Schiavo Dies.

http//www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/31/schiavo/index.html

sad.

I don't mean to be rude because this is not a topic to laugh about, but I just thought your typo....shicavo? lol, nots a bit off, even for a typo. Sorry, don't mean to be an ass

[quoteef1055a46b="glacier505"]I don't mean to be rude because this is not a topic to laugh about, but I just thought your typo....shicavo? lol, nots a bit off, even for a typo. Sorry, don't mean to be an ass[/quoteef1055a46b]

haha i noticed that too, i changed it BEFORE you said that tho ;-)

We now know that there is no checks/balances on the Judicial system in our country.

She wasnt even on life support for fucks sake.
They just starved her to death.

It's sick.

Shoulda watched the South Park last night...it was enlightening ;)

[quote1c058cb394="FreeOffersNow"]Shoulda watched the South Park last night...it was enlightening ;)[/quote1c058cb394]
LOL it was a good one

agreed, wood.

To be honest with you i feel relieved for her she is in a better place...i dont think i would want to live like that for 15yrs. I mean if i cant feed myself and respond to people i think i would want to die. God Bless her she is no longer suffering.

Blah blah, right to refuse treatment...

Blah blah, bodily integrity...

Blah blah, deference to court's first-hand findings...

Blah blah, undermining the purpose of of the courts.



Tired of hearing about it. Happens every single day. Tragic situation co-opted by a skittish public, sensationalist media, and opportunistic lawmakers.

Skittish public?

My prayers are with her and her family.

I just hope that people realize that living wills are very important and that you should have one if possible.

[quote727639b7ef="wood"]Skittish public?[/quote727639b7ef]

Yes. As a story, this wouldn't have gotten nearly as much traction but for the public's unswerving ability to get worked up and spooked so easily.

[quotec47207f78c="xs10shul"][quotec47207f78c="wood"]Skittish public?[/quotec47207f78c]

Yes. As a story, this wouldn't have gotten nearly as much traction but for the public's unswerving ability to get worked up and spooked so easily.[/quotec47207f78c]


You seem like one of the more intelligent members of this forum.

Do tell, what is your opinion? Was this the right course?

[quoteb37b2902fc="nate08"]My prayers are with her and her family.

I just hope that people realize that living wills are very important and that you should have one if possible.[/quoteb37b2902fc]

Living wills actually aren't all that useful. They can't possibly cover every contingency (though lawyers don't mind the billable hours making them), and are therefore deficient.

A better document is a durable medical power of attorney, in which you give your medical decisions over to a person or persons. That way, everything is covered no matter the situation.

[quote7002b6331b="Stroid"]To be honest with you i feel relieved for her she is in a better place...i dont think i would want to live like that for 15yrs. I mean if i cant feed myself and respond to people i think i would want to die. God Bless her she is no longer suffering.[/quote7002b6331b]

yes. but would you watn to die from 13 days of starvation? I wouldn't, I would want them to put a gun to my head or something fast..

You do know she felt no pain in the starvation correct? After being in that state for as long as she has, all of your senses of hunger/metal abilities/urinary/pain itself go away. She didn't feel any of this so it wasn't hurting her. My sister is a nurse and told me this.

What the husband did was correct, while I wish there hadn't been that whole lawful dispute about it and the media blew it way out of proportion.

I feel for the families loss but please remember she wasn't feeling ANY pain at all. She was at a hospice, that's their job.

Uh...Your sister is a dirty liar.

Cracked lips and a bleeding tounge are painful.
She wasnt in a coma and she wasnt on life support...she was breathing on her own...

She was alive.

[quote70d84f4b63="wood"]Uh...Your sister is a dirty liar.[/quote70d84f4b63]

Ouch.

Maybe going a little too far, guys?

LoL. it was sarcastic.

shes not a dirty liar...probably just misinformed.

Actually guys, it true -- her cerebral cortex was literally mush. It had literally turned to liquid. Her brain did not process pain just like it didn't process anything else. Doctors said that she had lost virtually any sensations long ago.

Under our laws, mercy killing and assisted suicide are illegal. ALL that can be legally and ethically be done is to take a person off of life support and let nature take it's course. That's why they had to do it that way. 15 years is entirely too long to live like that, the poor woman should have been allowed to die a long, long time ago. I have sympathy for her parents and understand their mourning and not wanting to let go, but quite honestly they were just being selfish.

I'm with x10shul on this one... too much of a political grandstanding that went on with this round of feed tube removal (there were previous battles over removing the feeding tube).

Personally, it's a matter of quality of life vs. the actual living part. Yes, she was alive, but what kind of life was it? Relying on people you may or may not recognize to come and visit you for 15 years while you are alive in breathing mode only?? That's not the kind of life I would want and it sounds like that's not the kind of life she wanted. A power of attorney and/or a will would have helped prevent a lot of this wasted court battle b.s.

She didn't want to be kept alive this long. After 2-3 years, there was obvious signs she would never improve.

It's sad to see anyone die, but it's even sadder to keep someone alive for the sake of personal gain and wishful thinking.

[quoteb4b450a423="dmorris68"] ALL that can be legally and ethically be done is to take a person off of life support and let nature take it's course.[/quoteb4b450a423]


liNews Flashli ! She wasn't on lifesupport ! liNews Flashli

She was on a feeding tube, thats all.
It may not seem like it to you, but there is a HUGE difference between the two.


Her brain was well enough to keep her breathing on her own.
That says A LOT.

[quoteb8b9fedfeb="wood"]liNews Flashli ! She wasn't on lifesupport ! liNews Flashli

She was on a feeding tube, thats all.
It may not seem like it to you, but there is a HUGE difference between the two.


Her brain was well enough to keep her breathing on her own.
That says A LOT.[/quoteb8b9fedfeb]

Excuse me? A feeding tube IS a form of life support. Any external device connected in order to sustain life is by definition life support. When a person cannot breathe on their own, they put 'em on a ventilator. When they can't eat, they're on a feeding tube. The term "pulling the plug" is a euphamism for dismantling ANY form of life support. The only difference between the two is the manner in which support is rendered. Sorry, but you're wrong.

[quote95bee321fd="wood"][quote95bee321fd="dmorris68"] ALL that can be legally and ethically be done is to take a person off of life support and let nature take it's course.[/quote95bee321fd]


liNews Flashli ! She wasn't on lifesupport ! liNews Flashli

She was on a feeding tube, thats all.
It may not seem like it to you, but there is a HUGE difference between the two.


Her brain was well enough to keep her breathing on her own.
That says A LOT.[/quote95bee321fd]

yea. i still think she felt pain. either way it's wicked.. why all of the sudden did her husband want to take her off after 15 years?? because he wanted the $$

now it's all about money. not life. and it was proven that she would most likely be able to recover if she had some therapeutic things done to her, but her husband didn't want to pay for it, why? because once again $$

EatChex, her husband tried to take her off life support 7 years ago. The parents fought it then, so he backed off. Then again 2 years ago. Her husband isn't the only person saying she didn't want to live like this. Her best friend said the same thing.

It's hard to judge folks until you've been where they are. All we know is what we're fed by the media. Let's not be so quick to jump to conclusions.

[quotef1311e482e="EatChex89"]yea. i still think she felt pain. either way it's wicked.. why all of the sudden did her husband want to take her off after 15 years?? because he wanted the $$

now it's all about money. not life. and it was proven that she would most likely be able to recover if she had some therapeutic things done to her, but her husband didn't want to pay for it, why? because once again $$[/quotef1311e482e]
Actually, it WASN'T about the $$$. The lawsuit the husband did years ago... he took none of the money. All of the money went to care for Terri. Even her parents had to reluctantly admit that, even though they pushed it under the rug for a long time.

For the first 7 years, he pursued options to try to see if she would get better. When it was evident, he then decided it was best to fulfill her wishes that she didn't want to remain alive in a permanent vegatative state.

His appearance on the news magazine TV show (I think it was 60 Minutes) showed him as a pretty decent guy just fulfilling his spouse's wishes.

This is why legal documents stating what your wishes are when you are capable of deciding are so important. If there's any positive thing to come from this whole granstanding fiasco is to encourage people to get their wishes documented and legalized.

[quoteaf4bf51e8b="chillywilly"][quoteaf4bf51e8b="EatChex89"]yea. i still think she felt pain. either way it's wicked.. why all of the sudden did her husband want to take her off after 15 years?? because he wanted the $$

now it's all about money. not life. and it was proven that she would most likely be able to recover if she had some therapeutic things done to her, but her husband didn't want to pay for it, why? because once again $$[/quoteaf4bf51e8b]
Actually, it WASN'T about the $$$. The lawsuit the husband did years ago... he took none of the money. All of the money went to care for Terri. Even her parents had to reluctantly admit that, even though they pushed it under the rug for a long time.

For the first 7 years, he pursued options to try to see if she would get better. When it was evident, he then decided it was best to fulfill her wishes that she didn't want to remain alive in a permanent vegatative state.

His appearance on the news magazine TV show (I think it was 60 Minutes) showed him as a pretty decent guy just fulfilling his spouse's wishes.

This is why legal documents stating what your wishes are when you are capable of deciding are so important. If there's any positive thing to come from this whole granstanding fiasco is to encourage people to get their wishes documented and legalized.[/quoteaf4bf51e8b]

ah okay. well still. it's sad the way they killed her, they could have injected her or something instead of starvation.. starvation just seems so cruel whether she could feel the pain or not..

[quote4c87bccd29="EatChex89"]ah okay. well still. it's sad the way they killed her, they could have injected her or something instead of starvation.. starvation just seems so cruel whether she could feel the pain or not..[/quote4c87bccd29]
I agree... it was sad the way she went. Hopefully, as some of the doctors mentioned, she didn't feel any of the pain.

I would have rather an injection happened.. something more humane. But in the end, it's good to see that the various grandstanders didn't get their way. What a waste of government resources.

[quote2b63887d0a="wood"]LoL. it was sarcastic.

shes not a dirty liar...probably just misinformed.[/quote2b63887d0a]
What the fuck dude. Be quiet. She's gone through five years of college and will be going out to San Diego to be a Navy nurse. Don't even think you can call her "misinformed".

And don't try to cover up you were being "sarcastic", usually that implies a smilie or a j/k.

Again let me say this again

She was NOT feeling any pain. Pain is something your brain interprets from the nerves in your body. If your brain does not function correctly, and in her case this was true, than the receptor from the nerves will not function.

Also breating is an involuntary action, you don't control it. Just like the heart beat, thats why not everyone who is on life support (yes a feeding tube is "supporting your life") needs a respirator.

In way she was "dead" already, but atleast she is "officially" dead now, she can go R.I.P. now

[quotec8233f61c0="wood"]Uh...Your sister is a dirty liar.

Cracked lips and a bleeding tounge are painful.
She wasnt in a coma and she wasnt on life support...she was breathing on her own...

She was alive.[/quotec8233f61c0]

Wood, I actually agree with you on this completely. This was disgusting and totally in-humane. To decide that she should die because WE wouldn't want to live like that is just wrong in every way. And truthfully, you don't know whether you'd want to live like that or not unless you actually end up like that.

It's easy to say you'd rather be dead now while you're totally healthy. But what if something happened to you and you were in her situation and realized that you still wanted to live but couldn't tell anyone. Then they all just decided you'd be better off dead because it seems so bad to them. Of course being an invalid is going to look bad to us, the healthy. But if it was the only option for an existence for you it may not seem so bad.

All of this is just my opinion, but it is what I believe in this situation. That being said, I do agree that the case was blown out of proportion. This should not have received the national media coverage that it got. This should have been handled in private with as little media attention as possible. It quickly became a way for all the media-whores to get on the news (Jessie Jackson, etc.). This poor woman's fate should have been kept as a private matter. At least that would have given her some respect.

Okay. You guys are a bunch of children, do you know that?



[quote808b4a779f="dmorris68"] Excuse me? A feeding tube IS a form of life support. Any external device connected in order to sustain life is by definition life support. When a person cannot breathe on their own, they put 'em on a ventilator. When they can't eat, they're on a feeding tube. The term "pulling the plug" is a euphamism for dismantling ANY form of life support. The only difference between the two is the manner in which support is rendered. Sorry, but you're wrong.[/quote808b4a779f]

You are such an ignorant piece of crap.

[quote808b4a779f="Doh004"] She was NOT feeling any pain. Pain is something your brain interprets from the nerves in your body. If your brain does not function correctly, and in her case this was true, than the receptor from the nerves will not function.
Also breating is an involuntary action, you don't control it. Just like the heart beat, thats why not everyone who is on life support (yes a feeding tube is "supporting your life") needs a respirator.[/quote808b4a779f]

And so are you.


Terri Schiavo ha s[b808b4a779f] never had an MRI or a PET scan [/b808b4a779f], nor a thorough neurological examination.
She is not brain-dead or comatose, and breathes naturally on her own. Although brain-damaged, she is not in a persistent vegetative state, according to an increasing number of radiologists and neurologists.

The courts . . . have also ordered that no attempts be made to provide her water or food by mouth. Terri swallows her own saliva. [b808b4a779f] Spoon feeding is not medical treatment. [/b808b4a779f]


Why dont you do a little research before you believe everything your secretary of a sister has to say?

[b808b4a779f] "A brain damaged person would feel it [dehydration] just as you and I would [/b808b4a779f] . . . . Their skin cracks, their tongue cracks, their lips crack. They may have nosebleeds because of the drying of the mucous membranes, and heaving and vomiting might ensue because of the drying out of the stomach lining.
They feel the pangs of hunger and thirst. Imagine going one day without a glass of water! . . . It is an extremely agonizing death."



Wow, a two minute search on this new thing called GOOGLE provides a quote from a world renowned neurologist disputing everything your sister just said.


I dont care if i'm being rude or over the top right now.
Its [b808b4a779f] ignorant SHEEP [/b808b4a779f]like you guys who believe whatever you see on primetime news.
[u808b4a779f]
She WAS feeling pain.
SPOON FEEDING IS NOT MEDICAL TREATMENT.
SHE SWALLOWS ON HER OWN. [/u808b4a779f]

ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG x x x

yeah jesse jackson makes money of the unfortunate what a jackass... i feel he used Dr.King to make money when Dr. King was an actual hero

[quote7565be7c88="wood"]I dont care if i'm being rude or over the top right now.
Its ignorant SHEEP like you guys who believe whatever you see on primetime news.

She WAS feeling pain.
SPOON FEEDING IS NOT MEDICAL TREATMENT.
SHE SWALLOWS ON HER OWN.

ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG [/quote7565be7c88]

I agree with you again. Unfortunately, some of the kids here just prefer to bask in their own ignorance rather than reading up on the subject. This whole thing disgusted me from the very start. What's even worse is how these kids are trivializing it. I had a friend who asked me if I wanted to get into a betting pool for her date of death for Christ's sake. I was so disappointed in him that I can't even express it in words.

Well I'm not going to be dragged into a flamefest with such an immature jackass, but I will say this

You're incredibly ignorant. Allow me to elaborate.

[quote6b236afcfb] Although brain-damaged, she is not in a persistent vegetative state, according to an increasing number of radiologists and neurologists. [/quote6b236afcfb]

Where do you get this stuff? Only ONE doctor has gone on record as saying she's not in PVS. And he's a controversial doctor who's been called a quack by just about every other doctor who knows him. Show me this "increasing number of radiologist (?) and neurologists." Do you even know what a radiologist is?

The courts have assigned doctors who have agreed with the diagnosis. The parents have [b6b236afcfb]lost over 30 court judgements[/b6b236afcfb] in the last 7 years and have [b6b236afcfb]not won a single one.[/b6b236afcfb] Hello? Are all of the courts and doctors involved just not as smart as you, or what?

That's it for me, I'm done with this thread. When you grow some hair on your willy and decide that you're old enough for grown-up conversation, I'll be here.

Everybody is entitled to their opinions, and this is an emotionally charged case to be sure, but you're just being stupid and disrespectful of other people's legitimate opinions.

However sad it is, I believe that she has finally got her wish. I for one know that I would not want to live in a PVS. I'm sure she didn't want all of this attention. What's sad is that this debate will go on for months more. I think everyone should let her rest in peace. I don't want to go into the politics of it, such as how there are NO checks and balances and Congress overstepped the Judicial branch.

There are about a dozen legal and ethical issues here, but I'll preface this by saying that if you have not yet read the lower court's findings, do not presume to know the facts of the case. The media has done an abysmal job of presenting the Court's findings, and if you have a strong opinion, you owe it to yourself to read them.

Original decision
Denial of petition
FL Ct. of Appeals
FL Supreme Court denial of cert

Now a word on how this process works. Subject to state law (as nearly all family law is) the courts look to certain evidence when determining these issues. First, they look for legal documents. In the absence of those, they look either to the patient's biological family, or the spouse, or the guardian, and sometimes all of them put together. It varies. In Florida, for example, they look to the spouse first, and in Indiana, they look to the biological family. Then there's the standard of proof, which is usually either clear and convincing evidence (CCE), which is a fairly high standard, or preponderance of the evidence, which is a lower standard (>=51% certainty). In Florida, they use the CCE standard.

That said, cases like this invoke the common law right to refuse treatment, itself derived also from the 14th Amendment Due Process clause substantive liberty interest. In short, you have the right to refuse life-saving medical treatment for yourself over and against the wishes of everyone, including the State. If you have cancer and there's a treatment that might save your life, you cannot be compelled to accept that treatment. Anything less, it's felt, would unconstitutionally infringe upon one's liberty and right to personal autonomy. It's easy to imagine cases in which a treatment carries with it a 10-20% chance of saving a patient, but is also extremely painful and invasive. By saying there's such a right to refuse treatment, one is reserving this most private and fundamental decision for the individual.

Often, however, patients are not always capable of making such decisions, and someone else must carry out the wishes of the patient. In the sad case where there is a dispute over those wishes, someone with standing can appeal to the court and a trial will ensue. During that trial, both parties present their best evidence, and in particularly acrimonious suits, such as this one, the Court will also appoint specialists of their own. Courts also will sometimes appoint a Guardian ad litem, an independent party, often an attorney, who will investigate and advocate separately on behalf of the patient.

Once the Court makes its decision, the fact-finding phase is largely over. This is the case in pretty much any civil or criminal trial, but it's worth underscoring that, except under rare circumstances, one does not retry the facts, nor does a reviewing court second-guess the fact-finder. Why? Because there is a principle in our legal system that "the one who hears should decide." The fact-finder, and not a reviewing court, can see the expressions on the faces of the witnesses, hear their vocal inflections, and otherwise act as an eye-witness... to the witnesses. Additionally, reviewing courts do not often retry the same facts. Mostly, that's because retrying the same facts doesn't mean one gets more truth--in fact the opposite is usually the case. One can't keep retrying a case over and over until they get the result they want. It's neither practical, nor does it advance the administration of justice

[added Florida state law treats "life support" and feeding/hydration tubes as identical.]

In the case at hand, the trial court reviewed all of the evidence, including court-appointed experts selected by both sides, and many witnesses. By clear and convincing evidence, the Court held that Terry's wishes were to not be forced to accept life-sustaining procedures and treatments in a case such as this. The testimony came from several different parties. Additionally, there was no question as to her persistent vegetative state. Her cerebrum was 2/3 spinal fluid and her lower functions only sustained by the fact that her brain stem was the only part of her brain that remained. She is not technically "brain dead" only for her stem, but she is not in a coma. She will not revive, ever, and her condition will only worsen, if possible. Her EEG was flatline... unlike some in a PVS, she had absolutely no higher or mid-level brain activity going on. Testimony independent of Terry's husband clearly showed that she would not like to be forced to receive treatment in such a state. Additionally a CAT scan, which is the primary tool that neuologists use for determining brain damage and shows the physical landscape of the brain, indicated that her brain is largely gone and replaced by spinal fluid. Other types of scans are both unnecessary and not recommended by the profession. The briefs from the AMA and others can tell you this.

You all know the rest, I hope. I have much more to say, but this is plenty to chew on. It's worth noting that applying the law to particular cases is the job of the courts, and not legislatures, whose job is to draft laws of general applicability. Congress and the Florida executive and legislative branches stepping in constituted a breach of separation of powers. It is simply not their job to decide particular cases. It undermines the entire court system to believe otherwise. The hearer must decide, and the decision must have finality. If not, then there is no "court system" at all.

Again, read the case. Read the facts. Stop opining without evidentiary support or drawing conclusions based on your own lay medical and legal opinions.

[quoteffd653fa0e="xs10shul"]Blah blah, right to refuse treatment...

Blah blah, bodily integrity...

Blah blah, deference to court's first-hand findings...

Blah blah, undermining the purpose of of the courts.



Tired of hearing about it. Happens every single day. Tragic situation co-opted by a skittish public, sensationalist media, and opportunistic lawmakers.[/quoteffd653fa0e]


werd

[quoted3fff1da82="dmorris68"]Show me this "increasing number of radiologist (?) and neurologists." Do you even know what a radiologist is? [/quoted3fff1da82]

why did you put a (?) next to radiologists?
Is that because you have no idea what it is, and how one could be of importance in this situation?

Let me guess, you think its someone who takes the pictures of your broken arm?
"the x-ray thingy doctor?"

Yea...Im not suprised...

In reality (you know...the world where most of us reside) a radiologist is a medically qualified doctor who specialises in the use of imaging techniques INCLUDING MR's and CT's.

Thanks for proving me right...
You are a brianless asswipe. Maybe we should do YOU a favor and lock you in a room and starve you to death?

[quoted3fff1da82="dmorris"]
The courts have assigned doctors who have agreed with the diagnosis. The parents have [bd3fff1da82]lost over 30 court judgements[/bd3fff1da82] in the last 7 years and have [bd3fff1da82]not won a single one.[/bd3fff1da82] Hello? Are all of the courts and doctors involved just not as smart as you, or what?
[/quoted3fff1da82]

The fact that she went on all those years without getting her feeding stopped proves that more then one person feels that way.
But you don't have to take my word for it...look for yourself...

OMGWTFHAX[=http//www.google.com/]OMGWTFHAX

[quoted3fff1da82="dmorris"] That's it for me, I'm done with this thread. When you grow some hair on your willy and decide that you're old enough for grown-up conversation, I'll be here.[/quoted3fff1da82]

Telling someone to "grow some hair on your willy" is what you consider a grown up convorsation?

uh... roll...

Alright guys that enough with the flaming...people are gonna see this issue diffrently if you guys cant talk maturly i will lock this thread act like adults

No offense, but who really cares? Her husband would know the best for her. If anyone knows what she'd want best it's the husband. Anyone that's even been married or in a really serious relationship would know that the spouse knows her better then anyone....

Christ it's been what 15 years?

Like someone said earlier, shit like this happens everyday. They just don't make it on CNN.

[quotef1d8d0d10c="bballp6699"]No offense, but who really cares? Her husband would know the best for her. If anyone knows what she'd want best it's the husband. Anyone that's even been married or in a really serious relationship would know that the spouse knows her better then anyone....

Christ it's been what 15 years?

Like someone said earlier, shit like this happens everyday. They just don't make it on CNN.[/quotef1d8d0d10c]


Her husband knows what's best for her?
The man has currently fathered two other children with a different woman who he's been living with for a while now. roll

I think the parents are the people who should make the final discision...

but regardles...there was ZERO paperwork (living will, medical rights transfered, etc) in this situation...
So in all actuality, she should have been left alive...it was no ones decision..

I'm not arguing that she would have wanted to die.

All i'm saying is that there is no true evidence she wouldn't have wanted to live like this...

I also disagreed with the "she felt no pain" comment, because thats definatly not true.

Im sorry if I got angry, but it's just so frustrating how this turned into the ringling bros thread all the sudden.

[quotee12f1c680a="wood"]
The man has currently fathered two other children with a different woman who he's been living with for a while now. roll.[/quotee12f1c680a]

There are issues about which one can quibble in this case, but I've never understood this criticism. His wife was put into a permanently unconscious state, and after some years, he wanted companionship. Was he supposed to remain celibate and alone... forego a family? Judgments like these are odd to make unless one has been in his shoes.

[quote6d0208f1bc="wood"]
Im sorry if I got angry, but it's just so frustrating how this turned into the ringling bros thread all the sudden.[/quote6d0208f1bc]

It's ok, I know how emotional you get....

Here here.....

P

How about the fact that he wouldnt let the parents in to the room for Terri's final moments?
Is that questionable too?

Props xs10shul, I've haven't put that much opinion into the case since I didn't know much about it besides what's been filtered through the media (and through the rumors), so it's nice to see some court documents.

[quote9bea1bf7e9="wood"]How about the fact that he wouldnt let the parents in to the room for Terri's final moments?
Is that questionable too?[/quote9bea1bf7e9]

Citation?

[quote44f6371490="xs10shul"][quote44f6371490="wood"]
The man has currently fathered two other children with a different woman who he's been living with for a while now. roll.[/quote44f6371490]

There are issues about which one can quibble in this case, but I've never understood this criticism. His wife was put into a permanently unconscious state, and after some years, he wanted companionship. Was he supposed to remain celibate and alone... forego a family? Judgments like these are odd to make unless one has been in his shoes.[/quote44f6371490]

I completely agree and

[quote44f6371490="wood"]
How about the fact that he wouldnt let the parents in to the room for Terri's final moments?
Is that questionable too? [/quote44f6371490]

As far as i understand they were allowed in the room during the last few hours of her life. This has turned into a he said she said battle.

I'm just glad its over. No more people exploiting her for political gain, on EITHER side. No more shameless big media lining their pockets with this story. Its disgusting. There's no such thing as dignity in life and death any more, because somebody, somewhere will exploit it and turn it into a "scandal." Call it the Oprah-fication of our country.

[quote5ba8f8c1cf="Stroid"]As far as i understand they were allowed in the room during the last few hours of her life. This has turned into a he said she said battle.[/quote5ba8f8c1cf]


wrong.
Even his (michael schiavo's) lawyer admitted they werent allowed in during her final minutes.
He wouldn't let them...

[quote823a64f114="wood"]Why dont you do a little research before you believe everything your secretary of a sister has to say?[/quote823a64f114]
shock

You little fucking prick.

You searched google. My sister has 5 years of college behind her. 5 years of nursing classes, human anatomy classes, a fucking college degree and certified by the US Navy. Worked in at least 4 different hospitals, working with patients like Terry.

So don't you even fucking think you can call my sister a "secretary".

I have now lost all respect for you, you little twat face.

[quote8026518ae5="wood"][quote8026518ae5="Stroid"]As far as i understand they were allowed in the room during the last few hours of her life. This has turned into a he said she said battle.[/quote8026518ae5]


wrong.
Even his (michael schiavo's) lawyer admitted they werent allowed in during her final minutes.
He wouldn't let them...[/quote8026518ae5]

I said as far as i understand indicating i wasnt sure. But like i said earlier this is like an abortion debate nobody ever wins them

[quote527c5f6bbf="Doh004"]
You little fucking prick.
...
You little twat face.[/quote527c5f6bbf]

Which is it? Prick or Twat?

Can't have it both ways toots lol

[quoteafd876848d="Doh004"][quoteafd876848d="wood"]Why dont you do a little research before you believe everything your secretary of a sister has to say?[/quoteafd876848d]
shock

You little fucking prick.

You searched google. My sister has 5 years of college behind her. 5 years of nursing classes, human anatomy classes, a fucking college degree and certified by the US Navy. Worked in at least 4 different hospitals, working with patients like Terry.

So don't you even fucking think you can call my sister a "secretary".

I have now lost all respect for you, you little twat face.[/quoteafd876848d]

Stroid, lock the thread. This is getting really stupid already.

Agreed...Locked

ditto