Political Crossfire Forums

[learn to swim]

[url=http://politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=459490#459490]
REMOVED! again............[/url]

[learn to swim]

Mar 18, 9:12 PM (ET)

By MITCH STACY

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (AP) - With a furious legal and political battle raging outside her hospice room, doctors removed Terri Schiavo's feeding tube Friday after a judge rebuffed an unprecedented attempt by Congress to keep the brain-damaged woman alive.

Schiavo, 41, could linger one to two weeks without the tube, provided no one intercedes and gets it reinserted - as happened twice before. Late Friday, a House committee filed an emergency request at the U.S. Supreme Court, asking justices to reinsert Schiavo's feeding tube while the committee files appeals in the lower courts to have its subpoenas recognized.

Republicans on Capitol Hill used their subpoena power to demand that Schiavo be brought before a congressional hearing, saying removing the tube amounted to "barbarism." The attorney for Schiavo's husband shot back at a news conference, calling the subpoenas "nothing short of thuggery."

"It was odious, it was shocking, it was disgusting, and I think all Americans should be very alarmed about that," George Felos said.

The judge presiding over the case ruled in the husband's favor early Friday afternoon and rejected the request from House attorneys to delay the removal, which he had previously ordered to take place at 1 p.m. EST. Felos said Michael Schiavo was at his wife's side shortly after the tube was disconnected.

The removal of the tube signals that an end may be near in a decade-long family feud between Schiavo's husband and her devoutly Roman Catholic parents, Bob and Mary Schindler. The parents have been trying to oust Michael Schiavo as their daughter's guardian and keep in place the tube that has kept her alive for more than 15 years.

Michael Schiavo says his wife told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that, saying she could get better and that their daughter has laughed, cried, smiled and responded to their voices. Court-appointed physicians testified her brain damage was so severe that there was no hope she would ever have any cognitive abilities.

The family is still hoping for a long-shot legal victory to have the tube re-inserted.

It is unclear how much time the family will have. The effects of such feeding tubes being removed can be seen by the third or fourth day, when the patient's mouth begins to look dry and the eyes appear sunken. From days five to 10, respiration becomes irregular with periods of very fast and then very slow breathing. By the final days, kidney function declines, toxins begin accumulating in the body, and multiple organ systems fail from lack of nutrition.

Court-appointed doctors have said Schiavo will not feel any pain given her state, but her parents' doctors dispute that.

Several right-to-die cases across the nation have been fought in the courts in recent years, but few, if any, have been this drawn-out and bitter.

The case has garnered attention around the world and served as a rallying cry for conservative Christian groups and anti-abortion activists, who flooded members of Congress and Florida legislators with messages seeking to keep Schiavo alive.

Outside Schiavo's hospice, about 30 people keeping vigil dropped to their knees in prayer when word spread of the judge's ruling calling for removal of the tube.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said President Bush discussed the case with his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and members of the state's congressional delegation during his swing through Florida on Friday to discuss Social Security reform.

"We're continuing to monitor developments," McClellan said. "The president believes when there are serious questions or doubts in a case like this that the presumption ought to be in favor of life."

Gov. Jeb Bush said the judge's decision "breaks my heart" and noted that it often takes two decades for a death row inmate's appeals to go through the system.

"There's this rush to starve her to death," Bush said.

But Rep. Henry Waxman of California, senior Democrat on the Government Reform Committee, called the subpoenas a "flagrant abuse of power" and said they amounted to Congress dictating the medical care Terri Schiavo should receive.

"Congress is turning the Schiavo family's personal tragedy into a national political farce," Waxman said.
Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 when a chemical imbalance apparently brought on by an eating disorder caused her heart to stop beating for a few minutes. She can breathe on her own, but has relied on the feeding and hydration tube to keep her alive.

Both sides accused each other of being motivated by greed over a $1 million medical malpractice award from doctors who failed to diagnose the chemical imbalance.

The Schindlers also said that Michael Schiavo wants their daughter dead so he can marry his longtime girlfriend, with whom he has young children. They have begged him to divorce their daughter, and let them care for her.

The tangled case has encompassed at least 19 judges in at least six different courts.

In 2001, Schiavo went without food and water for two days before a judge ordered the tube reinserted when a new witness surfaced.

When the tube was removed in October 2003, her parents and two siblings frantically sought intervention from Gov Jeb. Bush to stop her slow starvation. The governor pushed through "Terri's Law," and six days later the tube was reinserted.

That set off a new round of legal battles which culminated in September 2004 with the Florida Supreme Court ruling that Bush had overstepped his authority and declared the law unconstitutional.

The U.S. Supreme Court has been unwilling to hear arguments in the case.

On Feb. 25, Circuit Judge George Greer gave Michael Schiavo permission to order the removal of the feeding tube Friday.

"I have had no cogent reason why the (congressional) committee should intervene," Greer told attorneys in a conference call Friday, adding that last-minute action by Congress does not invalidate years of court rulings.

The attorney for the parents said he would likely file a new appeal early next week with a federal appeals court. He also said he hoped lawmakers in Washington or Tallahassee could agree on legislation that would force the tube to be reinserted. Similar efforts have failed in the past.

"I'm hopeful these men and women can get a strategy, get a focus, because we're running out of time," said attorney David Gibbs.

Story Link

[Scribbler1]

If what we know of this case is true, this case has gone on for too long. If the husband's story is true, and I don't see any reason to disbelieve it, the woman didn't want to be kept alive this way. Her wishes should be respected and no further interference should be allowed. This is not a child. This is a married woman and although the parents' wishes are quite understandable and even to be expected by loving parents, they have no say in this matter.
I'm saddened to see it had progressed as far as it did and even more saddened that the media has made a spectacle out of this family tragedy.

[Coral]

What a sad situation. I have been through a similar situation with a parent - a stroke victim. My father couldn't walk talk eat or do anything for himself. We could not bring ourselves to remove his tube. He too said he didn't want to live like that if it ever happened. Yet, as he was dying, five years into it, I know he was fighting to stay alive.

I can feel for all involved. I personally think that what people say before they end up in this situation is different once they are in it. And once tube feeding is started I feel there is an ethical/moral obligation to maintain it.

[Scribbler1]

Coral wrote: I can feel for all involved. I personally think that what people say before they end up in this situation is different once they are in it. And once tube feeding is started I feel there is an ethical/moral obligation to maintain it.
I think you are probably right about them changing their mind, as long as they are even able to think. I think your father's stroke is probably different from this case though. He might have changed his mind but was unable to tell anyone while this woman (by all reports) was not in a position to think at all. But that brings up a question in the event the person is not able to say if they changed their minds or not. You must make the best decision as to what to do when there is no input from the patient. Do you base your decision on the mere possibility of a different decision in light of the person's stressed mental state or do you give full weight to what the person said when they were calm, healthy and lucid. Also, based on how well you know the person, would you consider the possibility that the person, when faced with mere existence over a fairly regular "life" may prefer to end it. Personally, and I have discussed this with my Wife and Son, I would opt to end it as I feel without a functioning mind a life is simply not worth living. I feel this is this poor woman's situation.
I personally tend to agree with removal but I am very glad that decision is not mine to make.

[anti-bush2008]

Scribbler1 wrote: If what we know of this case is true, this case has gone on for too long. If the husband's story is true, and I don't see any reason to disbelieve it, the woman didn't want to be kept alive this way. Her wishes should be respected and no further interference should be allowed. This is not a child. This is a married woman and although the parents' wishes are quite understandable and even to be expected by loving parents, they have no say in this matter.
I'm saddened to see it had progressed as far as it did and even more saddened that the media has made a spectacle out of this family tragedy.
that's right
to not be kept alive artificially was her wish, everyone should honor it

[BTExpress]

I will be facing the decision the husband had to make sometime soon. My wife of over 32 years, Barbara, was found to have terminal brain cancer about 22 months ago. Normal life expectancy is 6-12 moths so she has done very well.

We discussed this very same thing many times during the first year and her decision was not to be kept alive with artificial means. She knows very well her decision would mean one day she would die without the extra care, but that is what she decided.

Now 22 months later, after three brain surgeries, radiation therapy, chemo therapy, multiple trips to the hospital, and near death twice, I will have to decide, as Terri Schiavo's husband did, if I will honor her decision and let her pass when the time comes. Everyone in her family, our friends and our son, all know what she has decided.

So soon it will be up to me to make the hardest decision I will probably ever have to make, do I let her pass as she wanted, or do I call the ambulance to prolong the inevitable a little while longer.

Right now sitting at this computer, my decision will be to let her pass. When the time actually comes for me to make the decision, I will ask God to give me the strength to do what she is trusting me to do. Because not to honor her decision would, in my mind, be a betrayal of the faith and trust she has in me to do fulfill her last request.

[Scribbler1]

I am honestly finding it difficult to respond. I don't know how you feel but having been married 29 years I can sort of put myself in your place. In fact my Wife and I have been discussing this a lot the past few dfays.

I don't know you but you will be in my thoughts, BT, and probably those of all here as well.

I can only say, when the time does come I wish you strength and I wish your Wife peace.

[BTExpress]

Scribbler1 wrote: I am honestly finding it difficult to respond. I don't know how you feel but having been married 29 years I can sort of put myself in your place. In fact my Wife and I have been discussing this a lot the past few dfays.

I don't know you but you will be in my thoughts, BT, and probably those of all here as well.

I can only say, when the time does come I wish you strength and I wish your Wife peace.

Thanks. She has taken the burden off of us by making the decision. It is just up to me to do what she wants.

[Lennox]

No matter how you feel about this, taking away food and water is wrong. We don't do that to animals in this country.

[BTExpress]

No that's true. But we also have the option to put animals to sleep if they were in irreversable conditions.

[Lagspike]

It costs thousands of dollars a day, paid for by your tax money, to keep Terri Schiavo alive. Do you want your money to go to some old retard? It's amazing that those advocating fiscal responsibility are the ones pushing for prolonging her meaningless life.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Lagspike wrote: It costs thousands of dollars a day, paid for by your tax money, to keep Terri Schiavo alive. Do you want your money to go to some old retard? It's amazing that those advocating fiscal responsibility are the ones pushing for prolonging her meaningless life.

Well, I find what you are saying a bit tasteless even though there might be some truth to it.

[Lagspike]

Just shift the burden of keeping her alive to her parents, and they can do whatever the f**k they want.

[Scribbler1]

Lagspike wrote: It costs thousands of dollars a day, paid for by your tax money, to keep Terri Schiavo alive. Do you want your money to go to some old retard? It's amazing that those advocating fiscal responsibility are the ones pushing for prolonging her meaningless life.
Whether her life is meaningless or not is exactly what the debate is all about. Go look at the other thread, which has grown to almost 20 pages in 24 hrs.

And that "old retard" comment is inappropriate and offensive.

[Lagspike]

Scribbler1 wrote:
And that "old retard" comment is inappropriate and offensive.

No, it is not. She's old, and she's retarded, which is a medical term.

[Scribbler1]

Lagspike wrote: Scribbler1 wrote:
And that "old retard" comment is inappropriate and offensive.

No, it is not. She's old, and she's retarded, which is a medical term.
She's 41, Beavis. That is old only to kiddies. You sound like an ignorant kid.

BTW, "Retarded" is a proper term but "old retard" is an insult. Maybe you could say that in front of her husband, eh?

[angusrae]

My sympathies to you BTExpress while i hope never to be in your position i have watched a well loved aunt fight a protracted battle against Cancer a at the end we were all praying for her passing as she was in either constant pain or a stupor due to pain medication. Her Husband my fathers eldest brother has never really recovered from her death. But he has moved on and his grandchildren have a Grandfather who dotes on them. Look to your child for strength. Terri's husband most be allowed to Honor his wife's wishes in that way the family can grieve and heal.

[earthmother]

:cry: To those of you who think it's ok to kill surplus people who are extremely sick or injured: Just in case you didn't know, starving any living being to death is cruel. No matter what the circumstances. If it is acceptable to kill people like Terry S. then why not be honest about it. Just pull the plug and walk away? What a supreme copout! Lethal injection perhaps? This is how they put animals to sleep for petes sake! Doesn't a human at least have the right to be treated as well as your dog? This ain't about political affilliation, friends. This is about right and wrong. Trouble is, people seem to be getting farther and farther away from the knowledge of right and wrong. It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of fact. Truth don't change. Right and wrong don't change. This idea of legally starving to death folks who are unwanted by a small handfull of particularly small minded baboons, just goes to show what sort of legal system we're having forced upon us. Terry's husband, if he gets his way in the end, will have to live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life, and I sure wouldn't want to be in his shoes. Karma is real and he's got some REAL BAD coming.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Let's discuss the real issue here: My life is my property ... I should be able to end it whenever I want! Why should the state interfere in my decision about ending my life?