KRC Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 OK...but its still up to her husband to make the decision, if thats what the law says. Someone else mentioned it...not sure here or somethere else.....The Republicans have been marching on this "Sanctity of Marriage" crutch for a while now. Well, here it is again, but the ugly side of it. Cant have it both ways, people. But, AS USUAL, people want to follow only the parts of the ideology that they agree with. 284959[/snapback] Well, the sanctity of marriage argument kinda falls apart when he moved on with his life and had children with another woman. The question I have, is how the law treats a couple which is separated. That is basically what their "marriage" is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 They have offered that. Her "husband" rejected it. Also a millionaire has offered to pay for her care.That too was rejected. Her "husband is scum on par with OJ and Robert Blake both killed their wives and got away with it. He will too. 284922[/snapback] Why do you want to keep her alive? She's a veggie! She will NOT GET BETTER! She has nothing to live for! If it was you, would YOU want to be kept alive in this state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Why do you want to keep her alive? She's a veggie! She will NOT GET BETTER! She has nothing to live for! 284974[/snapback] Who else has "nothing to live for"? Retarded people? Quadriplegics? Amputees? Is there anyone else we should start starving and dehydrating to death? If it was you, would YOU want to be kept alive in this state? I don't know - and neither does anyone else. No one knows what it's like to be in that state. Either she's so out of it that she has no concept of time or anything around here, and thus it doesn't hurt to keep her alive. Or she's conscious and thus very much aware of the fact that she hasn't received nourishment or water for five days now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 My mom said "think about this as if it was one of your sisters". (I have three older sisters). So I really did think about it. Well, I would let two of them pass away and one live on, in this terrible state. Why? Because I have talked to each of them. One said she wants to live, no matter what. The other two are in my shoes. If I cannot eat on my own, and acute medical procedures can't save me (meaning, sure they could keep me alive, but there's little to no chance they can help me recover), then let me go. When I go back to NY, we will all be making living wills, for just a case like this. 284818[/snapback] Living wills don't work in NYS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manateefan Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 What I find so amazing is that people are so willing to believe the worst of the husband. I'm not saying he is right to have the feeding tube removed, but why now after 15 years is he being accused of abuse? Why wasn't he accused then? There was no falling out with her parents until he received the malpractice settlement (which most of went for Terri's care) and he didn't give them any. My biggest problem with this whole situation is the way government (FL State Legislature, Jeb Bush, U.S. Congress, G.W.) has interfered. I don't like the fact that they jumped in even after this case had been looked at by 19 judges and a multitude of doctors who have stated that there is no hope for recovery from this vegetative state. The latest doctor who has stated that she is misdiagnosed just read her medical records and viewed the video tapes. He has not done an thorough examination of her. Is that the way to make a proper diagnosis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 What I find so amazing is that people are so willing to believe the worst of the husband. I'm not saying he is right to have the feeding tube removed, but why now after 15 years is he being accused of abuse? Why wasn't he accused then? There was no falling out with her parents until he received the malpractice settlement (which most of went for Terri's care) and he didn't give them any. My biggest problem with this whole situation is the way government (FL State Legislature, Jeb Bush, U.S. Congress, G.W.) has interfered. I don't like the fact that they jumped in even after this case had been looked at by 19 judges and a multitude of doctors who have stated that there is no hope for recovery from this vegetative state. 285313[/snapback] Nice post............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shameless Homer Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Well, the sanctity of marriage argument kinda falls apart when he moved on with his life and had children with another woman. The question I have, is how the law treats a couple which is separated. That is basically what their "marriage" is now. 284969[/snapback] This is brilliance non-pareil. Great point. His dominion over her life ended when he took on another "wife" and kids. Her parents should be the determinants of her fate. Starving someone to death. Unbephukinbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Living wills don't work in NYS. 285271[/snapback] Sure they do. Health Care Decisionmaking and Declarations in New York. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Sure they do. Health Care Decisionmaking and Declarations in New York. 285337[/snapback] What I heard on the radio this morning is that the expert they had on said "living wills" in NY won't usually do the job, but rather naming a health care overseer in the event of a catastrophic illness would be more beneficial to fullfilling your wishes, whatever they may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 What I heard on the radio this morning is that the expert they had on said "living wills" in NY won't usually do the job, but rather naming a health care overseer in the event of a catastrophic illness would be more beneficial to fullfilling your wishes, whatever they may be. 285351[/snapback] Legally binding or not a living will at least documents your personal wishes so as to leave no doubt as to what you want. Of course, Terri's parents stated in court that they'd go to any length and cost to keep her alive, even if it was against her wishes, so maybe it would not have done too much good here except to end the external debate over Michael using this as a money grab/save. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 What I don't like is how they are going about following those wishes. Starving someone to death (no matter what their brain condition is in) is inhumane. 284707[/snapback] Exactly my sentiments. Branching off... That is why I will never be an opponent of food stamps, not matter how bad the situation looks. Sure the system gets abused, yet if it staves off starvation or malnutrition for one person, it is worth it. That doesn't mean I will not judge someone's lack of will power to not stop eating themselves into obesity. Sorry for the tangent... Again, I am torn. I have to put the law and choice in the HUSBANDS hands over the parents. That is what the law has recognized for sometime. Correct me... In today's age, it is in the SPOUSE'S hands. I am not saying I would NOT act like the parents... It is just that I would have recognized and saw the futility of Terry's life on earth. Spirtually and spiritually as a Catholic I know God would grant me forgiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 What I find so amazing is that people are so willing to believe the worst of the husband. I'm not saying he is right to have the feeding tube removed, but why now after 15 years is he being accused of abuse? Why wasn't he accused then? There was no falling out with her parents until he received the malpractice settlement (which most of went for Terri's care) and he didn't give them any. My biggest problem with this whole situation is the way government (FL State Legislature, Jeb Bush, U.S. Congress, G.W.) has interfered. I don't like the fact that they jumped in even after this case had been looked at by 19 judges and a multitude of doctors who have stated that there is no hope for recovery from this vegetative state. The latest doctor who has stated that she is misdiagnosed just read her medical records and viewed the video tapes. He has not done an thorough examination of her. Is that the way to make a proper diagnosis? 285313[/snapback] It is a nice post! Just goes to show you that there is no honor amongst people. Even the powers that be that claim to be honorable. They just will not accept the rule of law and march on. Our leaders and especially the ones now (you think I wasn't gonna leave with a partisan shot? ) are worse than little kids. They just can't except when things don't go their way. Too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Well, the sanctity of marriage argument kinda falls apart when he moved on with his life and had children with another woman. The question I have, is how the law treats a couple which is separated. That is basically what their "marriage" is now. 284969[/snapback] He is still legally married to her right? Then the laws still apply, no matter how bad the marriage has become. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 He is still legally married to her right? Then the laws still apply, no matter how bad the marriage has become. 285571[/snapback] Good for him. I hope that bastard rots in hell. Enjoy the money, Schiavo. You can't take it with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted March 24, 2005 Author Share Posted March 24, 2005 Good for him. I hope that bastard rots in hell. Enjoy the money, Schiavo. You can't take it with you. 285592[/snapback] UGH...he's not making any money off this! Stop buying into the media! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 UGH...he's not making any money off this! Stop buying into the media! 285778[/snapback] The media is saying he is broke. They say he has no money, and that is BS. Do the research, he is saying it was only a million dollars. He doesn't talk about the life insurance, nor is he telling the truth on the awards. The total on the awards was between 2.25 and 2.5 million. With only 950K spent, most on lawyers there is still about 1.5 million there plus the 1 million to come. Fine if you believe it isn't about money, thats great, and maybe it isn't but there sure is a lot of money left that he chooses not to discusss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 UGH...he's not making any money off this! Stop buying into the media! 285778[/snapback] How much will he get in movie and book deals when she passes? What will he do with the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 (edited) High Court just refused to order re-insertion. Funny that the same people who rail against "activist judges" are the ones who want those same judges to ignore state's rights and legislate from the bench in this case by saying that the choice doesn't belong to the husband. Watch them get pissy, as with every time they don't get their way 100 percent, even when it's against the codified law. Godspeed, Teri. ----- VA, I'm sure you can tell us where exactly the money went and what bank it's in. You are, after all, Michael Schiavo's personal accountant, doing the books by what you see in media articles. Edited March 24, 2005 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 High Court just refused to order re-insertion. Funny that the same people who rail against "activist judges" are the ones who want those same judges to ignore state's rights and legislate from the bench in this case by saying that the choice doesn't belong to the husband. Watch them get pissy, as with every time they don't get their way 100 percent, even when it's against the codified law. Godspeed, Teri. 285821[/snapback] Yup, and the codified law in Florida says assisted suicide and euthenasia are not permitted. But go ahead and continue ignoring the Florida laws and their constitution, hell all the lawyers and judges are as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Because of this situation, I guarantee that some of us on this board will be "allowed to die" when we are old. This is the beginning of a slippery slope. Grandma is senile? -starve her. Grandpa is a quadrapelegic?- starve him. Got to make room in the nursing homes for all of us baby boomers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts