Thanks for the link John… I’ve been lurking through all these Plame threads. Got to admire your rigor and thoroughness.
3.
Vladi G
Actually… Sen. Tom Coburn has something to say….
Let me guess. Did Coburn say “Damn, I’m upset that she died before I had a chance to sterilize her against her will!”
4.
Sojourner
It would be nice if the slime balls on the right will now leave Michael Schiavo alone. Perhaps they’ve gotten all the political gain they can from trashing a private citizen. Once they’re done with Wilson and Plame, I wonder who they’ll go after next. So much for the ethical standards of the conservative right.
5.
scs
It would be nice if the slime balls on the left will now leave the Schindlers alone. Perhaps they’ve gotten all the political gain they can from trashing private citizens.
In regard to the article, it was very thorough but the writer jumped on improbabilites as impossiblities. For instance, I could think of several ways that Terri could have been injured without much signs of struggle. Say- she was asleep, turned away from Michael, he covered her face with a pillow, pinning her body down with his much larger size. It would be very hard for her to reach behind her, with her eyes covered, to fight off Michael. Also hard for her to move away. In the old days, people found it hard to believe females could be held down and raped without escaping and hence thought they agreed to the act, but we know that girls get raped like that all the time
Not a very difficult stretch of the imagination. I don’t think Michael was even checked for any signs of a struggle. The doctors all agreed the potassium levels could have been affected by the intravenous fluid, hence not a definite cause of death. If not that, then what? Why is it sacriledgeous to contemplates the possiblities of the cause of a young woman’s collapse? Any time a person dies or collapses unexpectedly, all possibilites are always investigated. Why not for Terri? I will be for Terri’s rights forever.
6.
jcricket
It would be nice if the slime balls on the left will now leave the Schindlers alone. Perhaps they’ve gotten all the political gain they can from trashing private citizens.
Wow, up really is down. The Schindler’s used every opportunity to absolutely trash Michael Schiavo, and enlisted anyone they could to further their cause, consequences be damned (like all the other people in the hospice whose dying family’s last days were made less peaceful through all the protests).
Moreover, the only “trashing” the Schindler’s have received is for their libel and slander of Michael Schiavo and for their employ of dubious characters like Randall Terry and the quack “doctors”.
I feel sorry the Schindlers couldn’t accept the reality of their daughter’s situation, and perhaps this explains their behavior, but it was never justified.
7.
scs
And Michael didn’t trash the Shindlers? C’mon, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
He accused them of only wanting to keep Terri alive for the money.
I never heard that. But then I didn’t see Michael much on TV. I did see a whole lot of the Schindler crowd. Anybody who gets in bed with Randall Terry automatically loses my vote.
12.
Mike S
Jesus. Obviously some wingnuts won’t accept anything that doesn’t make Randall Terry a hero. They’ll just keep throwing crap at the wall and hope no one notices that they are pulling it out of their asses. Even the fact that Randall Terry and the family straight out lied, “Terry said “I want to live,”” doesn’t disuade them.
13.
Longshot
Mike S – Thank you.
I’ve had the Randall Terry Experience myself once, back in ’92 in Houston during the GOP National Convention (yeah, the one with Pat Buchanan *and* Pat Robertson as speakers). Operation Rescue was in the city in a big way, and I’d joined a group of ppl to act as human shields to keep one of the Planned Parenthood clinic doors opened. Terry made a circuit through the city. When he came to the site I was at, things got so intense I was afraid there was going to be a riot. I’m just glad that HPD was on its best behavior and wasn’t about to let something like that happen on their watch.
The moment I saw his name with “Schindler Family Spokesman” underneath it on TV, I knew that there was nothing I could say about the Schindlers that would discredit them like “Randall Terry: Shindler Family Spokesman”.
And now he’s running for Florida state office. Un-effing-believable.
14.
scs
Kimmet- yes I am drawing equivalency. One is illegal, true, but the other accuses a very cold heart and lack of any concern for a beloved daughter as well as stone cold hypocrisy. I think the second is almost worse.
And Sojourner, Michael did two one hour interviews I think with Larry King that I saw, one done a year ago that Larry rebroadcast at the time of the hubbub. Believe me, he said that and lots of other mean things about the Schindlers. Just looking at the guy talk made my stomach turn. He said that the conflict started after he received the settlement money. He accused the Schindlers of wanting the money for themselves. The Schindlers say they wanted the money set aside for Terri to provide the rehab Michael said he wanted in the trial but never undertook. Who do you believe? I know who I believe.
He further said the only reason they wanted to keep Terri alive still was so that they could receive money from right-to-life people donating to the cause to get and basically live off of. But get the transcripts if you want the exact words. Sweet guy, right? Would that have been Terri’s wishes, to hear Michael talk like that about Terri’s family, whom she was so close to?
And Mike, a family lawyer, not Randall Terry, said she heard that. Would she risk her career for that? I don’t know. Either way, we don’t know for sure.
15.
Sojourner
He said that the conflict started after he received the settlement money. He accused the Schindlers of wanting the money for themselves. The Schindlers say they wanted the money set aside for Terri to provide the rehab Michael said he wanted in the trial but never undertook.
Actually there were two pots of money out of the settlement. One pot was for Terri’s care, the second much smaller pot went to Michael for pain and suffering from the loss of his wife. The Schindlers wanted Michael to split the second pot with them. It’s not at all obvious to me why the Schindlers thought they were entitled to it.
Frankly, by aligning themselves with Randall Terry and his ilk, the Schindlers opened themselves up to all sorts of attack. Terry is one of the sleaziest people on the planet. They chose to keep company with him and will suffer the corresponding criticisms.
It turned my stomach to read that the Schindlers were prepared to keep her alive at all costs. They were asked what they would do if she developed diabetes and had to have various pieces of her body removed. They said they were prepared to put her through whatever surgeries were necessary. I’m surprised they didn’t want to have her stuffed.
I never heard Michael Schiavo accuse anyone of murder. That’s a whole lot worse than suggesting the Schindlers were greedy. I don’t know if they were greedy but they sure loved that camera. An accusation that can’t be made of Michael.
16.
scs
I believe the first pot was for her daily care. They might have wanted part of the second pot for the rehab Michael said he so desperately wanted in the trial. Hmmm, accusations of murder – well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math. Kind of hard to accuse anyone else of murder in that case. Were the Schindlers ever discovered to profit finacially from the situation as Michael said? Who is hurling unfounded accusations here. The Shindlers wanted media attention cause they knew it helped their cause – Michael didn’t because he came off like a jerk and probably knew it and because he had the upper hand anyway.
17.
Mike S
Either way, we don’t know for sure.
You’re kidding, right? Are you saying that a woman with 1/2 a brain said “I want to live?”
Delusional.
18.
Mike S
well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math.
Prime example of the scum that has taken over the GOP. Ignore the known facts and slime the opponent. Terry/Dobson deciples. I hate these people.
19.
scs
As I posted a while ago, there is an operation that surgeons use on a certain kind of severely epileptic patients, which removes one whole (diseased) hemisphere, or half, of a person brain. Most people, if they are young enough especially, go on to live completely normal lives. That is an example right there of someone without half their brain functioning just fine. She may have had 20 percent of her brain left, but it may still have been enough for some rudimentary consciouness. No autopsy can tell for 100%, unless, say, it is ALL gone, which her’s wasn’t. Look up the medical facts, it is still an imprecise science, don’t make me go over the whole thing again.
20.
scs
Yes I have taken over the GOP, you’re right. I have voted for so many Republican in my life and belong to the Moral Majority. Pleeease. Get a life dude, my opinions are my own. My main concern in this whole story is violence and dominace over women, hardly a GOP talking point.
21.
scs
well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math.
Prime example of the scum that has taken over the GOP. Ignore the known facts and slime the opponent.
And besides Mike, those statemtns I made are techinically correct and part of the “known facts”. According to her autopsy, she DID collapse due to ‘undetermined’ reasons and Michael was the last to see her before it happened. Your problem is?
22.
Mike S
Delusional.
23.
scs
Sorry to keep posting here, but I can’t sleep and my cable is out until Saturday. Need to entertain myself somehow!
Anyway, FYI – In the interest of science, and since I am advancing a scenario here, I just put my pillow over my face for a few seconds to see how hard it was to breathe. I can tell you, I just put it over my face a little, hardly that forcefully at all, and was kind of surprised actually how VERY hard I found it to breathe, specially after the first few breaths after the air got sucked out of the pillow. I can totally see how someone could die or collapse that way after several minutes.
Okay, maybe I’m crazy here, but the best way to find out about these things is to try it yourself sometimes. (Caution, don’t try this at home unless supervised by a professional.)
24.
scs
yeah Mike you got me there – what a great comeback. How did you learn such great debating skills?
25.
Mike S
Anyway, FYI – In the interest of science, and since I am advancing a scenario here, I just put my pillow over my face for a few seconds to see how hard it was to breathe.
That is funny. The future of the GOP is bright with clowns like this in your corner.
As far as “debating” you? Might as well debate the homeless person on the corner screaming at his reflection in the window.
26.
scs
Mike, you obviously do not get it. How many times do I have to tell people I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, gosh, what else….am not religious, belive in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc – do I need to go on? Do you get the picture now ?
Do I need to include that paragraph with every posting I make, like some sort of footnote? I guess so, cause I am getting tired of people trying to win the argument by just calling me a GOP partisan hack because they are not skilled enough to debate me on the merits of the argument.
*DICLAIMER -I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, I am not religious, believe in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc. All arguments listed above are the sole property of SCS. Any arguments similar to any GOP arguments, living or dead, is a coincidence, and not to be taken as an actual potrayal of actual GOP arguments.
27.
Mike S
Riiiight. And you find Hannity and Coulter interesting and informative. Reminds me of all of those rediculous LTE’s a few years back.
“As a lifelong member of the Republican/Democratic party, I…”
28.
scs
Hey I’m free thinker, what can I say? I can appreciate Al Franken and Hannity. I can read the New York Times (and I do) and watch Fox. I know that may be hard for you to believe as you might need a party to tell you what to think. I don’t. I say let a thousand flowers bloom man! Anyway, kind of hard to be a Republican when you only voted for one Republican in your life and dozens of local and national Dems.
*DISCLAIMER -I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, nationalized healthcare, I am not religious, believe in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc. All arguments listed above are the sole property of SCS. Any arguments similar to any GOP arguments, living or dead, is a coincidence, and not to be taken as an actual potrayal of actual GOP arguments.
29.
scs
Well Mike, you are good for one thing. With all this knocking my head on a brick wall I did with you, you suceeded in tiring me out and making me want to sleep. Pleasant non-GOP dreams.
30.
Sojourner
As I posted a while ago, there is an operation that surgeons use on a certain kind of severely epileptic patients, which removes one whole (diseased) hemisphere, or half, of a person brain. Most people, if they are young enough especially, go on to live completely normal lives. That is an example right there of someone without half their brain functioning just fine.
Yes, the operation involves removing half of the brain (left or right) depending on the source of the seizures. Note that the remaining half is intact, including the cerebral cortex. The operation is usually done on children whose brains are much more plastic than adults.
Terri Schiavo, in contrast, had little or none of her cerebral cortex left. The cerebral cortex is the center of consciousness and cognitive processing. All she had left was the part of the brain that keeps the body functioning.
Hmmm, accusations of murder – well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math.
… I see my plea for critical thinking, humility, and respect went unheard.
32.
scs
Sojourner – I never heard Michael Schiavo accuse anyone of murder.
SCS – Hmmm, accusations of murder – well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math. Kind of hard to accuse anyone else of murder in that case.
You all need a reading comprehension class! That infamous statement that I made that everyone keeps quoting is part of a paragrah – read it in CONTEXT
The sentenceS referred to Soj’s assertion that Michael never accused anyone of murder. I replied in essence, well no, because it would be hard for Michael to do that since he was the last one to see Terri well.
The most I will give you is a double meaning that I used in the sentence to hint at my still continuing suspicions of Michael.
33.
scs
Terri Schiavo, in contrast, had little or none of her cerebral cortex left.
I agree Soj. The point is, however, she had a LITTLE left. BUT HOW LITTLE? Too little to have any awareness or just maybe enough to have some? THAT is the important question. Brain scans don’t tell us the answers to this completely accurately yet. Look it up, any doctor will tell you that. It is still, at best, an educated guess. I say, why guess?
SCS – Hmmm, accusations of murder – well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math. Kind of hard to accuse anyone else of murder in that case.
As the world must stop spinning if we don’t accuse someone of murder? And really, “the last one to see her well” only applies to Michael if, well, someone didn’t come in, assault her, and leave undetected; the logic doesn’t seem sound. I don’t think that anyone believes that this happened, and there being no evidence of anyone coming or going at the Schiavo house at 5:00 in the morning kind of leaves it silly-seeming to speculate that someone did. Kind of like it seems silly to speculate about someone assaulting her, when there’s no evidence that she was assaulted.
The most I will give you is a double meaning that I used in the sentence to hint at my still continuing suspicions of Michael.
Because it really isn’t all that unlikely that he somehow assaulted her without leaving a mark, kept her alive for 70 minutes, then called 911 to see if they could come undo the damage that he had just done on purpose, and, that plan having failed, spent the next several years making sure she didn’t get the first bedsore and trying to get her rehabilitated to the point where she could testify against him. I fully understand your suspicions.
35.
scs
Wow, little did I know that phrase would become the bestseller on here. You just never know what you’ll be remembered for. Once again, if you, smijer, didn’t read my explanatory post above, let me clarify AGAIN.
In fact, let me just cut and paste from above…
The sentenceS referred to Soj’s assertion that Michael never accused anyone of murder. I replied in essence, well no, because it would be hard for Michael to do that since he was the last one to see Terri well.
Do I have to explain further? Okay here goes…
Because the Schindlers, or anyone else for that matter besides Michael, were NOT at the scene of Terri’s collapse, it would be very difficult for Michael to accuse the Schindlers of trying to murder their daughter. If he did so, it would be ludicrous, even for him, since the Schindlers weren’t at the scene of the collapse. Hence, I think that to give credit to Michael for not accusing anyone else of murder is a false compliment, as Michael did not have a good OPPORTUNITY to be able to accuse anyone else of murder because there was no possible way that he could have done so, given the fact that it was widely known that there was no one at the scene of Terri’s collapse, besides himself. Get it now?
I don’t know how much more exactly I can explain it. Maybe diagramming the sentences will help you all. We can try that next.
36.
Sojourner
I agree Soj. The point is, however, she had a LITTLE left. BUT HOW LITTLE? Too little to have any awareness or just maybe enough to have some? THAT is the important question. Brain scans don’t tell us the answers to this completely accurately yet. Look it up, any doctor will tell you that. It is still, at best, an educated guess. I say, why guess?
Based on the observations of independent observers, she had no awareness and no cognitive functioning. What, then, is the point of keeping the body going?
No guessing here. You’re saying that you would want to keep a minimal consciousness trapped in a body with a mind incapable of supporting any interaction with the outside world? How creepy is that?
And you want to spend limited medical resources when so many who are fully functional go without? Where’s the morality in that?
37.
scs
These independent observers do not have the power to see inside a human’s brain. Remember the cases of the Kansas girl and the firefighter who recovered some speech after many years? Apparently they had some awareness of their surroundings for a long time even though no one thought so. The firefighter was also diagnosed as PVS, not minimally conscious, by the way, which means the doctors took tests and observed and thought he had nothing going on in there. They were wrong. Like I said, its an inexact science still.
You are now changing your argument a little bit by the way. First you said, ‘well she had no consciousness, so it was okay to kill her’. Now youre saying, ‘ok, so what if she may have had some consciousness, we should still kill her anyway. Its not enough consciousness to interact with us regular humans, therefore its not good enough and so she must die.’
In a way, I actually think that’s a more honest argument from you. People are all so darn sure she had NO consciousness and I say we don’t know for 100% sure. I suppose then if you’re okay in guessing and drawing some arbitrary line at which point you kill someone then we should discuss what that line should be. But we shouldn’t pretend that there is this bright, indisputable line separating comatose, PVS, and minimally conscious patients and just admit its still just an educated guess.
And your last point, I think as a civilized society, we should strive to treat each patient to the best of our ability, not worry about some sliding scale. That’s where the morality lies.
38.
Sojourner
Remember the cases of the Kansas girl and the firefighter who recovered some speech after many years? Apparently they had some awareness of their surroundings for a long time even though no one thought so. The firefighter was also diagnosed as PVS, not minimally conscious, by the way, which means the doctors took tests and observed and thought he had nothing going on in there. They were wrong. Like I said, its an inexact science still.
Your examples are irrelevant unless you can demonstrate that they, too, were missing almost all of their cerebral cortex. If somebody were missing both their eyes, would you assume that it might be possible that, with time and therapy, they could see again? Because that’s exactly the argument you’re making about the cerebral cortex. And it’s false.
No, morality does not dictate keeping somebody alive who is so irreparably damaged. To be consistent with your argument, you must then demand that ERs keep people with flat EEGs alive. Are you really prepared to do that?
Are you prepared to pay the expenses of these gravely wounded people? Because I sure as hell haven’t heard any concern from you about the people who die every year because they don’t have health insurance that would have helped them catch illnesses before they became terminal.
The hypocrisy of the right-to-lifers never ceases to amaze.
39.
scs
The hypocrisy of the forced-death-squad never ceases to amaze me!
I see I have to go back to my footnote I used earlier. See pro-abortion rights.
*DISCLAIMER -I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, nationalized healthcare, I am not religious, believe in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc. All arguments listed above are the sole property of SCS. Any arguments similar to any GOP arguments, living or dead, is a coincidence, and not to be taken as an actual potrayal of actual GOP arguments.
40.
scs
You and the other posters on here have to learn how to debate. To debate well, you have to be able to take a broad principle and apply it to other situations. This is done to arrive at certain truths.
I brought up the example of the firefighter guy as an illustration of how doctors, even with all their tests and power of observations, can be very wrong in terms of judging brain funtion. That is the main point I tried to show. This point can then be applied to the larger truth – that brain science is still an inexact science.
Not, gee, did I look at his brain scans and compare them to Terris and in Terri’s case she had 20% intact and in his case he had 45% intact, blah, blah blah. That is getting bogged down in the wrong arena. I never claimed that Terri’s and the firefighters had the same injuries. I only attempted to show that doctors can make mistake.
You know I shouldn’t have to explain all this. And by the way, I won’t go into the argument that we have to kill some people so that others can get health insurance.
41.
Sojourner
You and the other posters on here have to learn how to debate. To debate well, you have to be able to take a broad principle and apply it to other situations. This is done to arrive at certain truths.
Oh bullshit. We just look at the science and draw conclusions based on that. The cerebral cortex supports consciousness and cognitive processing. If the cerebral cortex is largely missing, so will the functions it supports.
It’s really that simple.
Comments are closed.
Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!
aaron pacy
Actually… Sen. Tom Coburn has something to say….
smijer
Thanks for the link John… I’ve been lurking through all these Plame threads. Got to admire your rigor and thoroughness.
Vladi G
Let me guess. Did Coburn say “Damn, I’m upset that she died before I had a chance to sterilize her against her will!”
Sojourner
It would be nice if the slime balls on the right will now leave Michael Schiavo alone. Perhaps they’ve gotten all the political gain they can from trashing a private citizen. Once they’re done with Wilson and Plame, I wonder who they’ll go after next. So much for the ethical standards of the conservative right.
scs
It would be nice if the slime balls on the left will now leave the Schindlers alone. Perhaps they’ve gotten all the political gain they can from trashing private citizens.
In regard to the article, it was very thorough but the writer jumped on improbabilites as impossiblities. For instance, I could think of several ways that Terri could have been injured without much signs of struggle. Say- she was asleep, turned away from Michael, he covered her face with a pillow, pinning her body down with his much larger size. It would be very hard for her to reach behind her, with her eyes covered, to fight off Michael. Also hard for her to move away. In the old days, people found it hard to believe females could be held down and raped without escaping and hence thought they agreed to the act, but we know that girls get raped like that all the time
Not a very difficult stretch of the imagination. I don’t think Michael was even checked for any signs of a struggle. The doctors all agreed the potassium levels could have been affected by the intravenous fluid, hence not a definite cause of death. If not that, then what? Why is it sacriledgeous to contemplates the possiblities of the cause of a young woman’s collapse? Any time a person dies or collapses unexpectedly, all possibilites are always investigated. Why not for Terri? I will be for Terri’s rights forever.
jcricket
Wow, up really is down. The Schindler’s used every opportunity to absolutely trash Michael Schiavo, and enlisted anyone they could to further their cause, consequences be damned (like all the other people in the hospice whose dying family’s last days were made less peaceful through all the protests).
Moreover, the only “trashing” the Schindler’s have received is for their libel and slander of Michael Schiavo and for their employ of dubious characters like Randall Terry and the quack “doctors”.
I feel sorry the Schindlers couldn’t accept the reality of their daughter’s situation, and perhaps this explains their behavior, but it was never justified.
scs
And Michael didn’t trash the Shindlers? C’mon, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Kimmitt
Michael didn’t accuse the Schindlers of abusing Ms. Schiavo. One of these two sides accused the other of brutal felonies and the other did not.
scs
He accused them of only wanting to keep Terri alive for the money. Heard it myself on Larry King. Not very nice either.
Kimmitt
You’re drawing equivalency between the two, then?
Sojourner
I never heard that. But then I didn’t see Michael much on TV. I did see a whole lot of the Schindler crowd. Anybody who gets in bed with Randall Terry automatically loses my vote.
Mike S
Jesus. Obviously some wingnuts won’t accept anything that doesn’t make Randall Terry a hero. They’ll just keep throwing crap at the wall and hope no one notices that they are pulling it out of their asses. Even the fact that Randall Terry and the family straight out lied, “Terry said “I want to live,”” doesn’t disuade them.
Longshot
Mike S – Thank you.
I’ve had the Randall Terry Experience myself once, back in ’92 in Houston during the GOP National Convention (yeah, the one with Pat Buchanan *and* Pat Robertson as speakers). Operation Rescue was in the city in a big way, and I’d joined a group of ppl to act as human shields to keep one of the Planned Parenthood clinic doors opened. Terry made a circuit through the city. When he came to the site I was at, things got so intense I was afraid there was going to be a riot. I’m just glad that HPD was on its best behavior and wasn’t about to let something like that happen on their watch.
The moment I saw his name with “Schindler Family Spokesman” underneath it on TV, I knew that there was nothing I could say about the Schindlers that would discredit them like “Randall Terry: Shindler Family Spokesman”.
And now he’s running for Florida state office. Un-effing-believable.
scs
Kimmet- yes I am drawing equivalency. One is illegal, true, but the other accuses a very cold heart and lack of any concern for a beloved daughter as well as stone cold hypocrisy. I think the second is almost worse.
And Sojourner, Michael did two one hour interviews I think with Larry King that I saw, one done a year ago that Larry rebroadcast at the time of the hubbub. Believe me, he said that and lots of other mean things about the Schindlers. Just looking at the guy talk made my stomach turn. He said that the conflict started after he received the settlement money. He accused the Schindlers of wanting the money for themselves. The Schindlers say they wanted the money set aside for Terri to provide the rehab Michael said he wanted in the trial but never undertook. Who do you believe? I know who I believe.
He further said the only reason they wanted to keep Terri alive still was so that they could receive money from right-to-life people donating to the cause to get and basically live off of. But get the transcripts if you want the exact words. Sweet guy, right? Would that have been Terri’s wishes, to hear Michael talk like that about Terri’s family, whom she was so close to?
And Mike, a family lawyer, not Randall Terry, said she heard that. Would she risk her career for that? I don’t know. Either way, we don’t know for sure.
Sojourner
Actually there were two pots of money out of the settlement. One pot was for Terri’s care, the second much smaller pot went to Michael for pain and suffering from the loss of his wife. The Schindlers wanted Michael to split the second pot with them. It’s not at all obvious to me why the Schindlers thought they were entitled to it.
Frankly, by aligning themselves with Randall Terry and his ilk, the Schindlers opened themselves up to all sorts of attack. Terry is one of the sleaziest people on the planet. They chose to keep company with him and will suffer the corresponding criticisms.
It turned my stomach to read that the Schindlers were prepared to keep her alive at all costs. They were asked what they would do if she developed diabetes and had to have various pieces of her body removed. They said they were prepared to put her through whatever surgeries were necessary. I’m surprised they didn’t want to have her stuffed.
I never heard Michael Schiavo accuse anyone of murder. That’s a whole lot worse than suggesting the Schindlers were greedy. I don’t know if they were greedy but they sure loved that camera. An accusation that can’t be made of Michael.
scs
I believe the first pot was for her daily care. They might have wanted part of the second pot for the rehab Michael said he so desperately wanted in the trial. Hmmm, accusations of murder – well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math. Kind of hard to accuse anyone else of murder in that case. Were the Schindlers ever discovered to profit finacially from the situation as Michael said? Who is hurling unfounded accusations here. The Shindlers wanted media attention cause they knew it helped their cause – Michael didn’t because he came off like a jerk and probably knew it and because he had the upper hand anyway.
Mike S
Either way, we don’t know for sure.
You’re kidding, right? Are you saying that a woman with 1/2 a brain said “I want to live?”
Delusional.
Mike S
well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math.
Prime example of the scum that has taken over the GOP. Ignore the known facts and slime the opponent. Terry/Dobson deciples. I hate these people.
scs
As I posted a while ago, there is an operation that surgeons use on a certain kind of severely epileptic patients, which removes one whole (diseased) hemisphere, or half, of a person brain. Most people, if they are young enough especially, go on to live completely normal lives. That is an example right there of someone without half their brain functioning just fine. She may have had 20 percent of her brain left, but it may still have been enough for some rudimentary consciouness. No autopsy can tell for 100%, unless, say, it is ALL gone, which her’s wasn’t. Look up the medical facts, it is still an imprecise science, don’t make me go over the whole thing again.
scs
Yes I have taken over the GOP, you’re right. I have voted for so many Republican in my life and belong to the Moral Majority. Pleeease. Get a life dude, my opinions are my own. My main concern in this whole story is violence and dominace over women, hardly a GOP talking point.
scs
well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math.
Prime example of the scum that has taken over the GOP. Ignore the known facts and slime the opponent.
And besides Mike, those statemtns I made are techinically correct and part of the “known facts”. According to her autopsy, she DID collapse due to ‘undetermined’ reasons and Michael was the last to see her before it happened. Your problem is?
Mike S
Delusional.
scs
Sorry to keep posting here, but I can’t sleep and my cable is out until Saturday. Need to entertain myself somehow!
Anyway, FYI – In the interest of science, and since I am advancing a scenario here, I just put my pillow over my face for a few seconds to see how hard it was to breathe. I can tell you, I just put it over my face a little, hardly that forcefully at all, and was kind of surprised actually how VERY hard I found it to breathe, specially after the first few breaths after the air got sucked out of the pillow. I can totally see how someone could die or collapse that way after several minutes.
Okay, maybe I’m crazy here, but the best way to find out about these things is to try it yourself sometimes. (Caution, don’t try this at home unless supervised by a professional.)
scs
yeah Mike you got me there – what a great comeback. How did you learn such great debating skills?
Mike S
Anyway, FYI – In the interest of science, and since I am advancing a scenario here, I just put my pillow over my face for a few seconds to see how hard it was to breathe.
That is funny. The future of the GOP is bright with clowns like this in your corner.
As far as “debating” you? Might as well debate the homeless person on the corner screaming at his reflection in the window.
scs
Mike, you obviously do not get it. How many times do I have to tell people I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, gosh, what else….am not religious, belive in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc – do I need to go on? Do you get the picture now ?
Do I need to include that paragraph with every posting I make, like some sort of footnote? I guess so, cause I am getting tired of people trying to win the argument by just calling me a GOP partisan hack because they are not skilled enough to debate me on the merits of the argument.
*DICLAIMER -I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, I am not religious, believe in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc. All arguments listed above are the sole property of SCS. Any arguments similar to any GOP arguments, living or dead, is a coincidence, and not to be taken as an actual potrayal of actual GOP arguments.
Mike S
Riiiight. And you find Hannity and Coulter interesting and informative. Reminds me of all of those rediculous LTE’s a few years back.
“As a lifelong member of the Republican/Democratic party, I…”
scs
Hey I’m free thinker, what can I say? I can appreciate Al Franken and Hannity. I can read the New York Times (and I do) and watch Fox. I know that may be hard for you to believe as you might need a party to tell you what to think. I don’t. I say let a thousand flowers bloom man! Anyway, kind of hard to be a Republican when you only voted for one Republican in your life and dozens of local and national Dems.
*DISCLAIMER -I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, nationalized healthcare, I am not religious, believe in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc. All arguments listed above are the sole property of SCS. Any arguments similar to any GOP arguments, living or dead, is a coincidence, and not to be taken as an actual potrayal of actual GOP arguments.
scs
Well Mike, you are good for one thing. With all this knocking my head on a brick wall I did with you, you suceeded in tiring me out and making me want to sleep. Pleasant non-GOP dreams.
Sojourner
Yes, the operation involves removing half of the brain (left or right) depending on the source of the seizures. Note that the remaining half is intact, including the cerebral cortex. The operation is usually done on children whose brains are much more plastic than adults.
Terri Schiavo, in contrast, had little or none of her cerebral cortex left. The cerebral cortex is the center of consciousness and cognitive processing. All she had left was the part of the brain that keeps the body functioning.
Not at all the same thing.
smijer
… I see my plea for critical thinking, humility, and respect went unheard.
scs
Sojourner – I never heard Michael Schiavo accuse anyone of murder.
SCS – Hmmm, accusations of murder – well the girl did collapse for undetermined reasons, and Michael was the last to see her, you do the the math. Kind of hard to accuse anyone else of murder in that case.
You all need a reading comprehension class! That infamous statement that I made that everyone keeps quoting is part of a paragrah – read it in CONTEXT
The sentenceS referred to Soj’s assertion that Michael never accused anyone of murder. I replied in essence, well no, because it would be hard for Michael to do that since he was the last one to see Terri well.
The most I will give you is a double meaning that I used in the sentence to hint at my still continuing suspicions of Michael.
scs
Terri Schiavo, in contrast, had little or none of her cerebral cortex left.
I agree Soj. The point is, however, she had a LITTLE left. BUT HOW LITTLE? Too little to have any awareness or just maybe enough to have some? THAT is the important question. Brain scans don’t tell us the answers to this completely accurately yet. Look it up, any doctor will tell you that. It is still, at best, an educated guess. I say, why guess?
smijer
As the world must stop spinning if we don’t accuse someone of murder? And really, “the last one to see her well” only applies to Michael if, well, someone didn’t come in, assault her, and leave undetected; the logic doesn’t seem sound. I don’t think that anyone believes that this happened, and there being no evidence of anyone coming or going at the Schiavo house at 5:00 in the morning kind of leaves it silly-seeming to speculate that someone did. Kind of like it seems silly to speculate about someone assaulting her, when there’s no evidence that she was assaulted.
Because it really isn’t all that unlikely that he somehow assaulted her without leaving a mark, kept her alive for 70 minutes, then called 911 to see if they could come undo the damage that he had just done on purpose, and, that plan having failed, spent the next several years making sure she didn’t get the first bedsore and trying to get her rehabilitated to the point where she could testify against him. I fully understand your suspicions.
scs
Wow, little did I know that phrase would become the bestseller on here. You just never know what you’ll be remembered for. Once again, if you, smijer, didn’t read my explanatory post above, let me clarify AGAIN.
In fact, let me just cut and paste from above…
The sentenceS referred to Soj’s assertion that Michael never accused anyone of murder. I replied in essence, well no, because it would be hard for Michael to do that since he was the last one to see Terri well.
Do I have to explain further? Okay here goes…
Because the Schindlers, or anyone else for that matter besides Michael, were NOT at the scene of Terri’s collapse, it would be very difficult for Michael to accuse the Schindlers of trying to murder their daughter. If he did so, it would be ludicrous, even for him, since the Schindlers weren’t at the scene of the collapse. Hence, I think that to give credit to Michael for not accusing anyone else of murder is a false compliment, as Michael did not have a good OPPORTUNITY to be able to accuse anyone else of murder because there was no possible way that he could have done so, given the fact that it was widely known that there was no one at the scene of Terri’s collapse, besides himself. Get it now?
I don’t know how much more exactly I can explain it. Maybe diagramming the sentences will help you all. We can try that next.
Sojourner
Based on the observations of independent observers, she had no awareness and no cognitive functioning. What, then, is the point of keeping the body going?
No guessing here. You’re saying that you would want to keep a minimal consciousness trapped in a body with a mind incapable of supporting any interaction with the outside world? How creepy is that?
And you want to spend limited medical resources when so many who are fully functional go without? Where’s the morality in that?
scs
These independent observers do not have the power to see inside a human’s brain. Remember the cases of the Kansas girl and the firefighter who recovered some speech after many years? Apparently they had some awareness of their surroundings for a long time even though no one thought so. The firefighter was also diagnosed as PVS, not minimally conscious, by the way, which means the doctors took tests and observed and thought he had nothing going on in there. They were wrong. Like I said, its an inexact science still.
You are now changing your argument a little bit by the way. First you said, ‘well she had no consciousness, so it was okay to kill her’. Now youre saying, ‘ok, so what if she may have had some consciousness, we should still kill her anyway. Its not enough consciousness to interact with us regular humans, therefore its not good enough and so she must die.’
In a way, I actually think that’s a more honest argument from you. People are all so darn sure she had NO consciousness and I say we don’t know for 100% sure. I suppose then if you’re okay in guessing and drawing some arbitrary line at which point you kill someone then we should discuss what that line should be. But we shouldn’t pretend that there is this bright, indisputable line separating comatose, PVS, and minimally conscious patients and just admit its still just an educated guess.
And your last point, I think as a civilized society, we should strive to treat each patient to the best of our ability, not worry about some sliding scale. That’s where the morality lies.
Sojourner
Your examples are irrelevant unless you can demonstrate that they, too, were missing almost all of their cerebral cortex. If somebody were missing both their eyes, would you assume that it might be possible that, with time and therapy, they could see again? Because that’s exactly the argument you’re making about the cerebral cortex. And it’s false.
No, morality does not dictate keeping somebody alive who is so irreparably damaged. To be consistent with your argument, you must then demand that ERs keep people with flat EEGs alive. Are you really prepared to do that?
Are you prepared to pay the expenses of these gravely wounded people? Because I sure as hell haven’t heard any concern from you about the people who die every year because they don’t have health insurance that would have helped them catch illnesses before they became terminal.
The hypocrisy of the right-to-lifers never ceases to amaze.
scs
The hypocrisy of the forced-death-squad never ceases to amaze me!
I see I have to go back to my footnote I used earlier. See pro-abortion rights.
*DISCLAIMER -I am not a member of the GOP. I voted for Clinton, believe in abortion rights, maybe even drug legalzation, flag burning rights, progressive taxation, nationalized healthcare, I am not religious, believe in evolution, taking God out of the pledge etc. All arguments listed above are the sole property of SCS. Any arguments similar to any GOP arguments, living or dead, is a coincidence, and not to be taken as an actual potrayal of actual GOP arguments.
scs
You and the other posters on here have to learn how to debate. To debate well, you have to be able to take a broad principle and apply it to other situations. This is done to arrive at certain truths.
I brought up the example of the firefighter guy as an illustration of how doctors, even with all their tests and power of observations, can be very wrong in terms of judging brain funtion. That is the main point I tried to show. This point can then be applied to the larger truth – that brain science is still an inexact science.
Not, gee, did I look at his brain scans and compare them to Terris and in Terri’s case she had 20% intact and in his case he had 45% intact, blah, blah blah. That is getting bogged down in the wrong arena. I never claimed that Terri’s and the firefighters had the same injuries. I only attempted to show that doctors can make mistake.
You know I shouldn’t have to explain all this. And by the way, I won’t go into the argument that we have to kill some people so that others can get health insurance.
Sojourner
Oh bullshit. We just look at the science and draw conclusions based on that. The cerebral cortex supports consciousness and cognitive processing. If the cerebral cortex is largely missing, so will the functions it supports.
It’s really that simple.