When I state repeatedly (and hysterically, as some have commented) that the extremists are taking unprecedented measures to have their way, and that this is destroying our democracy and our system of justice, I am talking about things like this:
Hours after a judge ordered that Terri Schiavo was not to be removed from her hospice, a team of state agents were en route to seize her and have her feeding tube reinserted — but they stopped short when local police told them they would enforce the judge’s order, The Herald has learned.
Agents of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement told police in Pinellas Park, the small town where Schiavo lies at Hospice Woodside, on Thursday that they were on the way to take her to a hospital to resume her feeding.
For a brief period, local police, who have officers at the hospice to keep protesters out, prepared for what sources called “a showdown.”
In the end, the squad from the FDLE and the Department of Children & Families backed down, apparently concerned about confronting local police outside the hospice.
”We told them that unless they had the judge with them when they came, they were not going to get in,” said a source with the local police.
”The FDLE called to say they were en route to the scene,” said an official with the city police who requested anonymity. “When the sheriff’s department and our department told them they could not enforce their order, they backed off.”
The incident,known only to a few and related to The Herald by three different sources involved in Thursday’s events, underscores the intense emotion and murky legal terrain that the Schiavo case has created. It also shows that agencies answering directly to Gov. Jeb Bush had planned to use a wrinkle in Florida law that would have allowed them to legally get around the judge’s order. The exception in the law allows public agencies to freeze a judge’s order whenever an agency appeals it.
Read the whole thing. Then, an exercise. Ask yourself who should have the authority to be making the decisions regarding Terri Schiavo.
The Florida Circuit Courts?
The Appeals Courts?
The Florida Supreme Court?
The United States Supreme Court?
Governor Bush?
The Florida Department of Law Enforcement?
The Department of Children and Families?
The National Right to Life group?
The US House of Representatives?
Randall Terry?
Tom DeLay?
Bill Frist?
The United States Senate?
Sean Hannity?
If you answered anything other than Michael Schiavo, you are part of the problem.
Dave
I see you left her parents off the list. Convenient. No? Perhaps YOU are part of the problem.
Jim Keating
What we are talking about is the Right to KILL, not the Right to die.
In any state but Florida Mr. Schiavo would have no legal standing, because he is the “Common Law Husband” of the mother of his two children and has been cohabitating with this new wife for the past 7 years.
PS Why is Mr. Schiavo going to creamate his Catholic Wife. Why no autopsy? Are we all afraid of what we would find?
John Cole
Dave- You are right- the parents haven’t done anything wrong, and it is perfectly understandable why they are doing what they are doing.
No one can fault them for what they are doing.
Jim- The cause of death will be organ failure brought on by dehydration. Why do you want an autopsy?
Andrew J. Lazarus
I’m mystified by the latest right-wing legal theory about Michael schiavo as someone else’s common-law husband. Flroida doesn’t have common-law marriage, and even if it did, it couldn’t be used to establish a bigamous relationship.
I think I understand that the real argument is that Schiavo didn’t freeze his life when his wife became ill. Instead he tried to brinf her a death with some dignity. As far as the 15 years of celibacy that Mr Keating wishes on mr Schiavo, I recommend he try it first.
scs2005
Ok, my first blog. I am just so upset about this case I could spit.
First of all I am not a religious person. However, I am a feminist. And I know that over 50% of marriages end in divorce and the leading cause of death for pregnant women in this country is murder by their husbands.
Why are all the men out their taking such great pains to make Michael Schiavo into this saint, whom we cannot even BEGIN to question his motives or critically examine the past records of family, friends, and nursing staff, all who pretty much paint the same portrait of a controlling guy and who raise serious questions of when he “remembered” what Terri’s wishes are.
Yes it seems that Terri has to die and it is the men in this country who are sending her there. Like Michael, they wish to still retain the ulitamate authorty over their women folk, even in death.
scs2005
Ok, my first blog. I am just so upset about this case I could spit.
First of all I am not a religious person. However, I am a feminist. And I know that over 50% of marriages end in divorce and the leading cause of death for pregnant women in this country is murder by their husbands.
Why are all the men out their taking such great pains to make Michael Schiavo into this saint, whom we cannot even BEGIN to question his motives or critically examine the past records of family, friends, and nursing staff, all who pretty much paint the same portrait of a controlling guy and who raise serious questions of when he “remembered” what Terri’s wishes are.
Yes it seems that Terri has to die and it is the men in this country who are sending her there. Like Michael, they wish to still retain the ulitamate authorty over their women folk, even in death.
Kimmitt
all who pretty much paint the same portrait of a controlling guy
Well, no, they don’t. We have the testimony of Carla Iyer, which is directly contradicted by the testimonies of the other nurses on staff, and we have the parents, who suddenly began alleging that Mr. Schiavo beat Ms. Schiavo in 2002 — but not beforehand. Oh, and we have a bunch of Freepers who’ve invented a life-insurance policy that doesn’t exist.
scs2005
I have been watching live interviews on On the Record with Greta Van Susteren. (congrats to her, she is the main one bothering to actually talk to the people who knew Terri the best.)
I have watched 4 of Terri’s close friends, including her bridesmaids and her coworkers, her brother whom she was very close to, and 3 nurses who have treated her all say that Michael was controlling and basically abusive. Three of the nurses said that Michael lied about treatment he gave Terri, actively prevented any minor attempts at rehab and one nurse, (not Cartla Iyer) stated last Friday that she specifically heard Michael Schavo state early on he ‘had NO idea” what Terri wanted him to do.
Now are all these people Republican liars? I don’t think so.
Apparently, many people all state that Terri did not confide about the state of her marriage to her parents. Many children woudn’t. And there was no point anyway for her parents to bring up anything they knew about that at Terri’s malpractice trial when Michael was trying to recover money for, as he said in the trial, to care for Terri’s for the rest of his life.
It was only after Micheal decided to ‘pull the plug’ a year after the settlement and he suddenly ‘remembered’ Terri’s wishes that the parents had any call to bring it up legally.
All you have to do is listen to all the people who knew Terri best, not just her husband, to really know what’t going on.
Kimmitt
And there was no point anyway for her parents to bring up anything they knew about that at Terri’s malpractice trial when Michael was trying to recover money for, as he said in the trial, to care for Terri’s for the rest of his life.
Sure, but then why didn’t they bring it up in 1993, when the first serious disagreements happened? Why did they wait nine years?
Also, why didn’t the nurses and others who “knew Terri” come forward back in 1998, when all of these matters were discussed thoroughly in the courts? Why the seven year delay? There’s a major credibility issue here, so yeah, I think that they could all be lying. As a matter of fact, I’m pretty sure they are.
scs2005
I believe from the interviews I heard that most of these witness did file affadavits with the court many years ago. I believe these affadavits were used in the 1993 action that the Schindlers filed to have Michael removed as a guardian after Michael refused to get any rehab for Terri and ordered nurses not to treat Terri’s infections, one year after the malpractice settlement. I believe that also one of Michael’s ex-girlfreinds was also supposed to testify that Michael told her he had no idea what Terri wanted and she even said so on a radio program, but was too scared to appear in court. Unfortunately, that suit was dismissed by the judge.
Terri’s friends and brother are on record from the beginning talking about Terri’s bad marriage. And the only place to bring this up after the 1993 guardian suit was at Judge Greer’s trial. And, like you, he ignored all those affadavits and believed Michael. The husband is always right, right?
So ALL these people are lying and only Michael (and his brother) is telling the truth? Wow you are really banking on Michael here. Maybe because to beleive otherwise would be a blow to your political viewpoint?
I believe Michael is the only real documented liar here. To repeat, he said at the trial(read the transcript excerpts) that the reason he deserved lots of money was so that he “could take of Terri for the REST of his life”. And a year later he’s looking at funeral homes and withholding life saving treatment for her. But no, everyone ELSE is lying.
scs2005
Just a correction here. I just tried to look it up. One nurse affidavit was filed in the 1993 guardianship hearing. That was by Carolyn Johnson who said that Michael had forbidden any kind of therapy or having Terri sit up or be taken outside etc., even though a doctor recommended such.
The other nurses treated Terry after 1993, I believe around 1996 or so. The nurses were I believe among many interviewd by the court appointed guardian Richard Pearse who reported to the court in 1998 on his findings. His findings were that Michael’s claim that he remembered Terri’s wishes 7 years later was not credible. The other 2 nurses then filed affidavits at the 2000 hearing. So the nurses did file in a relatively timely manner and deserve to have their crediblity given as much weight as you give Michael’s.
Bob
scs2005, what does Michael Schiavo’s goodness or badness have to do with anything? He has not been proven to have done anything to bring about Terri’s heart attack and subsequent brain damage. If he does, he should go on trial.
It’s been fifteen years, folks. Brains don’t grow back. Terri Schiavo (pre-heart attack) has left the building. She ain’t coming back.
Anyone else see psychological parallels betweeen Michael Schiavo and Poppa Schindler? And this so-called right-to-life movement? Controlling others.
scs2005
Michael’s goodness is important here, Bob. His goodness is important because his CREDIBILTY is important, to show he had enough goodness to tell the truth and that he didn’t have ulterior motives.
He and his brother and his brother’s wife are the only witnesses who back each other up and claim to have heard Terri state at a dinner she would never want any life support. This is in contrast to comments reportedly made by Michael to at least 3 people I’ve heard of who said Michael specifically made comments many times early on that he DIDN’T know what Terri wanted. This is in addition to comments made by Terri to girlfriends disaggreeing with removing life support from Karen Ann Quinlan.
So we are basing all of this on Michael’s good desire to tell the truth. The guardian has the power to not remove or remove the feeding tube in this case, based on his true belief on the wishes of the victim. The catch word here is “true”.
Yes I saw the CAT scan and much of Terri’s brain is gone. But contrary to what a lot of talking heads are saying, she is not brain dead and her brain is not ALL gone.I heard Dr. Baden on On the Record state that about 20% of her upper brain remains, in addition to her healthy brain stem.
Granted 20% is not a lot. But, there are certain conditions, of epilepsy I believe, where one whole hemisphere of a brain, 50% is removed by surgeons, so that a person can be free of debilitating seizures. And these persons can go on to leave normal lives after therapy and especially if they are young enough. So Terri has 20% left.
So what is going on in this 20%? Is it enough to have some awareness? What parts of the upper brain are left, ie is her vision still intact, her hearing? Perhaps she is deaf and blind, and paralyzed, which would explain her lack of responses, yet she still may have some awareness, some humanness, left in that 20%. Do we even know? An MRI or PET scan might be helpful in testing her responses and seeing which part of the brain lights ups, if any. But oh yeah, Micheal refused to have those tests.
Yes she may never become a star athelete and a Rhodes scholar after this and may remain this way for the rest of her life. But who are we to judge that 20% is not enough brain to make a human?
Kimmitt
My cat has more than 20% of my brain.
scs2005
Your cat probably has 100% of your brain.