Terri Schiavo: Please explain something to me...

[ontheEdgeof17]

Originally Posted by Mad4stevie

I heard an interview where it was discussed that sometimes morphine is given to patients in PVS as a consolation to the family, not because the patient was "experiencing" pain. Hummmmm . . .

If that was true for this case, then why are the parents complaining about it?


We give it for comfort. No one knows if the patient is experiencing pain. My grandma died of brain cancer. She didn't respond to internal or external stimuli. People always say, "I hope they are not dying a painful death." That's why we give them Morphine, to do the best we can so they don't.

Death by any means is not pleasant. Whether you are starving, drowning, in an accident, etc.......I see this case as any other. If we threw her in a pool and let her drown, there would be hell raised. There is no easy way to die. Even in your sleep, you are gasping for air...

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I am appalled at the way Judge Greer has been treated over this decision.
Rick Santorum was on CNN last night and Aaron Brown cornered him on his comment that all the courts were wrong. Santorum puffed up his chest and decried the Florida and 11th Circuit decisions but got completely tongue tied when asked about the Supreme Court. It was rather amusing to watch him squirm.

From a legal aspect, there are two forums here. This decision has been affirmed by all appellate courts that have considered it. Thus, there is no question the Florida State Court trial judge (Greer) correctly applied Florida law in this matter.

The second forum provided was created by Congress when it determined it wanted to provide Mrs. Schiavo with another method in addition to the Florida State Court. Mrs. Schiavo and related parties had no standing to assert Federal jurisdiction without a special bill. So, it passed (unanimous in the Senate and 203-58 in the Hoiuse) the following bill:

SECTION 1. RELIEF OF THE PARENTS OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO.

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida shall have jurisdiction to hear, determine, and render judgment on a suit or claim by or on behalf of Theresa Marie Schiavo for the alleged violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution or laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

SEC. 2. PROCEDURE.

Any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo shall have standing to bring a suit under this Act. The suit may be brought against any other person who was a party to State court proceedings relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain the life of Theresa Marie Schiavo, or who may act pursuant to a State court order authorizing or directing the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. In such a suit, the District Court shall determine de novo any claim of a violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo within the scope of this Act, notwithstanding any prior State court determination and regardless of whether such a claim has previously been raised, considered, or decided in State court proceedings. The District Court shall entertain and determine the suit without any delay or abstention in favor of State court proceedings, and regardless of whether remedies available in the State courts have been exhausted.

SEC. 3. RELIEF.

After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life.

SEC. 4. TIME FOR FILING.

Notwithstanding any other time limitation, any suit or claim under this Act shall be timely if filed within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. NO CHANGE OF SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create substantive rights not otherwise secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States or of the several States.

SEC. 6. NO EFFECT ON ASSISTING SUICIDE.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to confer additional jurisdiction on any court to consider any claim related--
(1) to assisting suicide, or
(2) a State law regarding assisting suicide.

SEC. 7. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.

Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills.
SEC. 8. NO AFFECT ON THE PATIENT SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 1990.

Nothing in this Act shall affect the rights of any person under the Patient Self- Determination Act of 1990.
SEC. 9. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

It is the Sense of Congress that the 109th Congress should consider policies regarding the status and legal rights of incapacitated individuals who are incapable of making decisions concerning the provision, withholding, or withdrawal of foods, fluid, or medical care.

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/s...bill31905.html (emphasis supplied)

The bolded lang. in Terri's Bill mandates the Federal Court must give Mrs. Schiavo a new hearing. The Federal Court's did not do that. They instead deferred to the state court's decision, which was in direct conflict with the bolded lang. above. That is what Santorum was talking about in the interview I saw last night. He justifiably is pissed because the Federal court's essentially ignored the specific lang. in Terri's Bill for a de novo consideration. Here is the 11th Cir.'s decision http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511556.pdf

I cannot agree with Congress' intrusion into this CLEARLY state court matter, but I agree the Federal Courts did not apply the law they were given. I think that is an academic argument however because if the Federal Courts reached the same conclusion as the state courts, then it is logical to assume the Federal Courts would have reached the same conclusion on the same facts if they had had a de novo hearing. Thus, this is a tempest in a teapot.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by ontheEdgeof17

If that was true for this case, then why are the parents complaining about it?


We give it for comfort. No one knows if the patient is experiencing pain. My grandma died of brain cancer. She didn't respond to internal or external stimuli. People always say, "I hope they are not dying a painful death." That's why we give them Morphine, to do the best we can so they don't.

Death by any means is not pleasant. Whether you are starving, drowning, in an accident, etc.......I see this case as any other. If we threw her in a pool and let her drown, there would be hell raised. There is no easy way to die. Even in your sleep, you are gasping for air...

I am with you on this. Hospice has been given a bad bad deal here. ALL people who know anything know that the pro life people are spinning hospice in a bad way. These clinics are there to comfort dying people. This is their job. To assert that the insertion of two morphine suppositories in 12 days is some underhanded attempt to truncate Mrs. Schiavo's life is patently absurd.

[skcin]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I am with you on this. Hospice has been given a bad bad deal here. ALL people who know anything know that the pro life people are spinning hospice in a bad way. These clinics are there to comfort dying people. This is their job. To assert that the insertion of two morphine suppositories in 12 days is some underhanded attempt to truncate Mrs. Schiavo's life is patently absurd.

Hospice does a phenomenal job.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by skcin

Hospice does a phenomenal job.

I mean their job is hard enough - then these a$$holes give them grief. I mean they watch death all day long. They do not need this

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I mean their job is hard enough - then these a$$holes give them grief. I mean they watch death all day long. They do not need this

Yeah, a hospice nurse called into Stephanie Miller this morning talking about what they do. She said, "you actually do the Lord's work". That was a good point. God and Jesus would want dying people to be treated with dignity and to be comforted in any way possible. These people are angels among us!

The family is just desperate and will say anything to try to get that tube back in their daughter. And the right wing fundies will gladly ride their coattails and make this a political issue when it has nothing to do with their pro-life stance. O'Reilley went so far last night as to say liberals love abortion. These people make me crazy.

WTF is Jesse Jackson getting involved now for?

I wish this case weren't elevated to this media circus. It's not my business, not congress' business nobody's but the families and the courts. People using this tragedy to push an agenda is the sickest thing in a long time, and some pretty sick sh*t has been going on.

[GypsySorcerer]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Yeah, a hospice nurse called into Stephanie Miller this morning talking about what they do. She said, "you actually do the Lord's work". That was a good point. God and Jesus would want dying people to be treated with dignity and to be comforted in any way possible. These people are angels among us!

The family is just desperate and will say anything to try to get that tube back in their daughter. And the right wing fundies will gladly ride their coattails and make this a political issue when it has nothing to do with their pro-life stance. O'Reilley went so far last night as to say liberals love abortion. These people make me crazy.

WTF is Jesse Jackson getting involved now for?

I wish this case weren't elevated to this media circus. It's not my business, not congress' business nobody's but the families and the courts. People using this tragedy to push an agenda is the sickest thing in a long time, and some pretty sick sh*t has been going on.

Jesse Jackson will do anything for political attention, IMO.

[strandinthewind]

An interesting thought:

Exemplifying the shameless hypocrisy that has permeated all of the actions of Bush and Congress in this case, White House spokesman Scott McClellan issued a statement that in matters of life and death, such as the Schiavo case, the president believed in careful reflection and deliberation. This from a man who, as governor of Texas, rubber-stamped the execution of 152 prisoners, giving an average of 15 minutes apiece to their death row appeals. The Bush White House’s record of “respect for human life” has included the razing of entire cities in Iraq, the dispatch of US Special Forces and CIA death squads around the world, and the widespread use of torture.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/ma...schi-m21.shtml

I get that convicts have done something wrong and Mrs. Schiavo has not. But, the fact remains that the legislative brance determined both must die - convicts via the criminal statutes and Mrs. Schiavo via the legal method for her guardian to establish her intent. Thus, they are VERY similar. Thus, the hypocisy of W.

[strandinthewind]

Here is an article from the Atlanta Jounral Const. clarifying the new 11th Cir. appeal.

Interestingly, I walked past the 11th Cir. about and hour ago. There were about 10 news crews mulling about by their cameras and vans and one lone protestor (an older lady) very respectfully holding up a big picture of Mary as Our Lady of Guadalupe and silently mouthing prayers.

Appeal by Schiavo's parents questions husband's actions

> By BILL TORPY
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
> Published on: 03/30/05
The parents of Terri Schiavo are telling an appeals court in Atlanta that the husband of the severely brain damaged woman sought her death only after receiving a cash malpractice award.

The latest petition, filed late Tuesday night, seeks a new hearing before all 12 members of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court agreed Tuesday to consider an emergency motion requesting a new hearing on whether to reconnect Schiavo's feeding tube. The court did not say when it would decide whether to grant a rehearing.

It was not clear what effect reconnecting Schiavo's feeding tube would have on her as she approached her 13th day without nourishment.

The new filing by Bob and Mary Schindler attacks contentions of Michael Schiavo, Terri's husband and guardian, that Terri would not want to live in a vegetative state. The petition says Michael did not bring forth Terri's "wishes" until almost five years after she fell into a vegetative state in 1990.

"His 'evidence' concerning Terri's wishes was discovered (or remembered) only after Michael had begun living in what can only be described as a common law marital relationship with another woman," the parents' filing states. "And the recollections he and his family submitted were 'recollected' only after Micahael stopped spending the malpractice award on Terri's rehabilitation."

The Schindlers contend that Michael fought in court in the early 1990s for money to rehabilitate his wife. He was awarded $300,000 for himself and $700,000 for his wife's treatment in 1993.

Michael Schiavo and his in-laws had a falling out shortly after that.

The parents' lawyers are seeking the new hearing as a followup to a 3-0 denial by the 11th Circuit Friday. Tuesday's court order only allowed the Schindlers to file the appeal, even though the court had set a March 26 deadline to do so.

"The Appellant's emergency motion for leave to file out of time is granted."

The 11th Circuit had also ruled against the Schindlers earlier last week.

Attorneys for the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo didn't immediately return phone messages Wednesday.

Time was running out for Schiavo, however. Bob Schindler described his daughter on Tuesday as "failing."

"She still looks pretty darn good under the circumstances," Schindler said. "You can see the impact of no food and water for 12 days. Her bodily functions are still working. We still have her."

Doctors have said Schiavo, 41, would probably die within two weeks after the tube was removed March 18. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, insists he is carrying out her wishes by having the feeding tube pulled.

The request for a new hearing also asks to have the tube reinserted immediately "in light of the magnitude of what is at stake and the urgency of the action required."

The order was a ray of hope for the Schindlers, who are battling their son-in-law over their daughter's fate. The case has wound its way through six courts for seven years; the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene five times.

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

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

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

He became the 48th protester arrested since the tube was removed on a court order sought by her husband. Terri Schiavo suffered catastrophic brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped for several minutes because of a chemical imbalance apparently brought on by an eating disorder.

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

Their attorneys raised the issue of the new request after a Saturday deadline set by the court, saying they have had more time to research the issues and have become convinced that the federal court in Tampa had "committed plain error when it reviewed only the state court case and outcome history."

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

"I think the courts want to be sure that there's no accusation that any legal argument was ignored," said attorney Neal Sonnett, former chairman of the American Bar Association's criminal justice section.

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

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

Although supporters of the Schindlers have claimed the dehydrated woman is being denied comforts such as ice chips for her dry mouth or balm for chapped lips, George Felos, the husband's attorney, defended how Schiavo is being cared for.

"Obviously, the parents and the siblings are desperate. Desperation may lead to different perceptions," Felos told CNN. "I can only tell you what I've seen, and Terri is dying a very peaceful, cared-for death."

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

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

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

First lady Laura Bush also commented on the case Tuesday, saying the government was right to have intervened on behalf of Schiavo.

"It is a life issue that really does require government to be involved," Bush said aboard a plane bound for Afghanistan, where she was promoting education and women's rights.

Associated Press writer Jonathan Landrum Jr. in Atlanta contributed to this report.

Find this article at:
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metr...30schiavo.html
____________________________________________________

I think the statement

"His 'evidence' concerning Terri's wishes was discovered (or remembered) only after Michael had begun living in what can only be described as a common law marital relationship with another woman," the parents' filing states. "And the recollections he and his family submitted were 'recollected' only after Micahael stopped spending the malpractice award on Terri's rehabilitation."

is a little misleading. While the timing may coincide, it also should be pointed out that the husband spent thousands seeking help to determine if Mrs. Schiavo was indeed braid dead with no hope of recovery. He even learned nursing to take care of her and flew her, I believe, out to California for cutting edge testing. So, I think the correct statement would be "After exhausting all avenues to determine if she could recover, he decided to put forth intent." Plus, he asserts the parents wanted some of that money for repayment of their kindness to him. Why does everyone automatically discount that. From what I have seen, her parents are CLEARLY not above lying to get their way.

[strandinthewind]

CNN is reporting the 11th Cir. has denied the newest appeal.

[Mad4stevie]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

CNN is reporting the 11th Cir. has denied the newest appeal.

Yeah - and supposedly there was a statement in the ruling that any further attempts filed by the Schiavo's in either state or federal court would be "improper". Not that this would stop them . . .

[Mad4stevie]

As a matter of fact, MSNBC is reporting that the parent's lawyers will file yet another appeal to the US Supreme Court. Good lord.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Mad4stevie

As a matter of fact, MSNBC is reporting that the parent's lawyers will file yet another appeal to the US Supreme Court. Good lord.

Who will flatly reject it if history teaches us anything.

Personally, I would have thought the Court would have liked to have opined on the case the first time it was appealed. I think this is diff, than the Cruz decision in that there was a party in this case that was willing to take of Mrs. Schiavo. The question then squarely before the Court would have been "Whether the Consituitional right to die gives a party, here the parents, interested in administering care a superior right over the state sanctioned right of guardianship" or something like that. In other words, does Cruz apply in this situation. It would have been interesting to read the 5-4 decision.

[strandinthewind]

Here is the 11th Cir.'s latest denial

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/s...ca11rhrng2.pdf

They rule the Public Law Congressed passed (Terri's Law) was an Unconstitutional extension of Federal jurisdiction. This legally is a corect decision.

[Mad4stevie]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Who will flatly reject it if history teaches us anything.

Personally, I would have thought the Court would have liked to have opined on the case the first time it was appealed. I think this is diff, than the Cruz decision in that there was a party in this case that was willing to take of Mrs. Schiavo. The question then squarely before the Court would have been "Whether the Consituitional right to die gives a party, here the parents, interested in administering care a superior right over the state sanctioned right of guardianship" or something like that. In other words, does Cruz apply in this situation. It would have been interesting to read the 5-4 decision.

Yep. It would have been very interesting reading for sure. I agree the issue is different than the Cruzan case.

Also sounds as if some are pointing to bad lawyering on the part of Schiavo's lawyer for not getting to the true constitutional issues until now. At least that is what some legal pundits are saying tonight.