|
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Hopefully the boney bulimia girls are taking note...
One particular and very important subject matter that has been overshadowed (understatement) out of this whole debate is how she (can we call her "she"?) got to this point in the first place.
I've not heard nor seen one column/report on this subject in relation to Terri Schiavo...
It's not unconceivable that it could happen again...
This is a hard one for me to decide which side of the fence to be on.
While I do understand the arguements that the husband would like to move on with this life, to me, he already had and it questions the validity of 'marriage' for me per say.
If you're only going to mutter the words, "...in sickness and in health..." and not mean it, then I guess this is the free ticket I've been waiting for...(joking...I really do love my wife!)
Furthermore, to have two kids out of wedlock/adultry? while asking for your former? wife's dismise just doesn't really strike a good chord with me; I know that emotion is a falicy in this instance but everyone has a right to their own opinion. 
It's almost the polar argument of the Stem Cell case in what constitutes a fetus as being human.
When is an adult human not human? |
That’s a good philosophical question, one in which I really don’t have a very strong answer for right now. I think it is clear, however, that in Terri’s current state, which has been observed and verified by something like 6 doctors, some even court appointed (so there’s no bias involved here), is irreparable and incapable of any cognition whatsoever. Perhaps Descartes has come to bite her in the ass, I don’t know really. But a flat EEG and a cerebral cortex that is composed of nothing but spinal fluid has clearly been deemed medically and legally as a permanent vegetative state. And this has been confirmed over and over again, by judges appointed by Republican presidents, no less, so there’s no “liberal activist” judiciary system going on here.
I think it’s also necessary to view the historical context of what happened to Terri as well as the relationship of her parents to Michael. She clearly fell down and had a heart attack as a result of a potassium deficiency, which was medically and legally proven. This is consistent with severe bulimia, which Terri clearly suffered from. Any other conspiracy theories about Michael’s involvement, as well as him saying to others that he wanted a divorce and/or kill his wife were rightfully dismissed as heresy. But even if we were to go down that road of heresy, why would he try experimental therapies with the full consent of her family for the first 4 years or so if he wanted to divorce or kill her? Why would he go to nursing school and get his RN license in order to best take care of her himself if he wanted to divorce or kill her? Why was he so close to her family for at least the first 3 years after her fall if he wanted to divorce or kill her (which both parties readily admitted to in court)? Why did he continue to take care of her a number of years after the rift between he and her parents if he wanted to kill or divorce her? It doesn’t add up really, and even if there was some interesting speculation on it all it certainly isn’t admissible in court whatsoever.
So like many people, after some 3 years of no improvement Michael got mad and sued for malpractice. He eventually won and received a good healthy portion of money (I can’t remember how much). But for some reason, the Schindlers felt that some of that money belonged to them. Why they felt this way is really unclear and doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to anyone, let alone the courts who continually ruled against them. Only THEN was there a noticeable strain occurring between Michael and her parents – and it occurred when finances were involved that for some strange reason they felt they had some ownership to it.
And now we see that the Schindlers have sold a list of their financial supporters to a conservative direct-mailing firm:
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...12&pagenumber=5
Which in my mind completely blows any credibility they have out the window, and only reaffirms the true reason for the rift between Michael and her parents.
I realize that Michael starting a family with someone else doesn’t help his moral cause much. But legally there’s nothing that could be said against it. And let’s keep in mind the 2 underlying causes for ALL the courts to continually reject the Schindler’s arguments:
1. Michael is the true guardian, and Terri had told both he and at least 2 other witnesses that she does not want to “live” in such a state.
2. Her medical evaluations and observations have clearly shown that she’s not going to recover and that she is a permanent veg.
| quote: | In regards to Coultier's rantings, I'm going to guess that her arguement about the medical tests could be in reference to this:
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/t...order030905.pdf
where March 9, 2005 Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion requesting new tests? given the date of Coultier's column, March 24th. |
Well Coulter could have read the Greer decision you posted a bit closer to understand exactly why Greer denied it:
| quote: | The Court cannot see how the Respondents have met the burden established by Schlavo HI. Most of the doctor affida-vits submitted are based on their understanding of Terri's condition from news reports or video clips they have seen. Many are obviously not aware of the medical exams undertaken for the 2002 trial since they suggest the very tests that were given at that time or appear to be unaware that batteries of tests have been given at all. Others recommend that the new fMRI test be given since they believe that Terri is -not in a permanent or persistent vegetative state based on the available video footage but that she must be in a minimally conscious state or even better. The video footage referred to is either, a portion of, or all of the 4V2-hour videotape that was examined at the 2002 trial and was part of the basis of the Court's decision that she remained in PVS, which was affirmed by the Second District Court of Appeal. The minimally conscious state was discussed at some length with witnesses at the 2002 trial so it is certainly not new, According to the article in Neurolog~, the fMRI was employed in a studv that showed that some MCS patients may retain widely distributed cortical systems with potential for cognitive and sensory function despite their inability to follow simple instructions or conununicate reliably. One of the Respondents' afflants cautions that fMRI testing is an experimental procedure that has shown promise but is not yet routinely used foT clinical purposes and that any fMR1 testing should be conducted in an academic setting with ongoing research protocols investigating comaJVS/MCS. Petitioner contends that no MRI can be conducted on Tem Schiavo without brain surgery to remove a device that was previously inserted in her brain and that such an invasive procedure has not been
previously favored. A few of the other affiant doctors have appeared in this case before and their diagnoses and recommended courses of treatment have been previously considered. Although all of the affiants urge that new tests be given, most are vague as to the course of treatment that should be given, while other SUggeSt treatment that has already been considered (e.g., hyperbaric oxygenation). Both sides have cited guardian ad litem Wolfson's
report in which he found the evidence of PVS to be compelling
In regard to swallowing tests, she has previo-usly undergone them. The issue of swallowing saliva has also been previously heard by the Court. The Respondents and some of the afflants, notably speech pathologists or therapists, ,have recommended the swallovdng therapy called VitalStim, but notably there has been no allegation that VitalStim can be performed on patients who are in PVS. Dr. Wolfson also recommended such swallowing tests, but only if the parties agreed. Without an agreement to be bound by the results, he suggested that those tests had no feasibility. it is conceded that this matter.
In regard to patient Scantlin, news reports state that she was able to blink on conunand, and therefore., was apparently not in PVS, so the issue of her improvement has limited, if any, applicability to this case.
Based on the Respondents' request for relief as submitted, this Court does not believe that a colorable entitlement to relief has been established. |
But then again, that would require Coulter actually using a bit or rationality in her own right, which we all know is noticeably absent from pretty much any piece of vile drivel that comes out of her fucking mouth.
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
|
