Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ziggytrix
One thing tho, Kev, you said yourself there's a lot of hearsay in this case, so do you mind if I ask for your source for the statment that her husband has blocked attempts at MRIs and PETs?
|
(emphasis added)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
No, you're sense is warped because you looked at the very first thing that popped up in the search and then called it a day:
|
I feel I've earned the right to call you a presumptuous cockbite.
Editorial with no sources.
Contains statements directly contradictory to court documents. "Terri Schiavo has always been able to swallow but her "husband" denied her the therapy that would allow her to re-learn how to eat even though the therapy is considered mandatory by Florida Statute 744.3215, even to those diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state."
She has failed the swallow test on every occasion. If you'd check either of the links I posted, you'd see that Terri underwent extensive documented physical therapy, with no favorable outcome.
BINGO! Finally a source for the claim: "A column on National Review Online (nationalreview.com)
by Robert Johansen, a Catholic priest and leading advocate for Schiavo's survival, explains:
...
"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. ""
This seems plausible enough. Unfortunately, it is incorrect. Michael objected, but it was the
court that refused.
Quotes the same priest incorrectly stating that Terri has had no physical therapy when that is simply NOT TRUE.
OK, I FUCKED UP, the Washington Times comes thru (I didn't see this one earlier, my bad). They correctly state that the judge blocked new tests... Ya know, I can understand Mikey's objections, since I imagine objection is his knee-jerk response to what his in-laws have put him and his wife thru for the past 7 years. Of course that is being sympathetic to his point of view, and assuming he is not, in fact, a gholish monster, which I think is consistent with his actions for the first 8 years of this ordeal. What I don't understand is why the judge would refuse to allow the MRI, but I don't have access to the whole procedings, and I'm not trained in adjudication, so I just have to take it on faith that he is making the right call or that his decision would be overturned on appeal.
Quote:
|
Look, whatever your deal is, maybe mom and dad forced you to go to Church on Sunday's instead of watching cartoons
|
PRESUMPTOUS COCKBITE! (damn I hate using that up already) I'll have you know the day I turned 16 was a Sunday, and guess where the first place I ever drove by myself was? My parents were not church goers, but I was. But you didn't know and didn't care, so you should've kept your damn mouth shut.
Quote:
|
I never argued that the Church's stance had any bearing on this case.
|
but in the original post...
Quote:
|
Her husband, btw, has since remarried, and has children. Schiavo never stated what her wishes would be under such circumstances, but her husband claims "sending her to be with God" would be her wish (even though Terri was a devout Roman Catholic, and this very practice has been denounced by her Church).
|
then later
Quote:
|
Thus far, the courts in Florida have found Michael Schiavo's word, as well as the word of friends, to be convincing enough. Yet the words of her devoutly faithful Roman Catholic family, which Terri herself also was, seem to be moot.
|
I'm not trying to put words into your mouth Kev, explain it if I'm misunderstanding.
Quote:
|
According to people like you, who seem to feel comfortable deciding what life is worthy and unworthy, she's a vegetable. I think she at least deserves an MRI to determine how true that really is, no?
|
Fuck you. I am not the one saying she's a vegetable. I've never met her. I've not seen the (carefully edited) videos, and I CERTAINLY don't think I'm qualified to decide what life is (un)worthy. I just respect the rulings of every judge who's spent (I would HOPE) more time reviewing this case and with access to more relevant facts than I.
Quote:
|
Wah wah, do you feel better sniffles? You're the one who made this about the Church. I simply clarrified a point for Goat, and also explained how Terri's own faith should/would have a deciding factor in what maybe would've been her own intentions.
|
The fact that you cannot see that official dogma of the Vatican and the beliefs of an individual Catholic may not be entirely congruent baffles me. (also, I think we're about even on namecalling at this point, so can we attempt to go back to marginally civil discourse or are you going to call me a crybaby every time I utilize the CAPSlock for emphasis?)
Quote:
Quote:
|
The parents have testified in court that EVEN IF Terri had made the wish to not be kept alive like this, they'd do it anyway.
|
Because they're her parents and they love her. The bottom line is that she didn't clearly leave these intentions. Her intentions have instead been decided by a man who stopped being her husband over a decade ago, a man who won a medical malpractice case worth more than $1 million, and claimed that he intended to use the cash to rehabilitate Terri.
|
The bottom line is that she didn't clearly leave these intentions and the fact that her parents said in court that they would not have repsected those intentions had she clearly left them should not influence my opinion on this one bit...
I disagree.
Also, it wasn't until May 98 that Mikey filed petition for court to determine whether Terri's feeding tube should be removed, so I disagree with your remark that he stopped being her husband over a decade ago. I don't know what he did with the $1 million, but is it inconceivable that $1 million was exhausted between 1990 and 1998 on the care and experimental therapy Terri received? That's the thing that bothers me most about this issue really - the villification of Mike and anyone who sympathizes with his viewpoint.
I guess all us devaluers of the sanctity of of life gotta stick together. Fuckin Bill Frist *grumble*
Quote:
|
Do you think gay marriage should be a national entitlement, or are you cool with the state's right to bar such practices...?
|
I think it should not be a national ban, and if California wants to let gays get married, fine by me. Wow, what a refreshing tangent.
Quote:
|
There are times when the civil and constitutional rights of a citizen are brought into question, and the federal government has, and SHOULD act.
|
January 24, 2005 the US Supreme Court declined review in the Terri's Law case. I'm not sure why they declined. Personally, I think they should have taken it up, but I'm not on the US Supreme Court.
Quote:
|
Furthermore, the description [Crash] just provided of what I guess is an unworthy life also describes many people in adult care and nursing homes. Should we start bumping these people off too???
|
Nice slippery slope. But it's irrelevant - as Crash is not a Judge, and his opinion on what should be done with someone who has not left a living will matters as little as mine or yours, especially when said person isn't even someone any of us personally know.
I won't be offended if you don't read all this, I think I'm about exhausted with this issue myself.