This is just too much like how the Nazi's policy of murdering the mentally/physically handicapped.

Gives me chills.

TallDave, I'm not flaming, but you just Godwined a thread on the first post.

This is eons from Nazi Germany. This is more like modern Belgium and the Gronigen (?) Protocol.

This is not the State actively killing, it's the State passively allowing killing.

Not yet.

On the general question of life-support for brain-dead people, I simply don't know what to think. I fully understand the reasoning and moral clarity behind the "right to life" position (as I understand "pro-life" views on abortion), but to me reality is just messier than that.

This case gives me the chills, though. Not because a presumably brain-dead person is being taken off of life support; I'm somewhat conflicted on that issue and sincerely hope I never have to face it in my personal life. But in this case, I don't like the fact that her parents' wishes are brushed aside by a man who is, in all practical ways, her ex-husband. Her parents should be the ones to decide.

Why doesn't he just divorce her?

The truth is, I'm not so sure that I'd like whatever "right to life" bill they intend to pass.

I just hope I never have to face this issue in my own life...

For more info, see a great article on the case at Terri Schiavo is Starving For a Fair Diagnosis

My take: A couple of things that have not been well-presented in the MSM. The first is that there is considerable doubt as to whether Terri Schiavo is even in a Persistent Vegetative State. Her husband has refused all requests to have the tests done that would allow that diagnosis to be made or discounted. The diagnosis was made based on a CT Scan, judged by most neurologists to be insufficiently detailed to make this determination AND after a 45-minute exam by a neurologist who makes his living by testifying in court that patients are in a Persistent Vegetative State, sometimes in obvious disregard of plain evidence to the contrary.

If you ever saw the documentary, "The Thin Blue Line", you could compare this guy to the psychologist featured in that film who does brief interviews of defendants before determining, invariably, that they are cold-blooded killers without remorse who have no hope of rehabiliation. In the case featured in the documentary, he made that finding with regard to an innocent man who has since been released from prison. This is the same scenario that Terri is facing.

I normally like Noonan, but she really has her head up her ass on this one.

She thinks it is possible anyday Schiavo will break out of her coma. Talks of touching things she noticed in the cut 'n splice video that show Schiavo is not vegetative.

Noonan ignores the fact that Sciavo has no cerebral cortex left.

Everything that was once Schiavo - her personality, memories - has rotted out and liquified away. Even if Schiavo was the 1st person in medical history that regrew the outer half of her brain, it would still be just empty gray matter tissue.

We are close to where our technology can keep millions of people alive artificially, at hideous cost. Each year, such artificial life support is withdrawn from a good portion of dying patients. If it will require Federal court hearings and generally favor keeping all dying patients alive at all costs, be prepared for a doubling in Medicare costs and a doubling in payroll taxes.

Noonan talks about how the Religious Right will punish the GOP if it doesn't kow-tow to making "Terri's Law" the national healthcare model making the preservation of all life in all circumstances paramount. She neglects the widespread fear the Religious Right causes in the rest of the population - that they are Right to Life fanatics bent on shoving their religious beliefs down everybody's throats. If they do kow-tow, they will be like the Demos kow-towing to the Anti-America Left.

I don't see any winners in the "hyped over 200,000 other vegetatives" Schiavo Affair.

And the cedarTARD lies continue. Again, there is not one factual statement in his comment.

So 'TARD, did everybody get a weekend pass at the 'home'? You have the computer to yourself tonight? Great.

p.s. If you haven't noticed I'm going to call bullshit on all of your comments from now on. I feel its my civic duty to expose you for the liar that your are. If some innocent, impressionable person comes to AoSHQ I want them to know you are the abberation you appear to be. You are, henceforth, my Nazi bitch.

You know, as hard as this is to admit, I finally agree with Cedarford on a general point!

I look at him and I don't see any winners either!

I can understand anyone not wanting extraordinary means to be kept alive (like by machines) My answer to this is simple. Just let Teri's parents feed her orally. That is what people did before modern medicine. She will probably die eventually, but at least not by STARVING, and with the loving care of her parents.
That seems to be what so many are missing here. They are STARVING her. Good God people.

Jack. Jack. Jack.

Everything in his post is a lie. He has no way to know the state of Terri's brain because there have been no tests to determine it.

He lies about the impact of keeping Terri alive. There has not been one post here today suggesting that there is anything wrong with living wills. There is going to be no warehouse of vegetables thats just bullshit and unsupported by any facts.

There is no place in Peggy Noonans article that says anything about the religious right. Heres the quote "There is a passionate, highly motivated and sincere group of voters and activists who care deeply about whether Terri Schiavo is allowed to live". For confirmation check out the links on this site to liberal blogs.

Finally, there could be a winner in this. Terri.

Jack. My apologies. You are a subtle man and I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. I missed the joke.

No worries, BrewFan. If you missed it, Cedar probably did too.

So now, everytime he posts you can say "Does that look like the post of a winner?" And I can follow it up with "No, Brew. I see no winner in this here post."

And we can laugh and laugh and laugh at the Nazi.

And then laugh some more.

A case like this exhibits one of the reasons we have a federal order: It ought to be possible for activists to have it out over Michael and Terri Schiavo without the federal government being diverted. In that connection, I'm completely disdainful of Peggy Noonan and her equation of Republican occupancy of the Presidency and majority control of the Congress with the Republicans "hav[ing] the power" to save Terri Schiavo. I'd suggest she read the short list of the enumerated powers of Congress in the Constitution, but I'm as sure as I can be without actually going through her trash that she must have used her copy of the Constitution to wipe her butt.

I've always tended to make allowances for Noonan. I figure there's a place in punditry for someone who's little more than a party cheerleader but poses as a sober commentator. The party needs decent and personable, if lightweight, spokespersons. On this occasion, though, Noonan's just made an *ss of herself by showing she doesn't give even a passing thought to constitutional orders before proclaiming nonsense such as that what the Republicans should do, now that they control the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, is take up individual cases in the guise of a popular tribunal.

Please, let's not have anyone retort that the members of Congress routinely ignore the Congress's enumerated powers or that they "hold hearings" and "conduct investigations" all the time. Really, you'll just be making my point for me.

Crysknife just made one of the only conservatively consistent arguments on this blog. Even though I don't necessarily agree with dry constitutional orthodoxy, Kudos for consistency.

New article out on the forgotten man. The State of Florida appointed Dr. Jay Wolfson as Schiavo's independent guardian after passage of "Terri's Law". Wolfson was interviewed.

He said some interesting things. As a professional, he concluded both Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers loved and cared for Schiavo, met all criteria he used to determine devotedness, while disagreeing profoundly. Wolfson said in all his visits to Schiavo, all the times he spent monitoring her interactions or lack thereof with others, including the Schindlers, he was unable to see an iota of consciousness, and when the Schindlers talked to each other and him of positive signs of Schiavo doing this or that in response to their requests - Wolfson never saw anything, and concluded that the Schindlers were seeing what they wanted to see.

Link:

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/nation/11175595.htm

He said he was completing a 38-page report that in the end called for the additional tests the Schindlers wanted, though her attending doctors termed them pointless, with a recommendation to the State that her artificial life support be withdrawn, feeding tube removed if the new tests failed to challenge the neurologist team's 2002 evaluation. The court then invalidated "Terri's Law", rendering his report, which mostly backed Greer and medical consultants - moot.

He had concluded she was in a permanent vegetative state, though he worried he might have missed something....but also, based on observation, put little credence on Schindler claims that Terri was walking and talking as recently as 7 years before, and after that - regularly interacts with visitors.

He saw nothing.

But Wolfson did not call for removal of life support because while he believed her condition irreversable, thought different opinions were more valuable (and no dummy, he didn't want 200 Right to Life fanatics showing up on his doorstep making threats or calling him a monster). But he added he had 3 kids, and said that if something terrible like that happened to anyone of them he would be honest with himself and be a true parent who knows when to let go...................

Cedarford,

I have little doubt that one could make a good case for euthanasia for Terri. You just did.

The point is we generally leave these decisions to the patient herself, via a living will, or by the family's estimate of what her true desires would be.

Michael Schiavo is no longer family. He is maintaining his nominal "marriage" to this -- I'm sorry -- drooling retard for other reasons.

What do you imagine those reasons might be?

Pure selflessness, perhaps?

Michael Schiavo is still her husband. He has refused offers of millions of dollars to give up and allow Terri's parents to have their way. There are 3 people who testified that Terri's desire was to not be kept alive this way. Admittedly, Michael Schiavo has gotten on with his life, as he should. I find his unwavering devotion to her memory admirable. He simply will not give up the fight to have Terri's wishes carried out. I can only hope that my husband would, for the sake of the love we shared, fight so hard for so long for me.

ACE, I agree that it is a tough question to explain Michael Schiavo's motives - but at least you are approaching it on a basis other than the "damn the facts, I must worship and fight for all life: Religious Right perspective.

I think it is hard to get a grip on the guy because his defenders who exist have been drowned out by the Right to Life fanatics that demonize him as the (1) evil adulterer who broke his marriage vows to his comatose, vegetative wife; (2) The man who cruelly wishes to cause her slow death in the most painful way imaginable; (3) The man who stands to make money by killing poor Terri; (4) The man who ignores Religious Right doctors and lawyers (like the one tonight) swearing that Teri was trying to say "I want to live" and crying about her death....; (5) the man who refuses tests that will prove Terri will be the 1st human ever to emerge from PVS; (6)that he blocks her more-loving parents, who want what is best for Terri.

I pointed out in several posts - getting the expected heat from the RTL fanatics - that all 6 charges are wrong.

If he is an adulterer, then all the women in Iraq and Iran that married after their husbands were listed as MIA in the war and came back 7 years later were adulterers and should be stoned to death under Sharia.

Evidence was posted that refusal to drink or eat is part of the dying process and causes no pain. 1/2 million people die that way in America or have cachexis play a big part in their passing. And Schiavo doesn't feel pain because she has no cerebral cortex.

Not only will Michael Schiavo not make any money off his wife's passing, he has turned down bribes of 1 million and 10 million (he says) to walk away and cede his wifes affairs to the Schindlers and their Religious Right handlers.

He didn't ignore requests to do more tests. The court and it's appointed expert panel, inc 2 doctors selected by the Schindlers signed off that she had been thoroughly examined and she was vegetative (One of the Schindler docs started demanding additional test later, but not when he reported to the court his professional opinion). The lawyer lying last night is a total piece of female excrement playing to guillable RTLs who will be telling one another that Terri begged not to die.

The tests done show she has no outer brain.

Reports by the State-appointed guardian and examination of videotapes attested to by the Schindlers led the court to conclude the Schindlers were deceptive or in deep denial in "seeing things" that other observors say never happened. No discovery of deception was ever laid on Michael Schiavo.

****So anyways ACE, let me speculate on why the guy is acting as he is. He is being a hard-ass, fighting back, and by all accounts, a deep believer he is doing what his wife wanted. He thinks he should have been given the right as her husband to have final say, and after 7 years of bitter conflict with the Schindlers, is determined to give them NOTHING they want without a fight.....

That even when both parents agree that the plug has to be pulled on a vegetative child, or all family members on a parent.....these sort of fights have been happening outside the Schiavo case with great frequency no matter if the family all agrees, even with a Living Will in place. There are some very aggressive Right to Lifers like Terry Randall and Operation Rescue moving in defiance of a unanimity of family and caregivers to "sue on the side of life" in court. Even Religious Right preachers that regularly get run out of hospitals when they claim the dying patient they got alone with without invite miraculously emerged from their coma, personally told the preacher they had a change of heart, embraced Jesus, and now want to live.

I think Michael Schiavo, the Courts will look better when the dust settles, the Schindlers and their Religious Right handlers worse - when all the details are out and a clear picture can be constructed. And worst of all will be some Congressional opportunists that sought to pander and looked like they were grandstanding worse than the steroid hearings with their subpeona for a PVS patient to testify and attempts to push a rush law with no recorded votes that would quash all state rights and family rights if any conflict emerged over a end of life decision..and Federalize all that. Noteworthy in the House version that was never debated was a clause making it legal for an interested 3rd party to intervene on behalf of a patient if they thought the family was wrong or a Living Will was not specific enough...(Read RTLs in Congress wanted to make it legal for Operation Rescue to intervene in all cases).

Bill from INDC said, "Crysknife just made one of the only conservatively consistent arguments on this blog. Even though I don't necessarily agree with dry constitutional orthodoxy, Kudos for consistency."

I don't like constitutional orthodoxy for its own sake, either. In fact, at the risk of detracting from your kind compliment to me, I'm not consistently fond of consistency, either! If I could truly support the Constitution on some occasion by unconstitutional means, I would do so; likewise, if I could usefully employ some sort of inconsistency in the service of good constitutional order, I would do that, too.

I'd like it to be understood that I'm not blindly, rigidly, or fanatically constitutionalist or federalist. I just think the Constitution is good: thoughtfully put together, for the sake of the endurance of a decent republic, by Founders of very great intelligence who spent many years studying politics before writing the Constitution. However, I don't think the Constitution is perfect; in fact, I'm doubtful as to whether it can continue to stand up even as well as it has so far, subject as it is to the pressures of a $2.5 trillion budget, the fragmentation of control of the executive branch, the fragmentation of the Congress into subcommittees, the (ages-old) loss of the control of the Senate on the part of state legislatures, and national media that provide the means for Congressmen who fear electoral loss to grandstand before their constituents.

I can't get engaged about Terri and Michael Schiavo because I don't know either of them or know enough about their circumstances to form a judgement. However, I feel personally threatened by the growing disarray of the federal government

The pro=euthanasia lobby paints everyone who opposes them as right wing religious fanatics.
This canard is designed to divert attn from their utter failure to set forth the ''clear and convincing evidence'' necessary to make their case on Terri's condition.

Firstly, the 3 ''witnesses'' offered nothing but inadmissible hearsay and conjecture.
Secondly, the fact that their 'recollections' came 7 years later, after the 1.7 million dollar award for Terri, makes their hearsay also not credible and not worthy of belief.
Thirdly, their ''medical expert'', the self-styled ''Dr Death'', a discredited quack who failed to perform even basic testing. He did punch Terri in between the eyes though.
Finally, Felos et al are all extreme pro-euthanasia agitators, using this poor woman to advance a grisly political agenda.

Those of us who fear for the integrity of our judicial system cannot support court-ordered murder. This isn't about religion, it's about the Constitution and the Rule of Law--not men--not quacks.

"The first is that there is considerable doubt as to whether Terri Schiavo is even in a Persistent Vegetative State. Her husband has refused all requests to have the tests done that would allow that diagnosis to be made or discounted. "

This is complete nonsense. Her husband can't refuse tests. Terry Schiavo was examined by five board-certified doctors: two chosen by her parents, two chosen by her husband, and an independent one chosen by the court after the two parties couldn't agree. The independent doctor came to exactly the same conclusion that Schiavo's chosen physicians did: she was in PVS.

As for Wolfson, he came to the same conclusion BUT because he was appointed by the governor, in a politically difficult position and probably hoping that one more public repudiation might help the parents come to grips with reality, he suggested a round of swallow tests. Did Schiavo turn it down? He couldn't. The judge did.

Michael Schiavo doesn't have power of life or death over his wife. The court does. As guardian, he turned the decision over to the court, who has decided that his wife has a constitutional right to die. If you don't like that, then go take up the fight with Florida law. But you can't take it up with Michael Schiavo. If he changed his mind, it'd be irrelevant. If he turned over guardianship to the parents, they'd still have to convince the courts that she shouldn't die, and they might not be able to given their many foolish statements.

About the only possible way that Michael Schiavo could get the court to reconsider would be to tell the court that he committed perjury when he testified that Terry wouldn't want to be kept in this position. If he did this after he took millions to do so, the courts would rightly suspect his perjury now, not then.

Schiavo had no financial motive, and he isn't in charge of his wife's trust fund. There's no money left in it--but if there were, he's offered several times to sign it over to charity.

The Schindlers, on the other hand, have acted badly throughout. They wanted half of Michael's settlement money--and whether he promised it or not, it's still his money. They visited their daughter far less frequently than Schiavo did up through 2000 at least. And if we're talking groundless speculation about financial motives, they're the ones with the lawyers and possibly other expenses being funded by majorCatholic and right to life organizations.

"I don't see any winners in the "hyped over 200,000 other vegetatives" Schiavo Affair."

Exactly.

I have no opinion about the whole feeding tube removal issue. It's ugly. But it's legal, and it's done all the time. If that's your problem, then focus on changing the law. But quit pretending there's any shocking impropriety or doubt about Schiavo.

And amen to whoever pointed out that Noonan was wiping her ass with the Constitution.