Terry Schiavo
M C Hamster
high interest to the disabilities community. There is a disability-activist
group called "Not Dead Yet", which strongly opposes euthanasia. They
certainly have a point, in that there is a long history of society dealing
with people with disabilities by hastening their death, on the grounds that
"their lives aren't really worth saving". (In addition to taking on the
Terry Schiavo case as a cause celebre, they have also attacked "Million
Dollar Baby".)
While I generally am sympathetic with disability groups issues, this is one
where I just can't make the leap. For me, I think anyone, including people
with disabilities, should have the right to make these life-extending
decisions. To deny people that right just seems to be imposing a different
value structure on them.
Now of course then one has the problem that Terry Schiavo can't in fact
express her decision as to what to do. The only thing we have is a system
where someone else has a power of medical attorney to make those decisions
on behalf of the person. If her husband had done something illegal or shady
to get that power of attorney, then certainly one should fight his decision
to remove her feeding tube. But absent that, I just don't agree that others
should impose their own value structure in this case.
I find "Not Dead Yet's" attitude to be condenscing, to the point of being
even offensive, to people with disabilities. It must be odd for these
activities, most of whom are hard-core lefties, to be in the same camp on
this as Tom Delay. I've never asked any of them how they feel about
abortion.... it would be interesting to see if they oppose that choice for
women too, as logic would seem to dictate they must.
If there have been threads about this ad nauseum during my various absences
here, I apologize.
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
huey.c...@gmail.com
> Now of course then one has the problem that Terry Schiavo can't in
> fact express her decision as to what to do.
Per the Reuters story, the florida court
...ruled she would not have wanted continued life support based in
part on a relative's testimony that when her husband's grandmother
was being kept alive by a respirator, Terri Schiavo had said, "If I
ever go like that, just let me go ... I don't want to be kept alive
on a machine."
To me, that's the kicker. In the absence of a living will, but having
clearly expressed her own desire not to be, essentially, an
expensive houseplant for the last fifteen years, and given the
testimony from doctors and neurologists that she has indeed been
completely brain-dead for the last fifteen years (and countless legal
battles) I can't understand why anybody would go against not just the
wishes of the guy with medical power of attorney, but the woman's own
expressed wishes.
...then again, it can't possibly matter to her: she's been brain-dead
for fifteen years. Still, I'm not sure I see the purpose in continuing
to keep her body alive, and I certainly don't see the purpose in
having expensive, protracted court battles that go all the way up to
the state supreme court and the US congress to force the issue one way
or the other. I'm guessing that congress really ought to be looking at
the whole medicaid system, and not just one woman who has been brain
dead for fifteen years.
--
Huey
James Gifford
> is one where I just can't make the leap. For me, I think anyone,
> including people with disabilities, should have the right to make
> these life-extending decisions. To deny people that right just seems
> to be imposing a different value structure on them.
There is a relatively simple and fool-proof option: the living will. See a
family/estate lawyer or get a Nolo Press book or anything - but fill out a
valid living will the way you want it, get it notarized, and make sure it's
where it can be located should anything happen to you.
Don't leave it up to family, hospitals, the courts, etc. to fight your
battle for you, either way. If you don't want to lay around in a vegetative
state for years, say so. If you want all extreme measures taken to prolong
your life as long as possible, say so.
It's YOUR choice: make it and don't leave it to someone else, who certainly
doesn't want the emotional, legal or ethical burden.
--
|=- James Gifford = FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY -=|
|=- So... your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? -=|
M C Hamster
news:Xns961E727B92997ni...@216.168.3.44...
Well, an Advanced Directive like a living will is certainly good to have,
but it doesn't obviate a guardian needing to decide whether a specific
medical condition falls within their directive or not. (Schiavo did not
have one, unfortunately.) A Medical Power of Attorney is much like a living
will. You're supposed to express in that document your views about how much
intervention to do on your behalf if you are not able to make those
decisions yourself at the time, as a guide to your guardian, but they are
necessarily vague and provide leeway for the guardian deciding whether the
current condition calls for intervention or not. You aren't going to
prevent court fights by having a living will, unfortunately. In the Schiavo
case, apparently there's some question as to whether the husband or parents
have the legal right to be her guardian; maybe a living will / advanced
directive naming one of them as unequivocally your guardian might have
helped. The most important thing by far is having a guardian you can trust,
to act honestly in your best interests on your behalf.
For instance, I wouldn't name Kay as my guardian right now.
M C Hamster
news:423c805c$0$11363$bb4e...@newscene.com...
Or, for that matter, groo.
M C Hamster
news:Xns961E727B92997ni...@216.168.3.44...
Here's an article that confirms what I was saying about Living Wills and
Medical Power of Attorney documents. The key is having a guardian /
surrogate whom you trust to make decisions for you, and having his/her legal
authority for being that surrogate spelled out.
****
Living Wills Not Always Followed
By Janet Kornblum, USA TODAY
Susan Ponder-Stansel is a social worker who has worked for years with dying
people and their families. But five years ago, everything she had been
preaching suddenly hit home.
Her grandmother, 82-year-old Lucy Pastore, had congestive heart failure and
had made it clear that should her body fail, she didn't want any medical
intervention.
It was her wish to die at home. But that wasn't to happen.
Ponder-Stansel, president of Community Hospice of Northeast Florida in
Jacksonville, tells clients to get living wills, documents that specify how
people want to be medically treated if they become incapacitated. She also
tells them to designate a single person to make medical decisions for them
if that should become the case - just as her grandmother had done.
Experts say clearly spelling out your wishes can help you avoid ending up
like Terri Schiavo, 41, a Florida woman who suffered severe brain damage in
1990 after her heart stopped and who has been at the center of a national
legal battle: Some doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state, and
her husband, Michael Schiavo, says he once promised his wife he wouldn't
keep her alive by artificial means. Her parents have been battling in court
to keep their daughter alive.
A judge has ruled that Michael Schiavo can remove the tube after 1 p.m. ET
Friday, but in the latest in a series of legislative moves, this week the
Florida legislature has been debating a bill that could prevent the removal
of Schiavo's feeding tube before that deadline.
Some experts say that had Schiavo drawn up a living will, her wishes would
have been on record and at least a good part of this controversy could have
been avoided.
But Ponder-Stansel and others say experience shows that's not always the
case.
Living wills, especially when they are not accompanied by a document
designating a specific person to make medical decisions, can cause more harm
than good, some critics say. And the wishes laid out in living wills are not
always known, and not always followed.
Just look at the case of Ponder-Stansel's grandmother. She wrote up an
advance directive, and gave one of her daughters power of attorney - making
her the final health care decision-maker. She and her family passed along
those wishes to everyone they could think of, including relatives and health
care professionals.
But one day, her heart stopped while a hired caregiver was bathing her. The
caregiver didn't know there was an advance directive and dialed 911. The
first responders did what they were legally obligated to do in the absence
of a written advance directive: they tried to save her. So did the hospital.
By the time Ponder-Stansel got to the hospital, her unconscious grandmother
looked like a medical experiment, with tubes, bruises on her arms where they
had tried to insert IVs, even broken ribs from attempts to resuscitate her.
"Everything you could possibly do to a person, they did," Ponder-Stansel
says. "She wanted to die in her own home, but it didn't happen that way.
It's not pretty."
Had the caregiver known about the living will and order to not resuscitate,
her grandmother probably would have died at home, says Ponder-Stansel. But
she and other relatives were able to convince doctors to take her off of the
machines.
"If we didn't have that living will and that discussion with her - even me
as a professional - I would have a lot of trouble being as assertive as I
needed to be in that situation," she says. "It gave us peace of mind as the
family to be an advocate on her behalf because we were so sure of what she
wanted."
"It wasn't an easy decision, even though we all knew. When they finally
withdrew everything and extubated her, it was probably about four hours
before her heart stopped beating, and that was agonizing."
But at least they could make the decision.
Families who only have living wills and don't designate someone with power
of attorney are more likely to end up in legal disputes, says Carl E.
Schneider, a law professor and bioethicist at the University of Michigan Law
School.
In fact, he says, a surrogate is much more important than a living will.
While some say that Schiavo would not be in her situation if she had had a
living will, Schneider disagrees. "The problem is not that there wasn't a
piece of paper. The problem is that her husband and parents detest each
other. And they were going to fight about anything that got in the way of
what they wanted."
He says living wills don't work, because family members often make decisions
based on their own wishes and not the wishes of the incapacitated person.
Those were the findings of a study he co-authored for the bioethics journal
The Hastings Center Report in May.
The report says living wills are often too vague, can be difficult to
understand, aren't always followed, and can be expensive.
Instead he advocates that people designate a representative with similar
views on end-of-life issues - and then tell them what their wishes are.
But if Schiavo had put in writing that she wanted her husband - or her
parents - to make medical decisions for her, her case might be very
different.
"Will (appointing a surrogate) make all problems go away?" asks Schneider.
"No. Will anything make all problems go away? Hardly. But it's cheap, it's
easy, it's what most people want. It leaves your surrogate free to do his or
her best."
****
James Gifford
> To me, that's the kicker. In the absence of a living will, but having
> clearly expressed her own desire not to be, essentially, an
> expensive houseplant for the last fifteen years, and given the
> testimony from doctors and neurologists that she has indeed been
> completely brain-dead for the last fifteen years (and countless legal
> battles) I can't understand why anybody would go against not just the
> wishes of the guy with medical power of attorney, but the woman's own
> expressed wishes.
The opposition appears to be almost completely motivated by religious
considerations, with a general leavening of other viewpoints.
Binyamin Dissen
wrote:
:>The opposition appears to be almost completely motivated by religious
:>considerations, with a general leavening of other viewpoints.
Yes, the religious tend to be more concerned with the sanctity of life and
tend to have objections to the murder of less abled people. A basic result of
believing that people have souls.
--
Binyamin Dissen <bdi...@dissensoftware.com>
http://www.dissensoftware.com
Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.
I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
>huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
>> To me, that's the kicker. In the absence of a living will, but having
>> clearly expressed her own desire not to be, essentially, an
>> expensive houseplant for the last fifteen years, and given the
>> testimony from doctors and neurologists that she has indeed been
>> completely brain-dead for the last fifteen years (and countless legal
>> battles) I can't understand why anybody would go against not just the
>> wishes of the guy with medical power of attorney, but the woman's own
>> expressed wishes.
>
>The opposition appears to be almost completely motivated by religious
>considerations, with a general leavening of other viewpoints.
To be more exact, the Republicans are trying to establish a sanctity
for any sort of life, on either end of the life. This is more about
abortion than about the fight in this family about what should be done
with her remains.
The courts have in every case sided with the husband here. Political
forces have stepped in purely as a publicity stunt, to grandstand for
anti-abortion forces on the right of the Republican party.
Kevin
Les Albert
<post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:44:43 -0000 James Gifford <n...@nitrosyncretic.kom>
>wrote:
>
>:>The opposition appears to be almost completely motivated by religious
>:>considerations, with a general leavening of other viewpoints.
>Yes, the religious tend to be more concerned with the sanctity of life and
>tend to have objections to the murder of less abled people. A basic result of
>believing that people have souls.
So life is a fountain?
Les
osmium
> The opposition appears to be almost completely motivated by religious
> considerations, with a general leavening of other viewpoints.
This could be interesting. The left, which said the Tenth Amendment was
just noise, and ignored it. in favor of "a woman's right to choose" now will
now be in the position of saying "This is none of the federal government's
damned business."
What goes around comes around.
The Tenth Amendment had a purpose, as we may well see in a few days. It
should have been followed (my choice) or repealed, the same as prohibition
was repealed. Ignoring the Constitution is likely to be a bad idea in the
long run. It was written by people of a quality that government service
doesn't seem to attract any more.
Al Yellon
4ax.com:
The fundamental hypocrisy here is that the Republicans are the party of
"get the government off our backs", and state's rights', *except* when it
serves their purposes to get the federal government involved.
In this case, where the state courts in Florida have ruled against their
position, instead of accepting it, they have removed it to federal
jurisdiction, even *after* SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal.
Disgusting.
--
"People ask me what I do in the winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell
you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."- Rogers Hornsby
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Cub rants and commentary: || To contact me use the following:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com || itghtfr02 (at) sneakemail (dot) com
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
It's very seldom that you'll hear me jump on the "both parties are
shite about this" bandwagon on any subject, but really, on this they
both are. The Dems want to take away guns, the Repubs want to take
away drugs. They both want freedoms when those freedoms lead to
behavior that's in line with the way they think people should live,
and they both seem perfectly happy to dump the idea of freedom when
that freedom might lead to be buying a gun, or smoking a joint, or, if
I were a woman, deciding I don't want to support this other life for
nine months.
>In this case, where the state courts in Florida have ruled against their
>position, instead of accepting it, they have removed it to federal
>jurisdiction, even *after* SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal.
>
>Disgusting.
It really is. Calling on her (!) as a witness to testify (!) in front
of the congress is very close to an abuse of power, it seems to me.
They don't have a good faith belief that she can testify. It's
certainly acting outside the rule of law; they made the laws, the
judges have adjudicated, they should deal with it.
Kevin
Bill Turlock
Well, duhh.
At times like this I'm so reminded of P. J. O'Rourke's Parliament of
Whores.
http://www.groveatlantic.com/grove/wc.dll?groveproc~genauth~568~1048~DESC
Lars Eighner
the lovely and talented Al Yellon broadcast on
alt.fan.cecil-adams:
> The fundamental hypocrisy here is that the Republicans are the party of
> "get the government off our backs", and state's rights', *except* when it
> serves their purposes to get the federal government involved.
For years we have heard Republicans say "This is a republic, not
a democracy," but they are happy to play to the mobocracy when
it is something that tends to distract from real issues.
> In this case, where the state courts in Florida have ruled against their
> position, instead of accepting it, they have removed it to federal
> jurisdiction, even *after* SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal.
> Disgusting.
--
Lars Eighner eig...@io.com http://www.larseighner.com/
When the rich make war, it's the poor that die.
- Jean-Paul Sartre
SoCalMike
>>To be more exact, the Republicans are trying to establish a sanctity
>>for any sort of life, on either end of the life.
unless you screw up in a major way that involves killing someone. oh,
wait- laura bush did that! nevermind...
ok-
unless, like, you are sentenced to death. *then* the republicans get to
kill you.
me? im not against the death penalty. im also not against abortion, or
euthanasia, either. they are all tragic, but they all serve a purpose.
Le Retour du Petain d'Encule
>
> ...then again, it can't possibly matter to her: she's been brain-dead
> for fifteen years.
So has Congress, but then they're probably get scratchy pants realizing
that we should have pulled the plug on 2/3rds of them a long time ago.
So, naturally they gotta jump in because interfering in the private and
personal choices of people about their lives is so much more the role of
Congress than say managing the budget or anything else they were elected
to do.
Bill
M C Hamster
message news:pan.2005.03.20....@petaindencule.com...
Hiya Bill! Ton retour est bien accueilli! (Or something.)
Bob Ward
<mikein562...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>To be more exact, the Republicans are trying to establish a sanctity
>>>for any sort of life, on either end of the life.
>
>unless you screw up in a major way that involves killing someone. oh,
>wait- laura bush did that! nevermind...
>
>ok-
>
Perhaps Laura Bush should have dated Ted Kennedy, eh?
Greg Goss
>The fundamental hypocrisy here is that the Republicans are the party of
>"get the government off our backs", and state's rights', *except* when it
>serves their purposes to get the federal government involved.
>
>In this case, where the state courts in Florida have ruled against their
>position, instead of accepting it, they have removed it to federal
>jurisdiction, even *after* SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal.
>
>Disgusting.
It should be a state issue. Florida has courts. Florida's courts
ruled. The federal court has declined to examine it. Now they're
trying to do an end-run around the rules.
Five years from now, can a Democratic congress subpoena a
controversial death-row inmate to give testimony on some date after
his scheduled execution, just to stop Texas from doing some poorly
thought out execution? This is the door that the Republican congress
is opening.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Erich
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> >The fundamental hypocrisy here is that the Republicans are the party of
> >"get the government off our backs", and state's rights', *except* when it
> >serves their purposes to get the federal government involved.
> >
> >In this case, where the state courts in Florida have ruled against their
> >position, instead of accepting it, they have removed it to federal
> >jurisdiction, even *after* SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal.
> >
> >Disgusting.
>
> It should be a state issue. Florida has courts. Florida's courts
> ruled. The federal court has declined to examine it. Now they're
> trying to do an end-run around the rules.
The courts had rather clear grounds for their ruling. Florida law
Chapter 765 specifically permits withholding life-prolonging procedures,
for someone in a persistent vegetative state. This includes withholding
nutrition and water:
765.101 (10) "Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure,
treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance
and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous
vital function. The term does not include the administration of
medication or performance of medical procedure, when such medication or
procedure is deemed necessary to provide comfort care or to alleviate
pain."
Chapter 765.401 specifically gives a spouse priority in making such
decisions over a parent.
... Erich
osmium
>> It should be a state issue. Florida has courts. Florida's courts
>> ruled. The federal court has declined to examine it. Now they're
>> trying to do an end-run around the rules.
>
> The courts had rather clear grounds for their ruling. Florida law
> Chapter 765 specifically permits withholding life-prolonging procedures,
> for someone in a persistent vegetative state. This includes withholding
> nutrition and water:
>
> 765.101 (10) "Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure,
> treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance
> and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous
> vital function. The term does not include the administration of
> medication or performance of medical procedure, when such medication or
> procedure is deemed necessary to provide comfort care or to alleviate
> pain."
>
> Chapter 765.401 specifically gives a spouse priority in making such
> decisions over a parent.
That's absolutely shocking! The law seems as clear as any law could ever
be. How long has this argument been going on? I have heard about case this
for several months, at least. What is the basis for the legal proceedings
up to now? That they aren't really married? That she isn't in a persistent
vegetative state? That she isn't a citizen? For God's sake, WHAT?
M C Hamster
news:3a5msnF...@individual.net...
You said it: God's sake, apparently. Or so the Republicans say.
Erich
"osmium" <r124c...@comcast.net> wrote:
The battle has been going on for over a decade, as you can see from a
timeline of the case:
<http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/timeline.htm>
During this time, just about every argument you could think of has been
used.
The case seems driven by Terri's parents belief that one day she will
awake from her coma. After reviewing the evidence, the court
sided with Michael and ordered her feeding tube removed. Here is what
Florida Second District Court of Appeals said in June of 2003 upholding
that decision:
"In the final analysis, the difficult question that faced the trial
court was whether Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo, not after a few weeks
in a coma, but after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has
robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of
neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with
sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose
to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes
that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or
whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its
course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue
their lives. After due consideration, we conclude that the trial judge
had clear and convincing evidence to answer this question as he did."
After all appeals had been exhausted, the Florida Legislature passed a
special law giving the Governor the power to stay the courts ruling and
appoint a new guardian in this specific case. As the Florida
Constitution prohibits laws that only apply to one person, this law was
found to be invalid by the Florida courts.
... Erich
M C Hamster
news:oetting-3392A4...@news.uswest.net...
How much taxpayer money (i.e., Medicare) has been spent on this over this
time? What does a Republican say to that? What are her daily hospital
bills these days?
Le Retour du Petain d'Encule
J'ai tout quitte pour toi or some such stuff. Hope y'all been well. I
ain't been home much.
Bill
Binyamin Dissen
wrote:
:>How much taxpayer money (i.e., Medicare) has been spent on this over this
:>time? What does a Republican say to that? What are her daily hospital
:>bills these days?
Would you ask the same questions regarding a poor black guy who needed an
operation?
Why does the fact that her husband wants her inheritance change anything?
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> After all appeals had been exhausted, the Florida Legislature passed a
> special law giving the Governor the power to stay the courts ruling and
> appoint a new guardian in this specific case. As the Florida
> Constitution prohibits laws that only apply to one person, this law was
> found to be invalid by the Florida courts.
Art. 1, Sec. 10, of the Florida Constitution prohibits the
passing of any ex post facto laws.
Charles
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
<post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
>On 20 Mar 2005 12:27:05 -0600 "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet>
>wrote:
>
>:>How much taxpayer money (i.e., Medicare) has been spent on this over this
>:>time? What does a Republican say to that? What are her daily hospital
>:>bills these days?
>
>Would you ask the same questions regarding a poor black guy who needed an
>operation?
>
>Why does the fact that her husband wants her inheritance change anything?
What on earth are you talking about? Her husband was just offered
US$1,000,000 to sign her guardianship over to her parents; he refused,
and called it an insult, which it was. Nicely proves his point,
though, that this is not about money.
Good to see that you're not constrained by the rule of law when it
goes against you, much like other fundementalists who think that
'man's law' shouldn't apply to them 'cause god is whispering something
to them, secret-like.
Kevin
Binyamin Dissen
:>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:35:53 +0200, Binyamin Dissen
:><post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
:>>On 20 Mar 2005 12:27:05 -0600 "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet>
:>>wrote:
:>>:>How much taxpayer money (i.e., Medicare) has been spent on this over this
:>>:>time? What does a Republican say to that? What are her daily hospital
:>>:>bills these days?
:>>Would you ask the same questions regarding a poor black guy who needed an
:>>operation?
:>>Why does the fact that her husband wants her inheritance change anything?
:>What on earth are you talking about? Her husband was just offered
:>US$1,000,000 to sign her guardianship over to her parents; he refused,
:>and called it an insult, which it was. Nicely proves his point,
:>though, that this is not about money.
:>Good to see that you're not constrained by the rule of law
I am constrained to the Law.
Dilbert Firestorm
> I've followed this case with some interest, as it deals with an issue of
> high interest to the disabilities community. There is a disability-activist
> group called "Not Dead Yet", which strongly opposes euthanasia. They
> certainly have a point, in that there is a long history of society dealing
> with people with disabilities by hastening their death, on the grounds that
> "their lives aren't really worth saving". (In addition to taking on the
> Terry Schiavo case as a cause celebre, they have also attacked "Million
> Dollar Baby".)
>
> While I generally am sympathetic with disability groups issues, this is one
> where I just can't make the leap. For me, I think anyone, including people
> with disabilities, should have the right to make these life-extending
> decisions. To deny people that right just seems to be imposing a different
> value structure on them.
>
> express her decision as to what to do. The only thing we have is a system
> where someone else has a power of medical attorney to make those decisions
> on behalf of the person. If her husband had done something illegal or shady
> to get that power of attorney, then certainly one should fight his decision
> to remove her feeding tube. But absent that, I just don't agree that others
> should impose their own value structure in this case.
>
> I find "Not Dead Yet's" attitude to be condenscing, to the point of being
> even offensive, to people with disabilities. It must be odd for these
> activities, most of whom are hard-core lefties, to be in the same camp on
> this as Tom Delay. I've never asked any of them how they feel about
> abortion.... it would be interesting to see if they oppose that choice for
> women too, as logic would seem to dictate they must.
>
> If there have been threads about this ad nauseum during my various absences
> here, I apologize.
>
> M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
>
>
with regards to terry schiavo, in the absence of a will or living wills,
she should be kept alive. the problem is this person A told person B about
what person A wants, but does not tell other people and person A's family.
so, it comes down to who's telling the truth.
I was at one time on michael schiavo side that the terry's life be ended.
my opinion on this matter has changed.
one thing that I've noticed that a claim was made that she is on life
support from a coma. she is not. what she has is a feeding tube that
keeps her alive. remove that feeding tube, she dehydrate and starve within
a few days. now this has changed to "persistent" vegetative state.
this is different from life support which involves machines to the the
functions the human body, (keep heart beating, blood flowing, etc.)
I have issues about whats being done to Terry. I'm more inclined to
support Terry's parents who want to take care of her and yet her husband
want to remove the the feeding tube.
I have seen the video (which was seen on Fox News) of Terry which shows her
following the balloon. I did a double take on that. if Terry is supposed
to be "persistent" vegetative state, she does not appear to be in state of
veginess. a person that responds to the environment around her is not in
vegetable state.
there was an account by one of the family members who was present when
michaels lawyer asked Terry "we can end this now, do you want to live",
Terry apparenty responds loudly with incoherent speech with something like
"i wha..." and the guard outside the door heard and enters the room and
asks what was going on and the guard throws out the lawyer. this came from
the segment of Hannity & Colmes where the terry's younger sister & lawyer
were interviewed.
I'm really conviced that Terry shoud be under the care of Terry's parents,
not by her husband who is apparently has a girlfriend and has fathered a
child by that girlfriend.
James Gifford
> What on earth are you talking about? Her husband was just offered
> US$1,000,000 to sign her guardianship over to her parents; he refused,
> and called it an insult, which it was. Nicely proves his point,
> though, that this is not about money.
I believe he turned down $10M in a prior offer.
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
<post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:42:43 GMT K_S_O...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>:>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:35:53 +0200, Binyamin Dissen
>:><post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
>
>:>>On 20 Mar 2005 12:27:05 -0600 "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet>
>:>>wrote:
>
>:>>:>How much taxpayer money (i.e., Medicare) has been spent on this over this
>:>>:>time? What does a Republican say to that? What are her daily hospital
>:>>:>bills these days?
>
>:>>Would you ask the same questions regarding a poor black guy who needed an
>:>>operation?
>
>:>>Why does the fact that her husband wants her inheritance change anything?
>
>:>What on earth are you talking about? Her husband was just offered
>:>US$1,000,000 to sign her guardianship over to her parents; he refused,
>:>and called it an insult, which it was. Nicely proves his point,
>:>though, that this is not about money.
>
>:>Good to see that you're not constrained by the rule of law
>
>I am constrained to the Law.
Well yes, that's what I mean. You consider supernatural voices to be
a better source of guidance than secular laws. It's only luck,
really, with so many people like you in your various guises and sects
about that we don't have more people doing illegal and dangerous stuff
to other people because a voice told them to.
Kevin
Jane Chaplin
"osmium" <r124c...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3a5msnF...@individual.net...
| "Erich" writes:
|
|
| be. How long has this argument been going on? I have heard about case
this
| for several months, at least. What is the basis for the legal proceedings
| up to now? That they aren't really married? That she isn't in a
persistent
| vegetative state? That she isn't a citizen? For God's sake, WHAT?
|
|
doctors for not detecting the electrolyte imbalance that caused her heart to
stop. He testified that he wanted to care for her until she died. "I
believe in the vows I took with my wife: through sickness and health, for
richer or poor. I married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the
rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that." He was awarded $1.2
million for her medical care and rehabilitation.
It was after this that he remembered she told him she didn't to be kept
alive.
He tabled the plans he had presented to the jury for her rehabilitation. He
placed a DNR order, refused to treat her infections and began to date other
women.
Terri's parents became upset by this and filed suit to have him removed as
guardian.
I don't know how much is left in her fund. Michael says the money is gone.
The courts did allow him to use the money for legal fees.
Ten years ago when this ugly battle started, Michael wanted to marry his
girlfriend and mother of his child. He now says he has no plans to marry
her. The way Terri's parents saw it, he wanted this other woman, and
Terri's money. If he were to divorce her, he wouldn't inherit the money.
Jane Chaplin
"Dilbert Firestorm" <sca...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:d1l0f8$ok4$1...@news.datasync.com...
|
|
| I have seen the video (which was seen on Fox News) of Terry which shows
her
| following the balloon. I did a double take on that. if Terry is supposed
| to be "persistent" vegetative state, she does not appear to be in state of
| veginess. a person that responds to the environment around her is not in
| vegetable state.
I realize that National Review is slanted to the right, and many people do
not find them to be a credible newsource. I found this article regarding
Terri Schiavo. If even of these claims are true, it is really troubling.
If anyone can debunk these claims with a citation from a reputable source,
it is most welcome
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp
Terri Schiavo lies in a Florida hospice, subject to a judge's order that
will cause her to die of starvation and dehydration commencing this Friday,
March 18, at 1:00 P.M. Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, have fought for
over a decade to prevent her death. They have repeatedly gone to court in
their efforts to stop Terri's husband, Michael, from removing the tube that
provides her with food and water.
The court battle has gone largely against the Schindlers. Last week,
Pinellas County Circuit Court judge George Greer issued a steady stream of
rulings denying almost every motion the Schindlers raised. He denied some of
them summarily, without hearing arguments or evidence. Among the motions
Judge Greer denied was a request for new testing and examination of Terri by
independent and qualified specialists. David Gibbs, attorney for the
Schindlers, submitted 33 affidavits from doctors and other medical
professionals contending that Terri's condition should be reevaluated. About
15 of these affidavits are from board-certified neurologists. Some of these
doctors also say that Terri could benefit from therapy. Judge Greer was
unmoved.
Many people believe that Terri Schiavo has had "the best of care," and that
everything has been tried by way of rehabilitation. This belief is false. In
fact, Terri has had no attempts at therapy or rehabilitation since 1992, and
very little had been done up to that point. Terri has not even had the
physical therapy most doctors would regard as normative for someone in her
condition. The result is that Terri suffers from severe muscle contractures,
which have caused her body to become contorted. Physical therapy could
remedy this, but husband Michael has refused to provide it.
Terri has also suffered from what many professionals would regard as
neglect. She had to have several teeth extracted last year because of severe
decay. This decay was caused by a lack of basic dental hygiene, such as
tooth-brushing. She also developed decubitus (skin) ulcers on her buttocks
and thighs. These ulcers can be prevented by a simple regimen of regular
turning: a basic nursing task that any certified nurse's aide can perform.
The presence of these easily preventable ulcers is a classic sign of
neglect. Bob and Mary Schindler have repeatedly complained of Terri's
neglect, and have sought to remove Michael as guardian on that basis. Judge
Greer was unmoved by those complaints as well.
BAD MEDICINE
And, quite apart from the question of Terri's therapy and care, it is
entirely likely that Terri has never been properly diagnosed. Terri is
usually described as being in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS), and
indeed Judge Greer ruled as a finding of fact that she is PVS; but this
diagnosis and finding were arrived at in a way that has many neurologists
expressing surprise and dismay.
I have spent the past ten days recruiting and interviewing neurologists who
are willing to come forward and offer affidavits or declarations concerning
new testing and examinations for Terri. In addition to the 15 neurologists'
affidavits Gibbs had in time to present in court, I have commitments from
over 30 others who are willing to testify that Terri should have new and
additional testing, and new examinations by unbiased neurologists. Almost 50
neurologists all say the same thing: Terri should be reevaluated, Terri
should be reexamined, and there are grave doubts as to the accuracy of Terri's
diagnosis of PVS. All of these neurologists are board-certified; a number of
them are fellows of the prestigious American Academy of Neurology; several
are professors of neurology at major medical schools.
So how can Judge Greer ignore the opinions of so many qualified
neurologists, some of whom are leaders in the field? The answer is that
Michael Schiavo, his attorney George Felos, and Judge Greer already have the
diagnosis they want.
Terri's diagnosis was arrived at without the benefit of testing that most
neurologists would consider standard for diagnosing PVS. One such test is
MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging). MRI is widely used today, even for
ailments as simple as knee injuries - but Terri has never had one. Michael
has repeatedly refused to consent to one. The neurologists I have spoken to
have reacted with shock upon learning this fact. One such neurologist is Dr.
Peter Morin. He is a researcher specializing in degenerative brain diseases,
and has both an M.D. and a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Boston University.
In the course of my conversation with Dr. Morin, he made reference to the
standard use of MRI and PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans to diagnose
the extent of brain injuries. He seemed to assume that these had been done
for Terri. I stopped him and told him that these tests have never been done
for her; that Michael had refused them.
There was a moment of dead silence.
"That's criminal," he said, and then asked, in a tone of utter incredulity:
"How can he continue as guardian? People are deliberating over this woman's
life and death and there's been no MRI or PET?" He drew a reasonable
conclusion: "These people [Michael Schiavo, George Felos, and Judge Greer]
don't want the information."
Dr. Morin explained that he would feel obligated to obtain the information
in these tests before making a diagnosis with life and death consequences. I
told him that CT (Computer-Aided Tomography) scans had been done, and were
partly the basis for the finding of PVS. The doctor retorted, "Spare no
expense, eh?" I asked him to explain the comment; he said that a CT scan is
a much less expensive test than an MRI, but it "only gives you a tenth of
the information an MRI does." He added, "A CT scan is useful only in pretty
severe cases, such as trauma, and also during the few days after an anoxic
(lack of oxygen) brain injury. It's useful in an emergency-room setting. But
if the question is ischemic injury [brain damage caused by lack of
blood/oxygen to part of the brain] you want an MRI and PET. For subsequent
evaluation of brain injury, the CT is pretty useless unless there has been a
massive stroke."
Other neurologists have concurred with Dr. Morin's opinion. Dr. Thomas
Zabiega, who trained at the University of Chicago, said, "Any neurologist
who is objective would say 'Yes'" to the question, "Should Terri be given an
MRI?"
But in spite of the lack of advanced testing, such as an MRI, attorney
George Felos has claimed that Terri's cerebral cortex has "liquefied," and
doctors for Michael Schiavo have claimed, on the basis of the CT scans, that
parts of Terri's cerebral cortex "have been replaced by fluid." The problem
with such contentions is that the available evidence can't support them. Dr.
Zabiega explained that "a CT scan can't resolve the kind of detail needed"
to make such a pronouncement: "A CT scan is like a blurry photograph." Dr.
William Bell, a professor of neurology at Wake Forest University Medical
School, agrees: "A CT scan doesn't give much detail. In order to see it on a
CT, you have to have massive damage." Is it possible that Terri has that
sort of "massive" brain damage? According to Dr. Bell, that isn't likely.
Sometimes, he said, even patients who are PVS have a "normal or near normal"
MRI.
So why hasn't an MRI been done for Terri? That question has never been
satisfactorily answered. George Felos has argued that an MRI can't be done
because of thalamic implants that were placed in Terri's skull during the
last attempt at therapy, dating back to 1992. But Felos's contention ignores
the fact that these implants could be removed. Indeed, the doctor who put
them in instructed Michael to have them removed. Michael has never done so.
The most obvious possible explanation for what would otherwise be
inexplicable behavior is that Michael Schiavo, George Felos, and Judge Greer
don't want to admit any information that would upset the diagnosis they
already have. Dr. Morin, when told that Michael had refused an MRI, and that
Judge Greer had confirmed the decision, said: "He refused a non-invasive
test? People trying to do the right thing want the best and most complete
information available. We don't have that in Terri's case." Dr. Bell agreed
with this assessment, saying, "It seems as though they're fearful of any
additional information."
THE CRANFORD DIAGNOSIS
Doctors for Michael Schiavo have said that an MRI and PET are not necessary
for Terri because PVS is primarily a "clinical" diagnosis, that is, one
arrived at on the basis of examination of the patient, rather than by
relying on tests. And the neurologists I have spoken to agree on the
clinical nature of the diagnosis, while insisting that advanced tests
nonetheless are a necessary part of it. But the star medical witness for
Michael Schiavo, Dr. Ronald Cranford of the University of Minnesota, has
repeatedly dismissed calls for MRI testing, and his opinion has prevailed.
Dr. Cranford was the principal medical witness brought in by Schiavo and
Felos to support their position that Terri was PVS. Judge Greer was
obviously impressed by Cranford's résumé: Cranford travels throughout the
country testifying in cases involving PVS and brain impairment. He is widely
recognized by courts as an expert in these issues, and in some circles is
considered "the" expert on PVS. His clinical judgment has carried the day in
many cases, so it is relevant to examine the manner in which he arrived at
his judgment in Terri's case. But before that, one needs to know a little
about Cranford's background and perspective: Dr. Ronald Cranford is one of
the most outspoken advocates of the "right to die" movement and of
physician-assisted suicide in the U.S. today.
In published articles, including a 1997 op-ed in the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Star Tribune, he has advocated the starvation of Alzheimer's patients. He
has described PVS patients as indistinguishable from other forms of animal
life. He has said that PVS patients and others with brain impairment lack
personhood and should have no constitutional rights. Perusing the case
literature and articles surrounding the "right to die" and PVS, one will see
Dr. Cranford's name surface again and again. In almost every case, he is the
one claiming PVS, and advocating the cessation of nutrition and hydration.
In the cases of Paul Brophy, Nancy Jobes, Nancy Cruzan, and Christine
Busalucci, Cranford was the doctor behind the efforts to end their lives.
Each of these people was brain-damaged but not dying; nonetheless, he
advocated death for all, by dehydration and starvation. Nancy Cruzan did not
even require a feeding tube: She could be spoon-fed. But Cranford advocated
denying even that, saying that even spoon-feeding constituted "medical
treatment" that could be licitly withdrawn.
In cases where other doctors don't see it, Dr. Cranford seems to have a
knack for finding PVS. Cranford also diagnosed Robert Wendland as PVS. He
did so in spite of the fact that Wendland could pick up specifically colored
pegs or blocks and hand them to a therapy assistant on request. He did so in
spite of the fact that Wendland could operate and maneuver an ordinary
wheelchair with his left hand and foot, and an electric wheelchair with a
joystick, of the kind that many disabled persons (most famously Dr. Stephen
Hawking) use. Dr. Cranford dismissed these abilities as meaningless.
Fortunately for Wendland, the California supreme court was not persuaded by
Cranford's assessment.
Expert witnesses in court are supposed to be unbiased: disinterested in the
outcome of the case. Part of the procedure in qualifying expert witnesses is
establishing that they are objective and unbiased. But given Dr. Cranford's
history of advocacy in the "right to die" and euthanasia movements, and
given his track record of almost always coming down on the side of PVS and
removal of nutrition and hydration, one might question his objectivity.
Indeed, the Schindlers' attorneys attempted to do so in the 2002 evidentiary
hearing at which Cranford testified, but went unheard. Organizations such as
the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide submitted
amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in the appellate proceedings in
Terri's case, demonstrating Cranford's bias in detail. But these arguments
also seemed to fall on deaf ears.
Some neurologists who also consult in legal cases were not surprised at the
handling of Dr. Cranford's expert testimony. In theory, they said, the
expert witness is supposed to be objective, but, as Dr. Bell explained, "the
way it really works is that an attorney carefully selects an expert that
will give him the outcome he desires." He related that he has been asked by
attorneys to serve as an expert. "I have looked over medical records," he
said, "and told attorneys what I thought." But on occasion, he said, his
opinion was "obviously not what they wanted to hear" and "they moved on to
another expert." Bell acknowledged that Cranford is "a highly accomplished
and experienced speaker," but said that in him the court "likely found a
highly prejudiced expert."
Neurologists who are familiar with diagnosing and treating PVS and other
brain injuries have told me that PVS is a notoriously difficult diagnosis to
make. It requires a great deal of time spent with the patient over several
days or weeks. The reason for this, as Dr. Bell explained, is that
brain-injured patients have severely disrupted sleep/wake cycles. Dr. Mack
Jones, a neurologist in Ft. Walton Beach, Fla., added that patients with
severe brain injury will have greatly varying levels of alertness: "Two
independent examiners may get an entirely different impression depending on
when and how long he/she has spent performing the examination. For example,
one examiner may unknowingly attempt to evaluate the patient during a stage
of sleep. Another examiner, by chance, may find a more responsive patient
simply because [the patient is] now more aroused." Dr. Morin concurred,
saying that in his experience "the attention of brain-injured patients is
very erratic," and that because of this he has "seen inadequate assessments
even by experienced neurologists." Because of these difficulties, the
American Academy of Neurology has made it clear that it can take months for
a physician to establish with confidence the diagnosis of PVS. A 1996
British Medical Journal study, conducted at England's Royal Hospital for
Neurodisability, concluded that there was a 43-percent error rate in the
diagnosis of PVS. Inadequate time spent by specialists evaluating patients
was listed as a contributing factor for the high incidence of errors.
So, did Dr. Cranford, or any of the doctors testifying for Michael Schiavo,
spend months evaluating Terri? No. To be fair, none of the doctors appearing
for the Schindlers spent months with Terri either. But it is hardly
coincidental that the doctors who spent the most time with Terri came to the
conclusion that she is not PVS. The doctors brought in by the Schindlers
spent approximately 14 hours examining Terri over more than two weeks; their
conclusion was that Terri is not PVS, and that she may benefit from therapy.
In marked contrast, Dr. Cranford examined Terri on one occasion, for
approximately 45 minutes. Another doctor for Michael Schiavo, Dr. Peter
Bambikidis of the Cleveland Clinic Foundation in Ohio, examined Terri for
about half an hour. When Dr. Bell learned of the cursory nature of these
exams, he said: "You can't do this. To make a diagnosis of PVS based on one
examination is fallacious." In Cranford's examination, described by one
witness as "brutal," he discounted evidence under his own eyes of Terri's
responsiveness. At one point, Dr. Cranford struck Terri very hard on the
forehead between her eyes. Terri recoiled and moaned, seemingly in pain. In
his court testimony, Cranford dismissed the reaction and moan as a "reflex."
"I asked Dr. Bell if he thought a moan uttered after a painful blow could be
a reflex. "It's highly unlikely," he replied. He qualified his answer by
noting that he had not actually seen the video of the exam, but he believes
that the description of Terri's reaction is not consistent with a reflex. "A
moan is not a reflex," Bell said. "A wince or grimace is not a reflex." "
By the very definition of Persistent Vegetative State, the patient must
exhibit no "evidence of awareness of self or environment" or "ability to
interact with others." As one neurologist put it, if a patient shows "any
response to the outside world, the patient isn't in a PVS." All it takes,
according to Dr. Jones, is "only one examiner to discover the presence of
higher brain function and the naysayers' opinions are, by the very
definition of PVS, null and void."
TERRI'S FUTURE - AND THE ISSUE OF TRUTH
Given the difficulty of diagnosing PVS, the high rate of error, the obvious
bias of the doctor whose judgment forms the basis of the judge's ruling that
Terri is PVS, and the growing outcry from the neurological community, how is
it that Judge Greer's ruling has been sustained? The answer is that in our
legal system, once a judge has ruled on a matter of fact, it is very
difficult to revisit such a ruling. The lawyers' rule of thumb is that trial
courts hear and rule on questions of fact, and appellate courts rule on
questions of law; it's unusual for an appellate court to overturn a lower
court's ruling because of an issue of fact.
That's why, at every turn in this case, the Schindlers have had to try to
undo the faulty rulings of fact previously issued by Judge Greer. They've
had to go back before Judge Greer himself and try to convince him that he
was wrong, and should undo his own rulings. Judge Greer has proven unwilling
to do so. The higher courts, unwilling to overturn a trial judge's rulings
of fact, have no interest in granting new hearings. Michael Schiavo and
George Felos have no interest in revisiting Terri's diagnosis, as that
ruling provides the whole legal basis of their ability to end her life. Dr.
Cranford has no interest in seeing his own diagnosis called into question.
Dr. Bell lamented that at this point, "medical realities are no longer
governing this case." He added that it seemed to him that medical issues
concerning the care of the patient had been subsumed by legal issues. In our
courts, he added, "once a decision is made they don't want additional
information."
The whole history of Terri's case over the past few years can be summed up
as the efforts of the Schindlers, and those who value Terri's life, to try
to introduce additional information before the courts and other authorities.
Some of this information consists of facts and arguments that were ignored
or dismissed without adequate consideration; some has been the result of
advances in the diagnosis and treatment of brain injuries over the last five
years. On the side of Michael Schiavo, George Felos, and Judge Greer, their
efforts have consisted almost entirely in trying to prevent any new
information from being presented or considered.
The legal system's willful blindness to facts cannot succeed forever. The
truth has a way of coming out. But will it do so in time to save Terri
Schiavo? Dr. Morin said to me, towards the end of our conversation, that
"the law can find a way to do the right thing if it wants to." The problem
so far is that those who have the power to do the right thing seem to have
no desire or inclination to do so.
- Rev. Robert Johansen is a Catholic priest of the Diocese of Kalamazoo,
Michigan.
Binyamin Dissen
:>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 01:20:34 +0200, Binyamin Dissen
:><post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
:>>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:42:43 GMT K_S_O...@yahoo.com wrote:
:>>:>On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:35:53 +0200, Binyamin Dissen
:>>:><post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
:>>:>>On 20 Mar 2005 12:27:05 -0600 "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet>
:>>:>>wrote:
:>>:>>:>How much taxpayer money (i.e., Medicare) has been spent on this over this
:>>:>>:>time? What does a Republican say to that? What are her daily hospital
:>>:>>:>bills these days?
:>>:>>Would you ask the same questions regarding a poor black guy who needed an
:>>:>>operation?
:>>:>>Why does the fact that her husband wants her inheritance change anything?
:>>:>What on earth are you talking about? Her husband was just offered
:>>:>US$1,000,000 to sign her guardianship over to her parents; he refused,
:>>:>and called it an insult, which it was. Nicely proves his point,
:>>:>though, that this is not about money.
:>>:>Good to see that you're not constrained by the rule of law
:>>I am constrained to the Law.
:>Well yes, that's what I mean. You consider supernatural voices to be
:>a better source of guidance than secular laws.
No.
I consider G-d a better source of guidance.
You, on the other hand, would seem to have no problem killing untermenchen -
as long as it followed secular law, like in Germany some 60+ years ago.
:> It's only luck,
:>really, with so many people like you in your various guises and sects
:>about that we don't have more people doing illegal and dangerous stuff
:>to other people because a voice told them to.
It is with Divine providence that your ilk only get to murder - legally, by
your secular law - millions at rare intervals.
Erich
"Jane Chaplin" <janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> "osmium" <r124c...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:3a5msnF...@individual.net...
> | "Erich" writes:
> |
> |
> | That's absolutely shocking! The law seems as clear as any law could ever
> | be. How long has this argument been going on? I have heard about case
> this
> | for several months, at least. What is the basis for the legal proceedings
> | up to now? That they aren't really married? That she isn't in a
> persistent
> | vegetative state? That she isn't a citizen? For God's sake, WHAT?
> |
> |
> 13 years ago Michael Schiavo filed a lawsuit on Terri's behalf against her
> doctors for not detecting the electrolyte imbalance that caused her heart to
> stop. He testified that he wanted to care for her until she died. "I
> believe in the vows I took with my wife: through sickness and health, for
> richer or poor. I married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the
> rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that." He was awarded $1.2
> million for her medical care and rehabilitation.
> It was after this that he remembered she told him she didn't to be kept
> alive.
Or perhaps when he realized that there was no hope?
> He tabled the plans he had presented to the jury for her rehabilitation. He
> placed a DNR order, refused to treat her infections and began to date other
> women.
The jury verdict was in November 1992. Terri Schiavo remained in Sable
Palms skill care facility, receiving regular and aggressive therapy
through 1994. In 1994, the court appointed guardian reported that
Michael Schiavo has acted appropriately and attentively toward Terri
Schiavo.
See the case timeline here:
<http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/timeline.htm>
Terri did not get better, from the ruling of the Florida Appeals Court
we find:
"By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal
structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and
has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this
condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her
brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state,
totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private
needs."
<http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/2dcaorder01-01.txt>
It was only in 1998 that Michael filed a petition with the court to have
Terri's feeding tube removed.
> Terri's parents became upset by this and filed suit to have him removed as
> guardian.
They did file suit, but the reasons remain unclear. The court sided
with Michael and dismissed the suit.
> I don't know how much is left in her fund. Michael says the money is gone.
> The courts did allow him to use the money for legal fees.
Anyone who has paid bills for the kind of care Terri has been receiving
will understand how the money could be gone.
> Ten years ago when this ugly battle started, Michael wanted to marry his
> girlfriend and mother of his child. He now says he has no plans to marry
> her. The way Terri's parents saw it, he wanted this other woman, and
> Terri's money. If he were to divorce her, he wouldn't inherit the money.
Now we get into the tabloid smear campaign.
... Erich
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
<post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
Is god not supernatural, by definition?
>You, on the other hand, would seem to have no problem killing untermenchen -
>as long as it followed secular law, like in Germany some 60+ years ago.
I don't know where you get that from, but I think you'll have trouble
showing any example of secular humanists being led by secular ethics
to mass murder. Go on and try, though.
The particular examples you're citing were pretty interested in
supernatural stuff of all sorts for you to be trying to clump them in
as secular, in my opinion. Marxist Russia would be a better example.
>:> It's only luck,
>:>really, with so many people like you in your various guises and sects
>:>about that we don't have more people doing illegal and dangerous stuff
>:>to other people because a voice told them to.
>
>It is with Divine providence that your ilk only get to murder - legally, by
>your secular law - millions at rare intervals.
My secular laws don't really lead me to murder anyone, at the moment.
But you're right, I should have said "secular ethics", not "secular
laws." There are certainly laws I would be moved to disobey, due to
my ethics. My bad.
Kevin
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
<janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Dilbert Firestorm" <sca...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:d1l0f8$ok4$1...@news.datasync.com...
>|
>
>|
>| I have seen the video (which was seen on Fox News) of Terry which shows
>her
>| following the balloon. I did a double take on that. if Terry is supposed
>| to be "persistent" vegetative state, she does not appear to be in state of
>| veginess. a person that responds to the environment around her is not in
>| vegetable state.
>
>I realize that National Review is slanted to the right, and many people do
>not find them to be a credible newsource. I found this article regarding
>Terri Schiavo. If even of these claims are true, it is really troubling.
>If anyone can debunk these claims with a citation from a reputable source,
>it is most welcome
>
>http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp
That's very interesting. I don't understand why they wouldn't do an
MRI, if that's the standard.
Kevin
Dilbert Firestorm
I think they did do an MRI, but I don't know how old that data is. if the
ruling was based on old MRI data, not current MRI data, then the courts
have truly committed a miscarrige of justice.
D.F. Manno
Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> In this case, where the state courts in Florida have ruled against their
> position, instead of accepting it, they have removed it to federal
> jurisdiction, even *after* SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal.
>
> Disgusting.
The administration and its supporters displayed its disdain for state
courts before it even seized power (Bush v. Gore), so while this is
disgusting, it isn't at all surprising.
--
D.F. Manno
dfm2a...@spymac.com
"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream
will never die."
D.F. Manno
"Jane Chaplin" <janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I realize that National Review is slanted to the right, and many people do
> not find them to be a credible newsource. I found this article regarding
> Terri Schiavo. If even of these claims are true, it is really troubling.
> If anyone can debunk these claims with a citation from a reputable source,
> it is most welcome
>
> http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp
<snip>
> - Rev. Robert Johansen is a Catholic priest of the Diocese of Kalamazoo,
> Michigan.
We have a Catholic priest holding forth in a wingnut magazine. Why on
earth would you think people would not find that credible?
Ryan Robbins
> her following the balloon. I did a double take on that. if Terry is
> supposed to be "persistent" vegetative state, she does not appear to be in
> state of veginess. a person that responds to the environment around her
> is not in vegetable state.
Unfotrunately, the evidence all points to her cognitive abilities to be on
par with that of an ant, if even that, because she has no means of
communicating or doing anything for her self-preservation. The most
primitive functions of the brain regulate breathing, temperature, and
circulation.
Jason Quick
"Erich" <oet...@qwest.net> wrote :
> The case seems driven by Terri's parents belief that one day she will
> awake from her coma.
Yesterday I read an article in which Terri's guardian ad litem was
interviewed about his part in the process. In the article, it is stated
that Mrs. Schiavo's cerebral cortex has essentially disappeared, and the
space it occupied is now full of cerebrospinal fluid. Her brainstem was
apparently not damaged in the stroke or heart attack or whatever, and as
such it keeps her alive. Take that for what it's worth.
Jason
Guillermo el Gato
<post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
Was it really law? Or was it a secret protocol? Yes, I realize it's
a bit of splitting hairs, but it's one thing to have a parliamentary
body pass a law and another for a member of the executive branch issue
a secret decree. And don't forget that they did most of the dirty
work in occupied lands. Feel free to compare and contrast with the
West Bank and Guantanomo Bay.
>
>:> It's only luck,
>:>really, with so many people like you in your various guises and sects
>:>about that we don't have more people doing illegal and dangerous stuff
>:>to other people because a voice told them to.
>
>It is with Divine providence that your ilk only get to murder - legally, by
>your secular law - millions at rare intervals.
Please define "your ilk."
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
<dfm2a...@spymac.com> wrote:
>In article <vRo%d.8541$ZB6....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>,
> "Jane Chaplin" <janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> I realize that National Review is slanted to the right, and many people do
>> not find them to be a credible newsource. I found this article regarding
>> Terri Schiavo. If even of these claims are true, it is really troubling.
>> If anyone can debunk these claims with a citation from a reputable source,
>> it is most welcome
>>
>> http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp
>
><snip>
>
>> - Rev. Robert Johansen is a Catholic priest of the Diocese of Kalamazoo,
>> Michigan.
>
>We have a Catholic priest holding forth in a wingnut magazine. Why on
>earth would you think people would not find that credible?
Regardless of the source, if a substantial number of experts think she
has not been correctly evaluated then there's an issue. Why would her
husband refuse an MRI, if that's the standard?
Kevin
xho...@gmail.com
And if that "substantial" number of experts are all morally opposed to
removing the feeding tubes, regardless of the results of a correct
evaluation, and acting only on this moral opposition rather than any
actually expertise with the specific case?
> Why would her
> husband refuse an MRI, if that's the standard?
Because it is the beginning of an infinite regress of obstructionist
tactics.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Jane Chaplin
| will understand how the money could be gone.
|
I certainly understand how expensive care is and how possible it is for the
money to be spent on care since the battle started.
I am only explaining the parent's motivations and point of view.
M C Hamster
news:teE%d.23104$hU7....@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
OK. But now it's something that a federal court is being called on to hear.
But of course only in this particular case... the Republicans are opposed to
federal intervention in states issues, unless of course it suits their
political purposes to have the federal goverment intervene in a state issue.
Like to have SCOTUS decide who the president should be.
Hypocritical lying sons of bitches. Are they really oblivious to their
depths of hypocrisy here?
Of course another hypocrisy is that they vote against Medicaid while
fighting to keep Terry Schiavo alive. Idiots.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> "Jane Chaplin" <janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:teE%d.23104$hU7....@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>"Erich" <oet...@qwest.net> wrote in message news:oetting-|
>>| Anyone who has paid bills for the kind of care Terri has been receiving
>>| will understand how the money could be gone.
>>|
>>
>>I certainly understand how expensive care is and how possible it is for
>>the
>>money to be spent on care since the battle started.
>>
>>I am only explaining the parent's motivations and point of view.
>
> OK. But now it's something that a federal court is being called on to hear.
> But of course only in this particular case... the Republicans are opposed to
> federal intervention in states issues, unless of course it suits their
> political purposes to have the federal goverment intervene in a state issue.
> Like to have SCOTUS decide who the president should be.
And what about the approximately 25,000 other brain-dead people
in this country on life-support, about 4000 of whom are removed
from life-support each year and allowed to die?
What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a can of worms.
Charles
James Gifford
> their depths of hypocrisy here?
Let's see, how do I indicate a 9.5 on the DuhMeter in ASCII...?
groo
news:423c85ba$0$11346$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>>
>> For instance, I wouldn't name Kay as my guardian right now.
>
> Or, for that matter, groo.
No worries. If you are ever incapacitated to the point that you are unable
to spend your money, I'll step in and do the right thing.
--
"I didn't give a rat's ass about the gold. The money was, and still is, in
leprechauns." - The Filthy Critic
Hactar
James Gifford <n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
> "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
> > Hypocritical lying sons of bitches. Are they really oblivious to
> > their depths of hypocrisy here?
>
> Let's see, how do I indicate a 9.5 on the DuhMeter in ASCII...?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
| . . . . | . . . . |
^
|
9.5
--
-eben ebQ...@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar
Your pretended fear lest error might step in is like the man who
would keep all wine out of the country lest men should be drunk.
-- Oliver Cromwell
Dilbert Firestorm
part of a legal effort to kill her. that's the only reason that make sense.
Dilbert Firestorm
I'm sorry. you are wrong. tha fact is that she is not in a vegetataive
state as claimed by Michael's lawyers. in fact, terry has had proper
medical care and rehabilitation withheld from her by her husbands orders.
there is a doctor with a nobel peace prize nomination who disagrees with
the vegetative diagnosis. he is appearing tonight on hannity & colmes.
judge for yourself before you join the death bandwagon crowd
I seem to be in the minority, I for one believe the family that Terry is
worth saving and has hope for her.
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
>K_S_O...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:09:43 -0500, "D.F. Manno"
>> <dfm2a...@spymac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <vRo%d.8541$ZB6....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>,
>> > "Jane Chaplin" <janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I realize that National Review is slanted to the right, and many
>> >> people do not find them to be a credible newsource. I found this
>> >> article regarding Terri Schiavo. If even of these claims are true, it
>> >> is really troubling. If anyone can debunk these claims with a citation
>> >> from a reputable source, it is most welcome
>> >>
>> >> http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> >> - Rev. Robert Johansen is a Catholic priest of the Diocese of
>> >> Kalamazoo, Michigan.
>> >
>> >We have a Catholic priest holding forth in a wingnut magazine. Why on
>> >earth would you think people would not find that credible?
>>
>> Regardless of the source, if a substantial number of experts think she
>> has not been correctly evaluated then there's an issue.
>
>And if that "substantial" number of experts are all morally opposed to
>removing the feeding tubes, regardless of the results of a correct
>evaluation, and acting only on this moral opposition rather than any
>actually expertise with the specific case?
There does exist in most things medical a standard of practice. If
that standard in cases like this is an MRI, than they should do one.
If a CT scan is indeed like a "blurry photo", as one guy in the
article said, than that's not good enough. I had a freakin MRI on my
knee last year, surely we can afford one here to show once and for all
that her brain is gone. I mean, that's the crux of the argument, to
me, that major parts of her brain have been found by the court to be
gone and replaced with fluids. If that's wrong then the thing needs
to be re-examined.
I mean, I'm open to the idea that the article was slanted. But there
were some pretty good credentials cited in there, too. And in my
experience in court professional testifyer-experts are not always as
expert as they might be.
>> Why would her
>> husband refuse an MRI, if that's the standard?
>
>Because it is the beginning of an infinite regress of obstructionist
>tactics.
That may be the case. Still, I'm assuming a good faith effort on his
part to find out the truth, and this puzzles me. If I were he I would
want to know, I would want to be able to say that we knew to a
certainty that her brain was gone and that she was in this persistant
vegitative state, and that my evidence would hold up to whatever
standard was considered definative by the neurology community as a
whole, not just one guy.
I mean, what if she dies, and they do an autopsy, and she has a whole
brain? What if the CT is wrong, and they didn't bother with an MRI
that would have told them that?
Kevin
Erich
Dilbert Firestorm <sca...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Ryan Robbins wrote:
> > "Dilbert Firestorm" <sca...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:d1l0f8$ok4$1...@news.datasync.com...
> >
> >>I have seen the video (which was seen on Fox News) of Terry which shows
> >>her following the balloon. I did a double take on that. if Terry is
> >>supposed to be "persistent" vegetative state, she does not appear to be in
> >>state of veginess. a person that responds to the environment around her
> >>is not in vegetable state.
> >
> >
> > Unfotrunately, the evidence all points to her cognitive abilities to be on
> > par with that of an ant, if even that, because she has no means of
> > communicating or doing anything for her self-preservation. The most
> > primitive functions of the brain regulate breathing, temperature, and
> > circulation.
>
> I'm sorry. you are wrong. tha fact is that she is not in a vegetataive
> state as claimed by Michael's lawyers. in fact, terry has had proper
> medical care and rehabilitation withheld from her by her husbands orders.
A few dates from a timeline of the case:
<http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/timeline.htm>
February 25, 1990
Terri Schiavo suffers cardiac arrest, apparently caused by a potassium
imbalance and leading to brain damage due to lack of oxygen. She was
taken to the Humana Northside Hospital and was later given a
percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) to provide nutrition and
hydration.
May 12, 1990
Terri Schiavo is discharged from the hospital and taken to the College
Park skilled care and rehabilitation facility.
June 30, 1990
Terri Schiavo is transferred to Bayfront Hospital for further
rehabilitation efforts.
September 1990
Terri Schiavos family brings her home, but three weeks later they return
her to the College Park facility because the family is overwhelmed by
Terri's care needs.
November 1990
Michael Schiavo takes Terri Schiavo to California for experimental brain
stimulator treatment, an experimental thalamic stimulator implant in her
brain.
January 1991
The Schiavos return to Florida; Terri Schiavo is moved to the Mediplex
Rehabilitation Center in Brandon where she receives 24-hour care.
July 19, 1991
Terri Schiavo is transferred to Sable Palms skilled care facility where
she receives continuing neurological testing, and regular and aggressive
speech/occupational therapy through 1994.
[end quotes]
At this point, Terri has had therapy for over four years but nothing has
helped. A couple years later, Michael learns it is hopeless:
"By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal
structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and
has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this
condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her
brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state,
totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private
needs."
<http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/2dcaorder01-01.txt>
> there is a doctor with a nobel peace prize nomination who disagrees with
> the vegetative diagnosis. he is appearing tonight on hannity & colmes.
>
> judge for yourself before you join the death bandwagon crowd
>
> I seem to be in the minority, I for one believe the family that Terry is
> worth saving and has hope for her.
Now, lets assume that there is some part of Terri that still has
conscious thought. Put yourself in Terri's place, trapped inside a body
you can no longer control. The parts of your brain the process vision
and hearing are also gone. You are blind, deaf and unable to
communicate with the outside world. Since brain tissue does not grow
back, you will never get better.
Now, is it a kindness to keep you alive?
Or would you rather have someone pull the damn plug and end it all?
... Erich
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
I would want to have someone do me in somewhat faster than starving to
death, but your point stands. My only quibble is with the MRI thing,
it seems odd to me. The article cited had some impressive sounding
people in it, and they uniformly thought one should be done.
It may be the case that her brain is physically still there and that
she is still in this veg state, and that her support still should be
withheld, I don't know. But that's a different case. This court has
found as a matter of fact that major parts of her brain are gone based
on a CT scan. The article said that several other experts thought
there was a better option than a CT scan available, and that not doing
an MRI was inexplicable. Do one, is all I'm saying, have the correct
facts on the table. What if, based on a CT scan, she's allowed to
starve, and then they do an autopsy and she's found to have a whole
brain? What will that do for the right to die movement? It's not a
good idea for this to proceed with false conclusions in the court
record.
Kevin
SoCalMike
> "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>
>>Hypocritical lying sons of bitches. Are they really oblivious to
>>their depths of hypocrisy here?
>
>
> Let's see, how do I indicate a 9.5 on the DuhMeter in ASCII...?
>
1 5 10
Dilbert Firestorm
if she is consious, but has no control, it would be very frustrating to
communicate...
apparently, that is what happened to another woman, Kate Adamson, who awoke
from a coma and was in a similar vegetative state where she was concious
and aware, but unable to communicate.
Doctors are not perfect, they don't even know everything that goes on in
the human body, particularly the brain,
Lesmond
>
>this doctor, Dr. Bill Hammesfahr, who is a nobel peace prize nominee,
No one knows if they're a nominee. And if I slept with a member of the
nominating committee, I could be nominated too. Making the claim indicates
that he's probably a whacko.
says
>something entirely different about Terry's cardiac arrest. he says after
>looking at her medical records, she did not suffer from cardiac arrest as
>originally claimed. he says something other than a potassium imblance
>cause her current condition. more like an attempted strangulation.
So why did no doctor notice bruises or ligature marks on her neck during the
initial ER examinations?
Right...this is why her husband made sure she had therapy for five years.
Because it's only after the therapy didn't work that she she became a danger
to his murderous plan.
I was hospitalized about ten years back for a potassium imbalance. Trust me,
it's not something to joke about and it *can* kill you.
A conspiracy theory rarely makes an argument look more intelligent.
--
If there's a nuclear winter, at least it'll snow.
Richard Evans
>apparently, that is what happened to another woman, Kate Adamson, who awoke
>from a coma and was in a similar vegetative state where she was concious
>and aware, but unable to communicate.
A quick Google on the name doesn't show any objective reports, just
her own claims. Assuming she truly was in a "vegetative state" (and I
suspect that "vegetative state" and "conscioius and aware" are
mutually exclusive conditions) it appears to have lasted only about
two and a half months and there was nothing like the devastating brain
damage suffered by Terri Schiavo. Hardly a point of comparison.
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
>this doctor, Dr. Bill Hammesfahr, who is a nobel peace prize nominee, says
>something entirely different about Terry's cardiac arrest. he says after
>looking at her medical records, she did not suffer from cardiac arrest as
>originally claimed. he says something other than a potassium imblance
>cause her current condition. more like an attempted strangulation.
You're a whackjob, you know? Tell you what, don't help me anymore.
OK? Thanks.
Kevin
Erich
Dilbert Firestorm <sca...@nospam.com> wrote:
> this doctor, Dr. Bill Hammesfahr, who is a nobel peace prize nominee, says
> something entirely different about Terry's cardiac arrest. he says after
> looking at her medical records, she did not suffer from cardiac arrest as
> originally claimed. he says something other than a potassium imblance
> cause her current condition. more like an attempted strangulation.
OK, lets check out Dr. Hammesfahr's claim to be a Nobel nominee.
From <http://nobelprize.org/peace/nomination/index.html> we discover:
"Information about the nominations, investigations, and opinions
concerning the award is kept secret for fifty years."
So what did the good Dr. say about this when asked?:
<http://www.sptimes.com/2002/10/15/news_pf/TampaBay/Doctor_testifies_he_c
.shtml>
"George Felos, an attorney for Schiavo, challenged Hammesfahr's
credibility and the effectiveness of his therapy during a lengthy
cross-examination.
"He questioned the doctor about his assertion in advertisements that he
has been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine.
"Hammesfahr said he was nominated for the prize by Republican U.S. Rep.
Mike Bilirakis, who wrote a letter to Stockholm recommending the doctor
for the honor several years ago."
So now we ask, is Congressman Bilirakis one of the official nominators?
<http://nobelprize.org/medicine/nomination/nominators.html>
"Right to submit proposals for the award of the Nobel Prize in
Physiology or Medicine, based on the principle of competence and
universality, shall by statute be enjoyed by:
1. Members of the Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm;
2. Swedish and foreign members of the medical class of the Royal Swedish
Academy of Sciences;
3. Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine;
4. Members of the Nobel Committee not qualified under paragraph 1 above;
5. Holders of established posts as professors at the faculties of
medicine in Sweden and holders of similar posts at the faculties of
medicine or similar institutions in Denmark, Finland, Iceland and
Norway;
6. Holders of similar posts at no fewer than six other faculties of
medicine selected by the Assembly, with a view to ensuring the
appropriate distribution of the task among various countries and their
seats of learning; and
7. Practitioners of natural sciences whom the Assembly may otherwise
see fit to approach."
Looking at the Congressman's biography, it's hard to see how he meets
any of these qualifications.
<http://www.house.gov/bilirakis/biography.htm>
I don't know about you, but I have a hard time trusting people who
inflate their resume.
The good news that Dr. Hammesfahr only rates one mention on Quackwatch:
<http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Tests/tcd.html>
... Erich "like shooting ducks in a barrel"
Lesmond
>,
>>> > "Jane Chaplin" <janec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I realize that National Review is slanted to the right, and many
>>> >> people do not find them to be a credible newsource. I found this
>>> >> article regarding Terri Schiavo. If even of these claims are true, it
>>> >> is really troubling. If anyone can debunk these claims with a citation
>>> >> from a reputable source, it is most welcome
>>> >>
>>> >> http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp
>
>There does exist in most things medical a standard of practice. If
>that standard in cases like this is an MRI, than they should do one.
>If a CT scan is indeed like a "blurry photo", as one guy in the
>article said, than that's not good enough. I had a freakin MRI on my
>knee last year, surely we can afford one here to show once and for all
>that her brain is gone. I mean, that's the crux of the argument, to
>me, that major parts of her brain have been found by the court to be
>gone and replaced with fluids. If that's wrong then the thing needs
>to be re-examined.
This is the one thing that concerns me, too. If it is true that an MRI has
never been done, then just do it. Have EEGs been done? Are they flatline?
Those would remove the necessity for an MRI provided they had been done
correctly.
Still, why not have it? Perfectly verifiable evidence, right?
Dilbert Firestorm
Greg Goss
>Regardless of the source, if a substantial number of experts think she
>has not been correctly evaluated then there's an issue. Why would her
>husband refuse an MRI, if that's the standard?
An MRI cannot be done where metal is present. There are electrodes
present from a previous attempt at therapy. Surgery would be
necessary to remove the implants before an MRI could be done.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Guillermo el Gato
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:49:10 -0600, Dilbert Firestorm wrote:
>
>>
>>this doctor, Dr. Bill Hammesfahr, who is a nobel peace prize nominee,
>
>No one knows if they're a nominee. And if I slept with a member of the
>nominating committee, I could be nominated too.
That makes you eligible for the Nobel Piece Prize.
xho...@gmail.com
>
> I'm sorry. you are wrong. tha fact is that she is not in a vegetataive
> state as claimed by Michael's lawyers. in fact, terry has had proper
> medical care and rehabilitation withheld from her by her husbands orders.
>
> there is a doctor with a nobel peace prize nomination who disagrees with
> the vegetative diagnosis. he is appearing tonight on hannity & colmes.
Hell, Kissinger actually *win* his nobel peace prize. Let us ask him.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
I hereby nominate myself for the Nobel prizes in chemistry, physics,
medicine, peace, and literature, plus the BOS prize in economics in memory
of Al. What the hell, I'll also go for the Fields medal and the Lucasian
Chair.
N Jill Marsh
>The MRI cannot be done unless surgery is done to remove metal implants
>from a previous attempt at therapy. MRI cannot be done where metal is
>present.
Just to clarify this point slightly: if the metal is implant grade (as
all surgical staples &etc should be) then the problem is not with the
metal doing spectacular things such as one would see with an external
prosthetic, as implant grade metal is not ferromagnetic.
However, any metal in the region of the scan does produce artefacts on
the pictures, and in some cases this can significantly degrade the
quality of the test.
--
nj"guaranteed non-ferromagnetic body parts"m
"Perhaps I would get a better understanding if I read it."
- James V. has an epiphany.
M C Hamster
news:3ab7ejF...@individual.net...
> "Lesmond" <les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>This is the one thing that concerns me, too. If it is true that an MRI
>>has
>>never been done, then just do it. Have EEGs been done? Are they
>>flatline?
>>Those would remove the necessity for an MRI provided they had been done
>>correctly.
>>
>>Still, why not have it? Perfectly verifiable evidence, right?
>
> from a previous attempt at therapy. MRI cannot be done where metal is
> present.
As I discovered a few years ago, with truly spectacular results, when I had
an MRI while still wearing my leg prosthesis.
N Jill Marsh
>Dilbert Firestorm <sca...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm sorry. you are wrong. tha fact is that she is not in a vegetataive
>> state as claimed by Michael's lawyers. in fact, terry has had proper
>> medical care and rehabilitation withheld from her by her husbands orders.
>>
>> there is a doctor with a nobel peace prize nomination who disagrees with
>> the vegetative diagnosis. he is appearing tonight on hannity & colmes.
>
>Hell, Kissinger actually *win* his nobel peace prize. Let us ask him.
Was it "Spy" that used to have the "Ask the Nobel Laureate" column? I
remember a really good article on the designated hitter rule.
--
nj"I'll second if I get a trip to Sweden if you win"m
Boron Elgar
>"M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote in
>news:42409e6d$0$11384$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>>
>> So, boys and girls, think long and hard when it's time for your own
>> MRI.
>>
>
>Cool story! I guess if you have a metal plate in your head, you should
>probably mention that to someone before they try to do an MRI.
http://www.mrireview.com/docs/mrideath.pdf
Boy, 6, killed in MRI accident
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: July 31, 2001)
VALHALLA — A 6-year-old boy died two days after he was smashed in
the head by a metal oxygen canister that was pulled by magnetic force
into the MRI machine where he was being examined, Westchester Medical
Center officials said yesterday.
An unidentified hospital employee brought the oxygen tank within reach
of the 10-ton magnet's field, and it shot through the air to the
center of the machine, the hospital said.
The boy, Michael Colombini of Croton-on-Hudson, died Sunday at the
hospital, where he had undergone surgery before the MRI. An autopsy
revealed that he died of a blunt force trauma to the head with a
fractured skull and brain hemorrhage, the Westchester County Medical
Examiner's Office said.
groo
news:42409e6d$0$11384$bb4e...@newscene.com:
> "Dilbert Firestorm" <sca...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:d1q1rn$rro$2...@news.datasync.com...
>> um, what was the spectacular results??? levitation?
>
> More or less.
>
> This was an MRI for my shoulder (a torn rotator cuff). The MRI
> technician made me take off all my metal, watches, belt, etc. etc. I
> stripped to the waist for the MRI, and asked if I needed to remove my
> prosthesis. She thought a second and said, "No, I think that will be
> OK. We're only inserting your upper body into the tube."
>
> So I went into the MRI room and got up on the platform, laying
> horizontally with legs flat, and they began slowly sliding me into the
> tube. She said, "OK, just a little bit more", and moved me in another
> inch or two. Suddenly, my knee flexed and flew upward with truly
> shocking force and violence -- THWAMMMMMMM!!!!!!!! This was metal on
> metal, and God knows what velocity it was traveling at when it
> collided. So you need to envision me as laying horizontal, with my
> prosthetic leg flexed at the knee, and the top of my knee firmly glued
> to the top of the tube.
>
> The technician screamed (well, so did I). I told her I wasn't hurt,
> fortunately. So then she started to try to slide me out by moving the
> platform out from the tube. However, when she tried to do that, it
> was clear that I was really completely wedged now in the tube, and the
> process of trying to slide me out was really going to hurt me (my
> prosthesis would dig into me at the hip, and I dunno, maybe do another
> amputation there or something). So I screamed at her to stop removing
> me, and she did. She tried pulling my foot with all her might to try
> to straighten my leg, but that was futile given the incredible
> magnetic forces there. So finally she said she'd have to power off
> the entire MRI, and she did within a few minutes. Then I was able to
> have my leg straightened and then I could easily escape the tube.
>
> Apparently it takes something like 16 hours to power up the MRI
> machine once it's turned off. She probably got a stern talking-to,
> too. I wondered if there was a dent in the tube.
>
> So, boys and girls, think long and hard when it's time for your own
> MRI.
>
Cool story! I guess if you have a metal plate in your head, you should
probably mention that to someone before they try to do an MRI.
--
"Jesus loves you; everyone else thinks you're a jerk." - Anon.
D.F. Manno
K_S_O...@yahoo.com wrote:
> "D.F. Manno" <dfm2a...@spymac.com> wrote:
>
> >We have a Catholic priest holding forth in a wingnut magazine. Why on
> >earth would you think people would not find that credible?
>
> Regardless of the source, if a substantial number of experts think she
> has not been correctly evaluated then there's an issue.
A Catholic priest is not an unbiased observer. No matter what the tests
say, he will come down on not ending her existence.
What axe are the other experts grinding? Congress is looking to make
political gain out of this, the anti-choice forces are riding their
hobby horse, the religionists are thumping their bibles.
The opinions of the only unbiased experts I have read agree that she is
in a persistent vegatative state. Further testing would be
futile--unless the goal is to prolong this case for selfish purposes.
> Why would her
> husband refuse an MRI, if that's the standard?
Do you have a cite for either part of that statement: that he refused,
and that it is the standard?
--
D.F. Manno
dfm2a...@spymac.com
"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream
will never die."
Dilbert Firestorm
I said that it was *similar* not exactly the same as each case is different.
Greg Goss
>> That's very interesting. I don't understand why they wouldn't do an
>> MRI, if that's the standard.
>
>I think they did do an MRI, but I don't know how old that data is. if the
>ruling was based on old MRI data, not current MRI data, then the courts
>have truly committed a miscarrige of justice.
They did a CAT scan. At the time, MRI scans were wildly expensive and
rare. Remember that this has been going on for a very long time.
The article is misrepresenting its own evidence. It starts from
"doctors for Michael Schiavo have claimed, on the basis of the CT
scans, that parts of Terri's cerebral cortex "have been replaced by
fluid." and then points out that CAT scans are no good for subtle
brain injuries.
:"A CT scan doesn't give much detail. In order to see it on a
:CT, you have to have massive damage." Is it possible that Terri has
:that sort of "massive" brain damage? According to Dr. Bell, that isn't
:likely. Sometimes, he said, even patients who are PVS have a "normal
:or near normal" MRI."
Sometimes? Likely? The claim is that the cerebrum is missing. This
would be the required "massive damage". And if SOME patients have a
normal MRI, how is this relevant if Schiavo has a clearly abnormal
CAT? Different test, different result. Is this supposed to be
relevant?
And if the evidence on these two tests (one gross and used, one subtle
and not used) is misrepresented so badly, why should I trust anything
else in the article?
Dilbert Firestorm
um, what was the spectacular results??? levitation?
Erich
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> Dilbert Firestorm <sca...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >> That's very interesting. I don't understand why they wouldn't do an
> >> MRI, if that's the standard.
> >
> >I think they did do an MRI, but I don't know how old that data is. if the
> >ruling was based on old MRI data, not current MRI data, then the courts
> >have truly committed a miscarrige of justice.
>
> They did a CAT scan. At the time, MRI scans were wildly expensive and
> rare. Remember that this has been going on for a very long time.
>
> The article is misrepresenting its own evidence. It starts from
> "doctors for Michael Schiavo have claimed, on the basis of the CT
> scans, that parts of Terri's cerebral cortex "have been replaced by
> fluid." and then points out that CAT scans are no good for subtle
> brain injuries.
If you are at all familiar with what a normal CT scan looks like, it is
obvious that Terri's injuries are not subtile:
<http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/CT%20scan.png>
... Erich
Richard Evans
For a very broad definition of "similar", apparently. As I just
pointed out, the similarity was virtually non-existent.
- No irreversible brain damage
- Coma of short duration
- "Vegetative state" questionable, given that she claimed to be
conscious and aware
The only remaining similarity seems to be that they were both at some
time in a hospital.
M C Hamster
>> "Greg Goss" <go...@gossg.org> wrote in message
>> news:3ab7ejF...@individual.net...
>>
>>>"Lesmond" <les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>This is the one thing that concerns me, too. If it is true that an MRI
>>>>has
>>>>never been done, then just do it. Have EEGs been done? Are they
>>>>flatline?
>>>>Those would remove the necessity for an MRI provided they had been done
>>>>correctly.
>>>>
>>>>Still, why not have it? Perfectly verifiable evidence, right?
>>>
>>>The MRI cannot be done unless surgery is done to remove metal implants
>>>from a previous attempt at therapy. MRI cannot be done where metal is
>>>present.
>>>--
>>
>>
>> As I discovered a few years ago, with truly spectacular results, when I
>> had an MRI while still wearing my leg prosthesis.
>>
>
More or less.
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
Greg Goss
>This is the one thing that concerns me, too. If it is true that an MRI has
>never been done, then just do it. Have EEGs been done? Are they flatline?
>Those would remove the necessity for an MRI provided they had been done
>correctly.
>
>Still, why not have it? Perfectly verifiable evidence, right?
The MRI cannot be done unless surgery is done to remove metal implants
from a previous attempt at therapy. MRI cannot be done where metal is
present.
--
Dilbert Firestorm
time to take your meds....
/\ /\
/ \ / \
\ / \ /
\/ \/
\\ //
\\ //
\\ //
\\___________________//
\\_________________//
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
\_____/
PHFFFFFFFFTTTTTTFTFTTFTFTFTYHTTHTHTHTHTHTHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
N Jill Marsh
>Dilbert Firestorm <sca...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>I think they did do an MRI, but I don't know how old that data is. if the
>>ruling was based on old MRI data, not current MRI data, then the courts
>>have truly committed a miscarrige of justice.
Not particularly, unless you can find a cite demonstrating extensive
regeneration of cortical tissue.
>They did a CAT scan. At the time, MRI scans were wildly expensive and
>rare. Remember that this has been going on for a very long time.
>
>The article is misrepresenting its own evidence. It starts from
>"doctors for Michael Schiavo have claimed, on the basis of the CT
>scans, that parts of Terri's cerebral cortex "have been replaced by
>fluid." and then points out that CAT scans are no good for subtle
>brain injuries.
>
>:"A CT scan doesn't give much detail. In order to see it on a
>:CT, you have to have massive damage."
This is untrue, even of a very old machine. And as Greg said, missing
bits of brain qualify as massive damage.
>And if the evidence on these two tests (one gross and used, one subtle
>and not used) is misrepresented so badly, why should I trust anything
>else in the article?
Indeed.
--
nj"quelle dommage"m
K_S_O...@yahoo.com
That's a hell of a cite, thank you. I'm not that familiar[1], do you
happen to have a CT scan of a normal brain in your pocket?
Kevin
[1] despite having once lived with someone who was dating someone who
may well have been the worst radiologist in the world, from all
available evidence.
Jason Quick
news:MPG.1ca9f6033...@news.birch.net...
> Previously in alt.fan.cecil-adams, Erich wrote:
>
>> "George Felos, an attorney for Schiavo, challenged Hammesfahr's
>> credibility and the effectiveness of his therapy during a lengthy
>> cross-examination.
>
>> "He questioned the doctor about his assertion in advertisements that he
>> has been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine.
>
> nominated had blathered that he was nominated for a "peace prize."
Wait, it gets better!
http://mediamatters.org/items/200503220009
(Yeah, they're liberal. Bite me.)
"Hammesfahr, a Florida neurologist disciplined in 2003 by the Florida Board
of Medicine who claims he can help Terri Schiavo, testified during an
October 2002 court hearing on the Schiavo case that his claim to be a Nobel
nominee is based on a letter written by Rep. Mike Bilirakis (R-FL)
recommending him for the prize. But Bilirakis is not qualified to make a
valid nomination under the Nobel rules."
(Hammesfahr was disciplined for false advertising about his treatments for
stroke victims.)
Jason
Jason Quick
"Lesmond" <les...@verizon.net> wrote:
> This is the one thing that concerns me, too. If it is true that an MRI
> has
> never been done, then just do it. Have EEGs been done? Are they
> flatline?
> Those would remove the necessity for an MRI provided they had been done
> correctly.
As mentioned, there have been CT scans done, one of which is posted at the
URL below:
http://www.miami.edu/ethics/schiavo/CT%20scan.png
Those big black areas in either hemisphere? Yeah. Those aren't supposed to
be there on a healthy person.
> Still, why not have it? Perfectly verifiable evidence, right?
OTOH, if I were him, why have it? NOTHING the man does at this point is
going to satisfy her parents and their supporters, short of giving her up to
them, which I can't imagine he's going to do either.
Jason
Estron
> "George Felos, an attorney for Schiavo, challenged Hammesfahr's
> credibility and the effectiveness of his therapy during a lengthy
> cross-examination.
> "He questioned the doctor about his assertion in advertisements that he
> has been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine.
But the congenital idiot who originally posted that Hammesfahr had been
nominated had blathered that he was nominated for a "peace prize."
Which in my opinion puts that whole post in the category of "it must be
true -- my mother's best friend's cousin has a co-worker who said so, and
he's an expert."
--
Any opinions expressed above are only that, and are my own.
Pax vobiscum.
est...@tfs.net
"and this is my mother we're talking about"
Erich
Estron <est...@tfs.net> wrote:
> Previously in alt.fan.cecil-adams, Erich wrote:
>
> > "George Felos, an attorney for Schiavo, challenged Hammesfahr's
> > credibility and the effectiveness of his therapy during a lengthy
> > cross-examination.
>
> > "He questioned the doctor about his assertion in advertisements that he
> > has been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine.
>
> But the congenital idiot who originally posted that Hammesfahr had been
> nominated had blathered that he was nominated for a "peace prize."
I figured that was just a typo.
> Which in my opinion puts that whole post in the category of "it must be
> true -- my mother's best friend's cousin has a co-worker who said so, and
> he's an expert."
At least from my experience, real experts are rather quiet about it.
The kind of people who actually get nominated for and win Nobel prizes
can easily impress you with knowledge. They seldom are the kind of
person that shows off awards and certificates.
It makes the phonies rather easy to spot.
... Erich
Paul Guertin
> Cool story! I guess if you have a metal plate in your head, you should
> probably mention that to someone before they try to do an MRI.
My mother had an MRI done a few days ago. They gave her a two-page
questionnaire that included questions such as "do you have a
prosthetic limb?", "did you ever have bits of metal removed from
your eye?", "do you work in soldering?", and the like.
I told her the story of the oxygen tank that flew through the air
when caught in the magnetic field of an MRI machine.
Paul Guertin
p...@sff.net
Dilbert Firestorm
ouch, that musta been fun....
btw, I thought prosthesis were made of non metal material like carbon fiber
or plastic types.
M C Hamster
Well, there are all sorts of materials used, but the knee is metal. (I'm
not actually sure what kind of metal it is.) Clearly they try to keep the
weight down where they can.
I can't use all the cool ones they have with microprocessors etc.,
unfortunately... but it's one fine piece of mechanical ingenuity, I can tell
you that. (And, IIRC, with about a $20,000 price tag. Thank God for
insurance.)
Greg Johnson
>On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 17:29:34 -0700, Erich <oet...@qwest.net> wrote:
>>If you are at all familiar with what a normal CT scan looks like, it is
>>obvious that Terri's injuries are not subtile:
>><http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/CT%20scan.png>
>
>That's a hell of a cite, thank you. I'm not that familiar[1], do you
>happen to have a CT scan of a normal brain in your pocket?
>
A quick google on "CT scan brain" produced
http://imaginis.com/ct-scan/history.asp
which has a picture it claims to be normal at the bottom,
http://medocs.ucdavis.edu/cha/400/rdifolder/headfilm/E8abc.gif
which doesn't say, but looks pretty normal to me, and
http://catalog.nucleusinc.com/enlargeexhibit.php?ID=1484
which purports to show how injuries look compared to a normal brain.
M C Hamster
news:l4f141dgj5vqmtctt...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:24:27 GMT, groo <gr...@groo.org> wrote:
>
>>"M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote in
>>news:42409e6d$0$11384$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>
>>>
>>> So, boys and girls, think long and hard when it's time for your own
>>> MRI.
>>>
>>
>>Cool story! I guess if you have a metal plate in your head, you should
>>probably mention that to someone before they try to do an MRI.
>
>
>
> http://www.mrireview.com/docs/mrideath.pdf
> Boy, 6, killed in MRI accident
> THE JOURNAL NEWS
>
> (Original publication: July 31, 2001)
> the head by a metal oxygen canister that was pulled by magnetic force
> into the MRI machine where he was being examined, Westchester Medical
> Center officials said yesterday.
>
> An unidentified hospital employee brought the oxygen tank within reach
> of the 10-ton magnet's field, and it shot through the air to the
> center of the machine, the hospital said.
>
> The boy, Michael Colombini of Croton-on-Hudson, died Sunday at the
> hospital, where he had undergone surgery before the MRI. An autopsy
> revealed that he died of a blunt force trauma to the head with a
> fractured skull and brain hemorrhage, the Westchester County Medical
> Examiner's Office said.
>
Absolutely terrifying. And just too, too possible... I can so easily
envision that happening. I'm really lucky I didn't get injured in this
debacle.
Estron
> At least from my experience, real experts are rather quiet about it.
I agree. I have known a lot of people who play guitar really well. To a
person, every one of them whom I have personally complimented has acted as
though their talent is no great shakes.
I have yet to hear a guitar player say, "Yeah, I'm really, really good.
Thanks."
--
Any opinions expressed above are only that, and are my own.
Pax vobiscum.
est...@tfs.net
Sugar Creek, Missouri
Dhubghall
The scary part is how often it happens. During the 2 summers I worked in
the surgery lab in Galveston it happened at least twice. I was walking in
the area when one of them happened and the clang that a 20 lb oxygen
cylinder makes is pretty impressive. I was told by one of the
radiologists that while it happens too often it generall happens when
there are no patients present since that's usually when the deliveries of
whatever are being made. Still doesn't excuse the poor design of the
environment and lack of training that leads to this.
It's not like it takes many pictures of the aftermath to get the idea
across. Heck all it took to drive home the importance of large gas
cylinder safety was one picture of a large (Type G?) O2 cylindar poking
its base out of a double cinderblock wall like a blunt torpedo. When you
realize that those things are basicly unfired unguided missiles you tend
to follow the procedures very carefully.
Dougall
xho...@gmail.com
> In article <MPG.1ca9f6033...@news.birch.net>,
> Estron <est...@tfs.net> wrote:
>
> > Previously in alt.fan.cecil-adams, Erich wrote:
> >
> > > "George Felos, an attorney for Schiavo, challenged Hammesfahr's
> > > credibility and the effectiveness of his therapy during a lengthy
> > > cross-examination.
> >
> > > "He questioned the doctor about his assertion in advertisements that
> > > he has been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine.
> >
> > But the congenital idiot who originally posted that Hammesfahr had been
> > nominated had blathered that he was nominated for a "peace prize."
>
> I figured that was just a typo.
I accidently backed over my husband. Seventeen times.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
xho...@gmail.com
>
> The scary part is how often it happens. During the 2 summers I worked in
> the surgery lab in Galveston it happened at least twice. I was walking
> in the area when one of them happened and the clang that a 20 lb oxygen
> cylinder makes is pretty impressive. I was told by one of the
> radiologists that while it happens too often it generall happens when
> there are no patients present since that's usually when the deliveries of
> whatever are being made. Still doesn't excuse the poor design of the
> environment and lack of training that leads to this.
>
> It's not like it takes many pictures of the aftermath to get the idea
> across. Heck all it took to drive home the importance of large gas
> cylinder safety was one picture of a large (Type G?) O2 cylindar poking
> its base out of a double cinderblock wall like a blunt torpedo. When you
> realize that those things are basicly unfired unguided missiles you tend
> to follow the procedures very carefully.
Yes, those disaster picts are very impressive to newbies. But after the
7943rd uneventful procedure, the lessons start to wear off. Then something
goes wrong, and then the survivors are much more careful for the next few
thousand times.
Joseph Michael Bay
>As mentioned, there have been CT scans done, one of which is posted at the
>URL below:
>http://www.miami.edu/ethics/schiavo/CT%20scan.png
>Those big black areas in either hemisphere? Yeah. Those aren't supposed to
>be there on a healthy person.
Normal brain CT scan:
http://www.acofp.org/member_publications/images/0604/0604_1_a.jpg
--
Chimes peal joy. Bah. Joseph Michael Bay
Icy colon barge Cancer Biology
Frosty divine Saturn Stanford University
www.stanford.edu/~jmbay/ got my mojo properly adjusted
Joseph Michael Bay
>Previously in alt.fan.cecil-adams, Erich wrote:
>> "George Felos, an attorney for Schiavo, challenged Hammesfahr's
>> credibility and the effectiveness of his therapy during a lengthy
>> cross-examination.
>
>> "He questioned the doctor about his assertion in advertisements that he
>> has been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine.
>But the congenital idiot who originally posted that Hammesfahr had been
>nominated had blathered that he was nominated for a "peace prize."
Plenty of people accidentally say "Nobel Peace Prize" when
they mean "Nobel Prize". There are like 80 Google hits on
"Nobel Peace Prize for Medicine". Not that it's right, but
it's not *that* unusual. What's unusual is the idea that
"Nobel Prize nominee" is considered to be meaningful on
its own. I mean, the colloidal silver guy was "nominated"
for a Nobel Prize by a bunch of "eclectic physicians" (some
of whom, no doubt, have bluish-gray skin from silver poisoning).