Either set of circumstances would be a homicide.
How did we come to a point that we are arguing about denying food to a
human being, about a culture of death rather than a culture of life? A
review of developments in Nazi Germany might be enlightening. The Nazi
atrocities were based on a philosophy that made the "quality of life"
more important than the "sanctity of life."
The Nazis slipped into the holocaust by seven recognizable steps. 1)
There was an acceptance of mercy killing to put people out of their
misery. 2) When Germany suffered a severe economic crunch efforts were
made to remove "useless" expenses from the budget. That led to the
killing of the chronically ill with no hope of recovery (Terri
Schiavo?). 3) Next came killing of the elderly who were without
relatives and resources but were a burden to the state. 4) This was
followed by the elimination of bums, beggars, gypsies and hopelessly
poor people. 5) Then came the economy of eliminating people who were
drawing welfare. 6) It was then the turn of the ideologically
unwanted, political enemies of the state, "religious extremists,"
"disloyal" individuals who were holding the government back from
providing every citizen a better quality of life. 7) Finally there
came those who in the ideology of the Nazis were evolutionally unfit
such as Jew and those who were not pure Aryans. Once the first step,
acceptance of euthanasia was taken, all other steps followed logically.
Could a holocaust happen here? Yes. A philosophy like that of Peter
Singer that would permit the killing of infants under certain
circumstances could serve as its intellectual underpinning. Indeed,
one may say it has already begun with the killing of 40 million unborn
infants by "legal" abortion. Abortion, euthanasia, cloning and
embryonic stem-cell research represent a belief that certain humans
should control the making and taking of human life. This is not unlike
the Third Reich. Things that were once condemned as a crime against
humanity at Nuremberg are now regarded as acts of compassion.
Terri's death sentence has many implications. Women's and civil-rights
groups are notably absent from defending Terri. Also missing are
leftists who seem to believe in government by the judiciary since
their positions do not gain approval in legislatures. They would like
Judge Greer to be upheld because, as Cardinal Renato Martino remarked
on Vatican radio: "If Mr. Schiavo succeeds legally in causing the
death of his wife, this not only would be tragic in itself, but would
be a great step toward the legal approval of euthanasia in the United
States."
Liberals rightfully are opposed to torture – except for Terri. They
give the "right to die" priority over the right to live. Some liberals
complain that intervention by Congress is a violation of states'
rights, but they had no such concern for authority of states in court
decisions overturning sodomy laws and gay marriage bans.
Do we want the government to allow people to be starved to death? We
are not speaking here of extraordinary means of life support, but
human feeding. Are we now going to kill Alzheimer's patients who have
lost all capacity for memory and are unable to function without
guidance? What about Parkinson's patients? If sentencing the
handicapped to death continues, people are going to die under the
guise of compassion and understanding when the decision will not
really be about them at all but about the convenience of others. We
will be making life-and-death decisions based on how much trouble it
will be for us to let them live.
There are millions in nursing homes who cannot wash and feed
themselves. In that sense they are very much like Terri. Her lot may
soon be theirs. Roe v. Wade allowed killing human beings in the womb.
Now, beginning with Terri, human beings outside the womb can be
destroyed. Now judges decide who gets food and water.
Dr. Kevorkian was jailed for helping to dispatch people who wanted to
die. How is Terri's case any different?
Msgr. James C. Brunner is pastor of St. Mary's Church in Victoria, Texas.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43415
Michael Schiavo admits on Larry King that he didn't know Terri's wishes
A review of transcript of the Larry King Show on
Friday, March 18 prepared and released by CNN nutrition and
hydration had been removed from his wife by the death
order of Florida judge George W. Greer, Michael
Schiavo admitted on national television that "we didn't know
what Terri wanted but this is what we want……"
A review of the transcript of Friday night's Larry
King show when Schiavo and his attorney, George Felos
were guests, clearly indicates that Michael Schiavo
admitted that he did not know what the wishes of Terri
Schindler-Schiavo are in regard to being kept alive by
assisted feeding.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0503/18/lkl.01.html
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.
M.SCHIAVO: I've had no contact with them.
KING: No contact at all?
M.SCHIAVO: No.
KING: Do you understand how they feel?
M.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…..
Schiavo's nationally televised admission
establishes grounds for him to be charged with perjury and for
Gov. Jeb Bush to immediately move to take the disabled
woman into protective custody before any further harm
is done to her by this attempt at judicial homicide.
Terri Schiavo, 41, sustained serious brain damage
in mysterious circumstances at her home in 1990. At a
jury trial in 1993 in a medical malpractice claim,
Schiavo testified he would take care of his wife for the
rest of his life and as a result of his testimony,
over $1 million was awarded to him with $750,000
earmarked for Terri's therapy and rehabilitation. He never
mentioned during the trial that she would not want to be
kept alive by a feeding tube.
However, as soon as he received the money, he
ordered that all rehabilitation for Terri be stopped. He
then petitioned the court for an order to end her life
and in January, 2000, for the first time, suddenly
remembered that she had allegedly made a comment some 15
years prior in 1984 while watching a movie that she
would not want to be kept alive by artificial means.
Although such self-serving hearsay is inadmissible
in Florida courts, Greer said Schiavo's hearsay
constituted "clear and convincing evidence" of her death
wish and he ordered her death by starvation and
dehydration.
Of course Schiavo stood to gain substantially
financially by her death.
Additionally, on Sunday afternoon, Schiavo
suspended the visitation rights of her parents and sister for
over four hours, in direct violation of a court
decision and order issued by Greer earlier this month which
allowed the Schindler family to be with their daughter
and sister in her last hours. Such action by Michael
Schiavo constitutes a contempt of a court order.
Informed sources said that the visits by the family
were suspended by Schiavo because her father, Bob
Schindler Sr., allegedly took a tape recorder into Terri's
room last night to record Terri talking.
Schiavo, supported by Greer, has maintained that
Terri is in a persistent vegetable state and that she
cannot speak or interact. However, her parents and
others dispute that, particularly attorney Barbara Weller
who has stated that Terri Schiavo made distinct
efforts Friday to express her desire to live when told her
assisted feeding was being removed by her husband on
order of Greer.
At 4 p.m. Sunday, Schiavo relented and allowed the
Schindlers to enter the hospice to visit Terri who is
said to be experiencing a high fever and possible
infection due to the alleged improper removal of her
feeding tube on Friday.
The 41-year-old disabled woman is now in her third
day without food and water as the result of the death
order issued by Greer. Without food and water, it is
anticipated that Terri Schiavo will die by court order
within 7 to 10 days unless there is judicial or
legislative intervention.
A review of transcript of the Larry King Show on
Friday, March 18 prepared and released by CNN nutrition and
hydration had been removed from his wife by the death
order of Florida judge George W. Greer, Michael
Schiavo admitted on national television that "we didn't know
what Terri wanted but this is what we want……"
A review of the transcript of Friday night's Larry
King show when Schiavo and his attorney, George Felos
were guests, clearly indicates that Michael Schiavo
admitted that he did not know what the wishes of Terri
Schindler-Schiavo are in regard to being kept alive by
assisted feeding.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0503/18/lkl.01.html
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.
M.SCHIAVO: I've had no contact with them.
KING: No contact at all?
M.SCHIAVO: No.
KING: Do you understand how they feel?
M.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…..
Schiavo's nationally televised admission
establishes grounds for him to be charged with perjury and for
Gov. Jeb Bush to immediately move to take the disabled
woman into protective custody before any further harm
is done to her by this attempt at judicial homicide.
Terri Schiavo, 41, sustained serious brain damage
in mysterious circumstances at her home in 1990. At a
jury trial in 1993 in a medical malpractice claim,
Schiavo testified he would take care of his wife for the
rest of his life and as a result of his testimony,
over $1 million was awarded to him with $750,000
earmarked for Terri's therapy and rehabilitation. He never
mentioned during the trial that she would not want to be
kept alive by a feeding tube.
However, as soon as he received the money, he
ordered that all rehabilitation for Terri be stopped. He
then petitioned the court for an order to end her life
and in January, 2000, for the first time, suddenly
remembered that she had allegedly made a comment some 15
years prior in 1984 while watching a movie that she
would not want to be kept alive by artificial means.
Although such self-serving hearsay is inadmissible
in Florida courts, Greer said Schiavo's hearsay
constituted "clear and convincing evidence" of her death
wish and he ordered her death by starvation and
dehydration.
Of course Schiavo stood to gain substantially
financially by her death.
Additionally, on Sunday afternoon, Schiavo
suspended the visitation rights of her parents and sister for
over four hours, in direct violation of a court
decision and order issued by Greer earlier this month which
allowed the Schindler family to be with their daughter
and sister in her last hours. Such action by Michael
Schiavo constitutes a contempt of a court order.
Informed sources said that the visits by the family
were suspended by Schiavo because her father, Bob
Schindler Sr., allegedly took a tape recorder into Terri's
room last night to record Terri talking.
Schiavo, supported by Greer, has maintained that
Terri is in a persistent vegetable state and that she
cannot speak or interact. However, her parents and
others dispute that, particularly attorney Barbara Weller
who has stated that Terri Schiavo made distinct
efforts Friday to express her desire to live when told her
assisted feeding was being removed by her husband on
order of Greer.
At 4 p.m. Sunday, Schiavo relented and allowed the
Schindlers to enter the hospice to visit Terri who is
said to be experiencing a high fever and possible
infection due to the alleged improper removal of her
feeding tube on Friday.
The 41-year-old disabled woman is now in her third
day without food and water as the result of the death
order issued by Greer. Without food and water, it is
anticipated that Terri Schiavo will die by court order
within 7 to 10 days unless there is judicial or
legislative intervention.
Court-ordered Euthanasia
Abortion / Population Control Last Updated: Mar 22nd, 2005 - 10:48:33
Court-ordered Euthanasia
by Jodie Gilmore
April 4, 2005
Euthanasia advocates claim it is not a crime to kill as long as the
victims cannot speak for themselves.
Michael Schiavo married his wife, Terri, "until death do us part."
Unfortunately, Michael wants to hurry that moment along. Normally,
there would be outrage, not to mention criminal charges, against a
husband who wanted to kill his wife. But because Terri has been
brain-damaged since 1990, Michael's efforts have attracted euthanasia
proponents who claim Terri's disablement entitles her to a mercy
killing — though it is debatable how merciful it would be to remove
her feeding tube so that she dies of starvation and dehydration over a
period of about two weeks.
The resulting Florida court battle over what Terri's father calls
"judicial homicide" has been bitter — and a woman's life hangs in the
balance. Michael and his lawyers claim that Terri is in a "persistent
vegetative state" (PVS) and that she told Michael she would not want
to live in such a state. Terri's family, on the other hand, claims
that Terri is a "purposefully interactive, alert, curious, lovely
young woman."
PVS Irrelevant
But while much of the public debate centers around whether Terri is
indeed in a PVS or some other form of disabled condition, the real
issue has been largely swept under the rug by the mainstream media.
And that is that, PVS or not, Terri is a living human being; as such
she is entitled to live her life to its natural end.
Terri is not "brain dead," as headlines and news stories describe her.
In fact, 14 independent medical professionals (six of them
neurologists) have given either statements or testimony that Terri is
not in a persistent vegetative state. Her family foundation website
notes that she "responds to stimuli, tries to communicate verbally,
follows limited commands, laughs or cries in interaction with loved
ones, physically distances herself from irritating or painful
stimulation, and watches loved ones as they move around her. None of
these behaviors are simple reflexes and are, instead, voluntary and
cognitive. Though Terri has limitations, she does interact purposely
with her environment."
Terri is not on life-support systems, such as a respirator, which
could be construed as "over-zealous" treatment, disproportionate to
the expected outcome. She does have a gastric feeding tube, which is
connected only at meal times. But the existence of a feeding tube does
not magically metamorphose Terri from a human to a "houseplant," which
is what Michael's lawyer and euthanasia advocate, George Felos,
compared her to.
Bobby Schindler, Jr., Terri's brother, has been fighting to save his
sister's life for many years. "I never realized how insidious these
death groups are," said Bobby, relating how, prior to his sister's
crisis, he considered abortion the main issue on the pro-death agenda.
Now he sees euthanasia as an equal threat to our country. One of the
main ways the pro-euthanasia groups promote their agenda, said
Schindler, is by presenting their victims as non-persons.
According to a spokesman for the Society for the Protection of Unborn
Children, a British pro-life group, "The persistent vegetative state
is increasingly referred to simply as the vegetative state. The use of
vegetative in these expressions is gravely misleading since it
suggests that a person in such a condition has somehow ceased to be
human." (Emphasis in original.)
Diagnosis of PVS Prone to Error
It is useful to examine the definition of PVS because it shows that
the definition permits multiple interpretations of its meaning.
According to HDI's Brain Injury Glossary, PVS is "A long-standing
condition in which the patient utters no words and does not follow
commands or make any response that is meaningful." But what
constitutes long-standing? What if responses aren't noticed? What is
meaningful? Recent events and research point to the impossibility of
answering these questions.
For example, consider Sarah Scantlin. Although not specifically
diagnosed as in a PVS, Scantlin has spent 20 years in a nursing home
after being struck by a drunk driver. She could blink her eyes, but no
one was sure if she understood the questions she was asked to blink an
answer to (one blink = no, two blinks = yes). Then, after 20 years of
silence, Scantlin began talking during a rehabilitative therapy
session in January. Her doctor, Bradley Scheel, believes "critical
pathways in the brain may have regenerated." In bioethicist terms, she
has been decidedly "biologically tenacious" — just like Terri Schiavo.
Now that she can carry on a conversation with family and friends, it
is doubtful that, if she had a husband, he would get away with
starving her to death. But if euthanasia advocates had their way,
Scantlin would never have had the chance to tell her parents "I love
you" this past Valentine's Day — she would have been long since dead.
The February 8 issue of Neurology published a study that measured the
brain activity of patients in a "minimally conscious state" (MCS). The
study showed that severely brain-damaged patients, although they can't
follow simple instructions or even communicate, may retain at least
some "cognitive function." According to a New York Times article, Dr.
Joseph Fins, who is chief of the medical ethics division of the New
York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medical Center, cited
research indicating that nearly a third of persons diagnosed with PVS
were really "minimally conscious."
Some physicians — and husbands — want to arbitrarily decide how
"conscious" some people are, and then decide that if they aren't
conscious enough, they don't deserve to live. But it is not man's
place to make such decisions. Dr. D. James Kennedy, president of Coral
Ridge Ministries, an international Christian broadcast outreach, has
described Terri's plight as being "sentenced to an excruciatingly
painful death by dehydration." "All one has to do is view the videos
on the Schiavo web site, www.terrisfight.org, to see that she is not
in a comatose or vegetative condition," Dr. Kennedy notes. "But even
if she were, that would not legitimize her court-ordered execution."
Dr. Kennedy explained what takes place when food and water are withdrawn:
Beyond hunger pangs, the skin, lips, and tongue crack. The nose
bleeds, as mucous membranes dry out. Vomiting follows, as the stomach
lining dries out. Blood pressure drops, the heart rate rises, and
physical extremities become cold, as circulation is redirected to
internal organs to maintain their function.
The Slippery Slope
According to Bobby Schindler, pro-life groups call Terri's legal
battle the "Roe v. Wade of euthanasia." Experts on the legality and
ethics of euthanasia agree. According to Pete Vere, a canon lawyer in
Ontario, Canada, who specializes in the rights of the mentally and
cognitively disabled: "Not only is the state sanctioning involuntary
euthanasia, but this sets an awful precedent in which society judges
an individual by his or her perceived utility."
Even if Terri really did tell her husband she wouldn't want to live in
a disabled state, the immorality of euthanasia, and the dangers of
trying to quantify "quality of life" remain — assisted suicide and
euthanasia are two edges of the same glittering sword of death. Some
people think that the "slippery slope" argument against euthanasia —
that is, that once murder is legalized, it will be used against people
who don't want to be euthanized — is overstating the situation.
In Chapter 25 of their book, Why Can't We Love Them Both? (a book
about life issues such as abortion and euthanasia), Dr. and Mrs. J.C.
Willke point to the very real dangers of legalized euthanasia. It is
instructive, they report, to look at what happened in Nazi Germany in
the '30s and '40s. Long before Hitler used gas chambers to purge
Germany of Jews and other "defective" races, German physicians were
using gas chambers to kill "defective" Germans — mental patients,
handicapped children, even "bed wetters, children with misshapen ears,
and those with learning disabilities." "When you take the giant step
of placing a price tag on human life," write the Willkes, "you have
made a fatal move, for price tags can be marked down."
In 2001, Holland legalized euthanasia. One study in Holland showed
that approximately 15 percent of the annual deaths in Holland result
from a doctor directly or indirectly killing a patient — and as many
as half had not ask to be killed — despite legal requirements in
Holland that to be euthanized legally, a patient must make repeated
requests to die, have uncontrollable pain, have witnesses, and have
two doctors who agree. According to the Willkes, Holland judges have
approved euthanasia for a depressed person who was physically well,
newborn infants who are judged to have too poor a quality of life, and
depressed teenagers. The Willke publication cites a study by H.W.
Hilhorst's (sponsored by Utrecht University and the Royal Dutch
Academy of Science) that found "involuntary active euthanasia was
being practiced in eight [Dutch] hospitals."
Hold Back the Tide
In January, Steve Crampton, an attorney with the American Family
Association (AFA) Center for Law & Policy, said: "Instead of
[providing] any kind of guarantee of the right to life, as our
Declaration of Independence assures us, our society has turned the
foundations of American law on their head, and here … we have a court
effectively ordering the termination of life — the death, the
post-birth abortion, if you will, of an innocent woman."
Dr. Richard Neubauer, medical director of the Ocean Hyperbaric
Neurologic Center in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, filed an affidavit
rendering his medical opinion that Terri Schiavo was neither "brain
dead" nor in a "persistent vegetative state." "In my opinion," Dr.
Neubauer stated, "to forego treatment of [Terri] and deny her
nutrition and hydration amounts to murder." Dr. Neubauer, who has
predicted that Terri could improve given proper hyperbaric therapy,
has successfully treated brain-injured patients. One of his patients,
Amber Satterwhite, was a brittle diabetic who lapsed into a coma at
age 14. Assisted by the loving care of her parents and treatments from
Dr. Neubauer, Amber, now 20, is unofficially helping out at her
church's nursery.
People of faith who recognize God as the Supreme Being see the horror
of euthanasia. For example, the AFA was founded by a United Methodist
minister. Jewish physician Daniel Eisenberg, M.D., has pointed out
that "the Torah does not sanction euthanasia in any situation. To
remove the feeding tube from a patient whose only impairment is
cognitive is simply murder." Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, has stated that "No one can
be the arbiter of life except God himself." He has also warned: "If
Mr. Schiavo succeeds legally in causing the death of his wife, this
not only would be tragic in itself, but would be a grave step toward
the legal approval of euthanasia in the United States."
Legalized euthanasia is a certain recipe for moral disaster. The
Schiavo case is not just a battle over one woman's life. It is a
battle between the powers of death and the Power of Life.
As this article goes to press, Terri's life is scheduled by the
Florida court system to be ended by starvation and dehydration on
March 18, although Representative Dave Weldon, M.D. (R-Fla.) has
introduced a bill into Congress that would give the Schindler family
access to a federal court to argue for the life of their daughter,
based on the writ of habeas corpus.
© Copyright 2005 American Opinion Publishing Incorporated
http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_1038.shtml
Florida neurologist: Terri's no vegetable
Florida neurologist: Terri's no vegetable
STARVATION: DAY 7
Doctor for state's adult protective services finds Schiavo has been
wrongly diagnosed
Posted: March 24, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Joseph Farah
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Dr. William Cheshire
An eminent neurologist who evaluated Terri Schiavo for the Florida
state Department of Children and Families yesterday concluded she has
been wrongly diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state and
urges immediate removal to another facility and the restoration of
food and water to the dying woman who has become the focal point of
the nation's attention.
In his affidavit to the court, obtained by WorldNetDaily, Dr. William
Polk Cheshire Jr. found Schiavo is aware of pain and reacts visibly to
it. She also reacts to the expectation of pain based on conversations
she overhears in her room.
"If Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is capable of
suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically mistaken," he
writes.
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush announced yesterday that Dr. Cheshire, Jr., as
part of a DCF review team, had concluded that Schiavo might not be in
a persistent vegetative state but rather in "a state of minimal
consciousness." Bush said. "This new information raises serious
concerns and warrants immediate action."
DCF Secretary Luci Hadi said that under state law the agency is
authorized to intervene and have Schiavo's sustenance restored even
without a court order.
But last night, Bush spokesman Jacob DiPietre said the administration
had no plans to defy Greer's order.
Pinellas County Judge George Greer said he expected to have a final
ruling on the case by noon today after reviewing the new evidence. He
blocked an effort by DCF to rescue Schiavo.
"It is my understanding that nearly three years have passed since
Terri has had the benefit of neurologic consultation," Dr. Cheshire
wrote in his affidavit. "How then are we to be certain about her
current neurologic status? There remain, in fact, huge uncertainties
in regard to Terri's true neurologic status."
Dr. Cheshire is the director of a laboratory at the Mayo Clinic branch
in Jacksonville that deals with unconscious reflexes like digestion.
Cheshire cited studies indicating a high rate of false initial
diagnoses of PVS.
"Furthermore, the diagnosis of minimally conscious state had not yet
become standard parlance in the field of neurology at the time of
Terri's initial diagnosis," he wrote. "The minimally conscious state
has emerged as a distinct diagnostic entity within the last few years."
Cheshire also pointed out that Schiavo has not undergone functional
imaging studies, such as positron emission tomography, or PET, or
functional magnetic resonance imagining, or fMRI.
"New facts have come to light in the last few years that should be
weighed in the neurologic assessment of Terri Schiavo," he said.
"Significant strides have been made in the scientific understanding of
PVS and minimally conscious states since Terri last underwent
neurologic evaluation. As usually happens with science, the newest
evidence is prompting the medical community to think about this field
in new ways. With new evidence comes fresh appreciation for what is
actually happening in the brains of persons with profound cognitive
impairment."
Cheshire said news studies show that when patients in a minimally
conscious state listen to narratives read by a familiar person "large
areas of the cerebral cortex normally involved in language recognition
and processing lit up." He said the presence of metabolic activity in
those brain cells was far more than expected.
He cited seven reasons to doubt the prior diagnosis of PVS in Terri
Schiavo:
# He found her facial expression brightens and she smiles in
response to the voice of familiar people such as her parents or her
nurse. Her agitation subsides and her facial demeanor softens when
quiet music is played. "When jubilant piano music is played, her face
brightens, she lifts her eyebrows, smiles, and even laughs." Cheshire
said several times he witnessed Schiavo laugh when someone in the room
made a humorous comment.
# She fixates her gaze on colorful objects and human faces for up to
15 seconds at a time and occasionally follows with her eyes as objects
move from side to side. "When I first walked into the room, she
immediately turned her head toward me and looked directly at my face.
There was a look of curiosity or expectation in her expression, and
she maintained eye contact for about half a minute." Cheshire said she
also appeared to attempt to speak to him.
# Although he did not hear her utter distinct words, the doctor said
"she demonstrates emotional expressivity by her use of single syllable
vocalizations and cooing sounds. In reviewing previous affidavits, he
noted that as late as 2003, the patient was heard to tell nurses to
"stop" during certain procedures.
# He noted that in a previous examination by a neurologist, the
patient appeared to try to follow certain commands – such as closing
her eyes. She also raised her right leg four times when asked to do so
in 2002 under examination.
# In that same 2002 examination by a neurologist, captured on
videotape, Schiavo was turned on her side and probed with a sharp
piece of wood. She reacted with sounds of discomfort. After that
procedure, the neurologist commented to her parents that they would
have to roll her over on her other side. Schiavo vocalized a crying
sound in response. "It is important to note that, at that moment, no
one is touching Terri or causing actual pain," he writes. Rather, he
says, she appears to comprehending what was said and anticipating pain.
# According to the definition of PVS, he writes, patients do not
have the capacity to experience pain and suffering. Yet, he concludes,
after reviewing her medical records, pain issues frequently arise.
"The nurses at Woodside Hospice told us that she often has pain with
menstrual cramps." The pain and agitation subside when she is given
ibuprofen. "If Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is
capable of suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically
mistaken," he concludes.
# "To enter the room of Terri Schiavo is nothing like entering the
room of a patient who is comatose or brain-dead or in some
neurological sense no longer there," he writes. "Although Terri did
not demonstrate during our 90-minute visit compelling evidence of
verbalization, conscious awareness, or volitional behavior, yet the
visitor has the distinct sense of the presence of a living human being
who seems at some level to be aware of some things around her."
"As I looked at Terri, and she gazed directly back at me, I asked
myself whether, if I were her attending physician, I could in good
conscience withdraw her feeding and hydration," he wrote. "No, I could
not. I could not withdraw life support if I were asked. I could not
withhold life-sustaining nutrition and hydration from this beautiful
lady whose face brightens in the presence of others."
Cheshire indicated he could see no reason to withdraw the sustenance.
"This situation differs fundamentally from end-of-life scenarios where
it is appropriate to withdraw life-sustaining medical interventions
that no longer benefit or are burdensome to patients in the terminal
stages of illness," he wrote. "Terri's feeding tube is not a burden to
her. It is not painful, is not infected, is not eroding her stomach
lining or causing any medical complications. But for the decision to
withdraw her feeding tube, Terri cannot be considered medically
terminal. But for the withdrawal of food and water, she would not die."
On the basis of all of those findings, Dr. Cheshire concluded "it
would be wrong to bring about her death by withdrawing food and water."
"At the time of this writing, Terri Schiavo, as the result of
decisions based on what I have argued to be a faulty diagnosis of
persistent vegetative state, has been without food or water for five
days," he wrote. "She is at risk of death or serious injury unless the
provision of food and water can be restored. Terri Schiavo lacks the
capacity to consent to emergency protective services and must trust
others to act on her behalf. If she were to be transferred to another
facility, it would be medically necessary to initiate hydration and
ensure that her serum electrolytes are within normal values."
Cheshire concluded: "How medicine and society choose to think about
Terri Schiavo will influence what kind of people we will be as we
evaluate and respond to the needs of the most vulnerable people among
us. When serious doubts exist as to whether a cognitively impaired
person is or is not consciously aware, even if these doubts cannot be
conclusively resolved, it is better to err on the side of protecting
vulnerable life."
Editor's note: WorldNetDaily has been reporting on the Terri Schiavo
story since 2002 – far longer than any other national news
organization – and exposing the many troubling, scandalous, and
possibly criminal, aspects of the case that to this day rarely surface
in news reports. Read WorldNetDaily's unparalleled, in-depth coverage
of the life-and-death fight over Terri Schiavo, including over 150
original stories and columns.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43470
Florida neurologist: Terri's no vegetable
STARVATION: DAY 7
Doctor for state's adult protective services finds Schiavo has been
wrongly diagnosed
Posted: March 24, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Joseph Farah
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Dr. William Cheshire
An eminent neurologist who evaluated Terri Schiavo for the Florida
state Department of Children and Families yesterday concluded she has
been wrongly diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state and
urges immediate removal to another facility and the restoration of
food and water to the dying woman who has become the focal point of
the nation's attention.
In his affidavit to the court, obtained by WorldNetDaily, Dr. William
Polk Cheshire Jr. found Schiavo is aware of pain and reacts visibly to
it. She also reacts to the expectation of pain based on conversations
she overhears in her room.
"If Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is capable of
suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically mistaken," he
writes.
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush announced yesterday that Dr. Cheshire, Jr., as
part of a DCF review team, had concluded that Schiavo might not be in
a persistent vegetative state but rather in "a state of minimal
consciousness." Bush said. "This new information raises serious
concerns and warrants immediate action."
DCF Secretary Luci Hadi said that under state law the agency is
authorized to intervene and have Schiavo's sustenance restored even
without a court order.
But last night, Bush spokesman Jacob DiPietre said the administration
had no plans to defy Greer's order.
Pinellas County Judge George Greer said he expected to have a final
ruling on the case by noon today after reviewing the new evidence. He
blocked an effort by DCF to rescue Schiavo.
"It is my understanding that nearly three years have passed since
Terri has had the benefit of neurologic consultation," Dr. Cheshire
wrote in his affidavit. "How then are we to be certain about her
current neurologic status? There remain, in fact, huge uncertainties
in regard to Terri's true neurologic status."
Dr. Cheshire is the director of a laboratory at the Mayo Clinic branch
in Jacksonville that deals with unconscious reflexes like digestion.
Cheshire cited studies indicating a high rate of false initial
diagnoses of PVS.
"Furthermore, the diagnosis of minimally conscious state had not yet
become standard parlance in the field of neurology at the time of
Terri's initial diagnosis," he wrote. "The minimally conscious state
has emerged as a distinct diagnostic entity within the last few years."
Cheshire also pointed out that Schiavo has not undergone functional
imaging studies, such as positron emission tomography, or PET, or
functional magnetic resonance imagining, or fMRI.
"New facts have come to light in the last few years that should be
weighed in the neurologic assessment of Terri Schiavo," he said.
"Significant strides have been made in the scientific understanding of
PVS and minimally conscious states since Terri last underwent
neurologic evaluation. As usually happens with science, the newest
evidence is prompting the medical community to think about this field
in new ways. With new evidence comes fresh appreciation for what is
actually happening in the brains of persons with profound cognitive
impairment."
Cheshire said news studies show that when patients in a minimally
conscious state listen to narratives read by a familiar person "large
areas of the cerebral cortex normally involved in language recognition
and processing lit up." He said the presence of metabolic activity in
those brain cells was far more than expected.
He cited seven reasons to doubt the prior diagnosis of PVS in Terri
Schiavo:
# He found her facial expression brightens and she smiles in
response to the voice of familiar people such as her parents or her
nurse. Her agitation subsides and her facial demeanor softens when
quiet music is played. "When jubilant piano music is played, her face
brightens, she lifts her eyebrows, smiles, and even laughs." Cheshire
said several times he witnessed Schiavo laugh when someone in the room
made a humorous comment.
# She fixates her gaze on colorful objects and human faces for up to
15 seconds at a time and occasionally follows with her eyes as objects
move from side to side. "When I first walked into the room, she
immediately turned her head toward me and looked directly at my face.
There was a look of curiosity or expectation in her expression, and
she maintained eye contact for about half a minute." Cheshire said she
also appeared to attempt to speak to him.
# Although he did not hear her utter distinct words, the doctor said
"she demonstrates emotional expressivity by her use of single syllable
vocalizations and cooing sounds. In reviewing previous affidavits, he
noted that as late as 2003, the patient was heard to tell nurses to
"stop" during certain procedures.
# He noted that in a previous examination by a neurologist, the
patient appeared to try to follow certain commands – such as closing
her eyes. She also raised her right leg four times when asked to do so
in 2002 under examination.
# In that same 2002 examination by a neurologist, captured on
videotape, Schiavo was turned on her side and probed with a sharp
piece of wood. She reacted with sounds of discomfort. After that
procedure, the neurologist commented to her parents that they would
have to roll her over on her other side. Schiavo vocalized a crying
sound in response. "It is important to note that, at that moment, no
one is touching Terri or causing actual pain," he writes. Rather, he
says, she appears to comprehending what was said and anticipating pain.
# According to the definition of PVS, he writes, patients do not
have the capacity to experience pain and suffering. Yet, he concludes,
after reviewing her medical records, pain issues frequently arise.
"The nurses at Woodside Hospice told us that she often has pain with
menstrual cramps." The pain and agitation subside when she is given
ibuprofen. "If Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is
capable of suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically
mistaken," he concludes.
# "To enter the room of Terri Schiavo is nothing like entering the
room of a patient who is comatose or brain-dead or in some
neurological sense no longer there," he writes. "Although Terri did
not demonstrate during our 90-minute visit compelling evidence of
verbalization, conscious awareness, or volitional behavior, yet the
visitor has the distinct sense of the presence of a living human being
who seems at some level to be aware of some things around her."
"As I looked at Terri, and she gazed directly back at me, I asked
myself whether, if I were her attending physician, I could in good
conscience withdraw her feeding and hydration," he wrote. "No, I could
not. I could not withdraw life support if I were asked. I could not
withhold life-sustaining nutrition and hydration from this beautiful
lady whose face brightens in the presence of others."
Cheshire indicated he could see no reason to withdraw the sustenance.
"This situation differs fundamentally from end-of-life scenarios where
it is appropriate to withdraw life-sustaining medical interventions
that no longer benefit or are burdensome to patients in the terminal
stages of illness," he wrote. "Terri's feeding tube is not a burden to
her. It is not painful, is not infected, is not eroding her stomach
lining or causing any medical complications. But for the decision to
withdraw her feeding tube, Terri cannot be considered medically
terminal. But for the withdrawal of food and water, she would not die."
On the basis of all of those findings, Dr. Cheshire concluded "it
would be wrong to bring about her death by withdrawing food and water."
"At the time of this writing, Terri Schiavo, as the result of
decisions based on what I have argued to be a faulty diagnosis of
persistent vegetative state, has been without food or water for five
days," he wrote. "She is at risk of death or serious injury unless the
provision of food and water can be restored. Terri Schiavo lacks the
capacity to consent to emergency protective services and must trust
others to act on her behalf. If she were to be transferred to another
facility, it would be medically necessary to initiate hydration and
ensure that her serum electrolytes are within normal values."
Cheshire concluded: "How medicine and society choose to think about
Terri Schiavo will influence what kind of people we will be as we
evaluate and respond to the needs of the most vulnerable people among
us. When serious doubts exist as to whether a cognitively impaired
person is or is not consciously aware, even if these doubts cannot be
conclusively resolved, it is better to err on the side of protecting
vulnerable life."
Editor's note: WorldNetDaily has been reporting on the Terri Schiavo
story since 2002 – far longer than any other national news
organization – and exposing the many troubling, scandalous, and
possibly criminal, aspects of the case that to this day rarely surface
in news reports. Read WorldNetDaily's unparalleled, in-depth coverage
of the life-and-death fight over Terri Schiavo, including over 150
original stories and columns.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43470
Newer | Latest | Older