posted March 19, 2005 01:36 AM            

I can see it now from Congress:

"Yes, we are quite aware of the fact that Rev. John Doe has raped and viciously murdered 50 children in the boys home and after letting him go for the sixth time of doing it and is caught again once more, only this vital and disturbing question only comes to my mind:

How can you(as a good Christain)not forgive this man and rather order a stay of execution to a direct servent of God's?"

Would this all sound reasonable to anybody?

That right there is an abuse of power and that's why we need to enforce that right of protecting this great system! It's cases like this that bring it all to the test, I would hate to see the day were a judge is faced with:

"Well you sure didn't want to let Rev. Doe go, but it was sure OK that you back right down to the case once we ordered a subpoena for that Terri Schiavo, right?

Why should this case be any different?"

And this is where I would fear it can go if Judge Greer doesn't "nip that in the bud" and put his foot down right away, it would only get out of hand!

Before you know it, it would go as this:

"Well yes, we reconise that he was a racist, but we also know that he made all his claims under the name of Jesus, before set fire to entire neighborhoods with napalm!"

To:

"Absolutly sir, this man should be condemned to death for conspiring a terroristic act on the downtown city of Los Angeles with an uranium capsule, but we also know that he has found Jesus in prison!

Now we offer to make a plee bargan in order to save this poor soul by making an exchange of these 50 Muslims that we found that was caught praying openly under that name of "Allah" and we require them to recieve a ordered issue of deployment for this faceless act..."

I mean, can anybody see where this would all go?!

In my heart, I think that more people would suffer, more by the untimely fate of Terri Schiavo, then even by the capture of Osama bin Laden or Homeland Security!

I got a kick out of this part of the artical that you've linked us to Petron: "House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, told reporters in Washington that removal of the tube amounted to "barbarism" that the hearings would at least temporarily prevent.

"Terry Schiavo is alive. She's as alive as you and I. As such, we have a moral obligation to protect and defend her," DeLay said. "This is not over."

Yeah, right, like Delay should know about all those things like barbarism and morals!

Why do people are to be so eagar in this country to desire they're legal protection to be possibly removed by the government over one person in this country? What, do all think that she's the only one that's ever had her plug pulled ever, how many others right now is suffering that same fate? Best yet, I'm hurt more about another female that used to live in Florida not long ago, let's try crying for Jessica Marie Lunsford, yeah I know, Republicans can't make her a political agenda, I guess back over in Texas the Bushes would call that a "Blown Dust"!

posted March 19, 2005 03:51 AM            

The thing that congress tried to do today, will never ever work, that's like trying bark up a tree by digging underground towards it's roots, you can either get tangled, smothered or the tree could die! It's best and easier to swing from branch to branch and is less messy!

The Supreme Court has already overturned the case once before from government intervention, I don't think that they're hearts can be won over so soon for it and that still can mean that over an illegal action against the judical system at large!

posted March 22, 2005 12:22 AM            

STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY OF PINELLAS )

BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared CARLA
SAUER IYER, R.N., who being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. My name is Carla Sauer Iyer. I am over the age of eighteen and make this statement of my own personal knowledge.

2. I am a registered nurse in the State of Florida, having been licensed continuously in Florida from 1997 to the present. Prior to that I was a Licensed Practical Nurse for about four years.

3. I was employed at Palm Garden of Largo Convalescent Center in Largo, Florida from April 1995 to July 1996, while Terri Schiavo was a patient there.

4. It was clear to me at Palm Gardens that all decisions regarding Terri Schiavo were made by Michael Schiavo, with no allowance made for any discussion, debate or normal professional judgment. My initial training there consisted solely of the instruction "Do what Michael
Schiavo tells you or you will be terminated." This struck me as extremely odd.

5. I was very disturbed by the decision making protocol, as no allowance
whatsoever was made for professional responsibility. The atmosphere
throughout the facility was dominated by Mr. Schiavo's intimidation. Everyone there, with the exception of several people who seemed to be close to Michael, was intimidated by him. Michael Schiavo always had an overbearing attitude, yelling numerous times such things as "This is my order and you're going to follow it." He is very large and
uses menacing body language, such as standing too close to you, getting right in your face and practically shouting.

6. To the best of my recollection, rehabilitation had been ordered for
Terri, but I never saw any being done or had any reason at all to believe that there was ever any rehab of Terri done at Palm Gardens
while I was there. I became concerned because Michael wanted nothing done for Terri at all, no antibiotics, no tests, no range of motion therapy, no stimulation, no nothing. Michael said again and again that Terri should NOT get any rehab, that there should be no range of motion whatsoever, or anything else. I and a CNA named Roxy would give Terri range of motion anyway. One time I put a wash cloth in Terri's hand to keep her fingers from curling together, and Michael saw it and made me take it out, saying that was therapy.

7. Terri's medical condition was systematically distorted and
misrepresented by Michael. When I worked with her, she was alert and oriented. Terri spoke on a regular basis while in my presence, saying such things as "mommy," and "help me." "Help me" was, in fact, one of her most frequent utterances. I heard her say it hundreds of times. Terri would try to say the word "pain" when she was in
discomfort, but it came out more like "pay." She didn't say the "n" sound very well. During her menses she would indicate her discomfort by saying "pay" and moving her arms toward her lower abdominal area. Other ways that she would indicate that she was in pain included pursing her lips, grimacing, thrashing in bed, curling her toes or
moving her legs around. She would let you know when she had a bowel movement by flipping up the covers and pulling on her diaper and scooted in bed on her bottom.

8. When I came into her room and said "Hi, Terri", she would always recognize my voice and her name, and would turn her head all the way toward me, saying "Haaaiiiii" sort of, as she did. I recognized this as a
"hi", which is very close to what it sounded like, the whole sound being only a second or two long.

When I told her humrous stories
about my life or something I read in the paper, Terri would chuckle, sometimes more a giggle or laugh. She would move her whole body, upper and lower. Her legs would sometimes be off the bed, and need
to be repositioned. I made numerous entries into the nursing notes in her chart, stating verbatim what she said and her various behaviors, but by my next on-duty shift, the notes would be deleted from her chart.
Every time I made a positive entry about any responsiveness of Terri's, someone would remove it after my shift ended. Michael always demanded to see her chart as soon as he arrived, and would take it in her room with him. I documented Terri's rehab potential well, writing whole pages about Terri's responsiveness, but they would
always be deleted by the next time I saw her chart. The reason I wrote so much was that everybody else seemed to be afraid to make positive entries for fear of their jobs, but I felt very strongly that a nurses job
was to accurately record everything we see and hear that bears on a patients condition and their family. I upheld the Nurses Practice Act, and if it cost me my job, I was willing to accept that.

9. Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused on Terri's death. Michael would say "When is she going to die?," "Has she died yet?" and "When is that bit*h gonna die?" These statements were common knowledge at Palm Gardens, as he would
make them casually in passing, without regard even for who he was talking to, as long as it was a staff member. Other statements which I recall him making include "Can't anything be done to accelerate her death - won't she ever die?" When she wouldn't die, Michael would
be furious. Michael was also adamant that the family should not be given information. He made numerous statements such as "Make sure the parents aren't contacted." I recorded Michael's statements word for word in Terri's chart, but these entries were also deleted after the end of my shift. Standing orders were that the family wasn't to be contacted, in fact, there was a large sign in the front of her chart that said under no circumstances was her family to be called, call Michael immediately, but I would call them, anyway, because I thought they should know about their daughter.

10. Any time Terri would be sick, like with a UTI or fluid buildup in her lungs, colds, or pneumonia, Michael would be visibly excited, thrilled even, hoping that she would die. He would say something like,
"Hallelujah! You've made my day!" He would call me, as I was the nurse supervisor on the floor, and ask for every little detail about her temperature, blood pressure, etc., and would call back frequently asking if she was dead yet. He would blurt out "I'm going to be rich!" and would talk about all the things he would buy when Terri died,
which included a new car, a new boat, and going to Europe, among other things.

11. When Michael visited Terri, he always came alone and always had the door closed and locked while he was with Terri. He would typically be there about twenty minutes or so. When he left Terri would be trembling, crying hysterically, and would be very pale and have cold sweats. It looked to me like Terri was having a hypoglycemic reaction,
so I'd check her blood sugar. The glucometer reading would be so low it was below the range where it would register an actual number reading. I would put dextrose in Terri's mouth to counteract it. This
happened about five times on my shift, as I recall. Normally Terri's blood sugar levels were very stable due to the uniformity of her diet through tube feeding. It is medically possible that Michael injected
Terri with Regular insulin, which is very fast acting, but I don't have any way of knowing for sure.

12. The longer I was employed at Palm Gardens the more concerned I became about patient care, both relating to Terri Schiavo, for the reasons I've said, and other patients, too. There was an LPN named
Carolyn Adams, known as "Andy" Adams who was a particular concern. An unusual number of patients seemed to die on her shift,
but she was completely unconcerned, making statements such as "They are old - let them die." I couldn't believe her attitude or the fact that it didn't seem to attract any attention. She made many comments about Terri being a waste of money, that she should die. She said it was costing Michael a lot of money to keep her alive, and that he
complained about it constantly (I heard him complain about it all the time, too.) Both Michael and Adams said that she would be worth more to him if she were dead. I ultimately called the police relative to
this situation, and was terminated the next day. Other reasons were cited, but I was convinced it was because of my "rocking the boat."

13. Ms. Adams was one of the people who did not seem to be intimidated by Michael. In fact, they seemed to be very close, and Adams would do whatever Michael told her. Michael sometimes called Adams at night and spoke at length. I was not able to hear the content of these phone calls, but I knew it was him talking to her because she would
tell me afterward and relay orders from him.

14. I have contacted the Schindler family because I just couldn't stand by
and let Terri die without the truth being known.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

<signed>
CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N.

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 29 day of August,
2003, by CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who produced her Florida's driver's license
as identification, and who did take an oath.

<signed Patricia J. Anderson>
Notary Public

posted March 22, 2005 12:42 AM            

A certified nursing assistant who cared for Terri Schiavo in 1997 filed a sworn affidavit in the case stating that she was able to feed Schiavo normally on multiple occasions - but that husband Michael Schiavo would allow only a feeding tube.

Heidi Law, a CNA at the Palm Gardens nursing home, testified:

"At least three times during any shift where I took care of Terri, I made sure to give Terri a wet washcloth filled with ice chips, to keep her mouth moistened. I personally saw her swallow the ice water and never saw her gag.
"[Another CNA] and I frequently put orange juice or apple juice in her washcloth to give her something nice to taste, which made her happy. On three or four occasions I personally fed Terri small mouthfuls of Jello, which she was able to swallow and enjoyed immensely."

Law testified that the only reason she didn't attempt to feed Ms. Schiavo more frequently was "because I was so afraid of being caught by Michael."

Editorializing on the case in light of Law's account, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette said Sunday, "It is one thing to withdraw a feeding tube; another entirely to withhold that day's meal tray."

Carla Sauer Iyer was a registered nurse at the same facility. In her own affidavit Iyer testified that Ms. Schiavo was capable of speech, explaining, "[Terri] spoke on a regular basis, saying such things as 'Mommy' and 'help me.'"

When she put a washcloth in Terri's hands to keep her fingers from curling together, Iyer said, "Michael saw it and made me take it out, saying that was therapy" that he had forbidden.

posted March 22, 2005 01:12 AM              

------------

TALLAHASSEE - As sheriff of Pinellas County, Everett Rice gave Michael Schiavo a job.

As a state legislator, Rice opposed a bill that would have blocked the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.

To Rice, the two acts are unrelated. But to some people who are using the Web to try to stop Terri Schiavo's death, they are just some of the evidence of "conspiracy, collusion and coverup."

Rice, a Treasure Island Republican and one of the Legislature's newest members, finds himself a target of an Internet attack accusing him of complicity to deny care to the Pinellas Park woman.

His chief critic is June Maxam of Chestertown, N.Y., who challenges what she calls "judicial tyranny." Working from a home computer near Albany, Maxam has been fighting New York judges who she said did not properly file their oaths of office.

Maxam writes for and co-owns The Empire Journal, an online newspaper. Her other targets include Circuit Judge George Greer, Attorney General Charlie Crist and Florida legislators who, like Rice, opposed a new feeding-tube law.

But Maxam has aimed most of her outrage at Rice, a four-term sheriff first elected to the Florida House in November. As sheriff, Rice declined to investigate charges of abuse against Terri Schiavo.

Other legislators have been receiving e-mails with copies of the anti-Rice articles attached.

Rice was unfamiliar with Maxam's Web site until Friday, and he laughed off her conspiracy theories. But they are an example of the intensity of the Schiavo debate in cyberspace.

Maxam has published online stories about Rice's hiring of Schiavo; Rice's longstanding friendship with Greer, the judge who ordered Schiavo's feeding tube removed; the role of Rice and Sheriff's Office equipment in a TV ad supporting Greer's re-election; and Rice's former membership on the board of a hospice where Terri Schiavo is a patient.

Weeks before he left the Sheriff's Office, Rice said, he hired Michael Schiavo for a job as a nurse in the county jail, near Largo. He began work Oct. 11.

"I hired him," Rice said, "but I never saw him. I don't know him. It's hard to find good nurses, and he was right at the top of the stack of applications."

While Rice hired Schiavo, he said, he is sure he acted on the recommendation of one of his assistants.

Rice said he and Judge Greer are friends, and he acknowledged making a TV ad and was on the hospice board several years ago, as an honorary member because he was sheriff.

Rice was one of eight Republicans in the state House who voted against a bill that would have prevented the withholding of food and water to incapacitated patients who did not make their intentions clear beforehand.

"I tried to vote my conscience and not necessarily do what's popular," Rice said. "I wasn't counting votes. I think the Republicans might have misread this thing."

[Last modified March 19, 2005, 01:00:09] http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/19/Tampabay/Schiavo_Web_rumor_peg.shtml

The EmpireJournal

posted March 22, 2005 01:41 AM              

And in what many liberal bloggers are calling an example of outright hypocrisy, Bush signed a Texas law in 1999 that created a legal mechanism to allow attending physicians and hospital ethics boards to pull the plug on patients -- even if that specifically contradicts patient or family wishes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/administration/whbriefing/

*******

Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube
Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care
By LEIGH HOPPER
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips.

• • • • •
"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive."

Wanda Hudson ,
mother of Sun Hudson

• • • • •

Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.

"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months. ... They made a terrible mistake."

Sun's death marks the first time a U.S. judge has allowed a hospital to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts. A similar case involving a 68-year-old man in a vegetative state at another Houston hospital is before a court now.

"It's sad this thing dragged on for so long. We all feel it's unfair, that a child doesn't have a chance to develop and thrive," said William Winslade, a bioethicist and lawyer who is a professor at the Institute for the Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Paraphrasing the late Catholic theologian and ethicist Richard McCormick, Winslade added, "This isn't murder. It's mercy, and it's appropriate to be merciful in that way. It's not killing, it's stopping pointless treatment."

The hospital's description of Sun — that he was motionless and sedated for comfort — has differed sharply from the mother's. Since February, the hospital has blocked the media from Hudson's invitation to see the baby, citing privacy concerns.

"I wanted y'all to see my son for yourself," Hudson told reporters. "So you could see he was actually moving around. He was conscious."

On Feb. 16, Harris County Probate Court Judge William C. McCulloch made the landmark decision to lift restrictions preventing Texas Children's from discontinuing care. However, an appeal by Hudson's attorney, Mario Caballero, and a procedural error on McCulloch's part prevented the hospital from acting for four weeks.

Texas law allows hospitals to discontinue life-sustaining care, even if a patient's family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.

Texas Children's said it contacted 40 facilities with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun. Without legal delays, Sun's care would have ended Nov. 28.

Sun was born with a fatal form of dwarfism characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs too tiny, doctors said. Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth, genetic counselors say.

Sun was delivered full term at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, but Hudson, 33, said she had no prenatal care during which his condition might have been discovered.

He was put on a ventilator while doctors figured out what was wrong with him, and Hudson refused when doctors recommended withdrawing treatment.

Texas Children's contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator.

Another case involving a patient on life support — a 68-year-old man in a chronic vegetative state whose family wants to stop St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital from turning off his ventilator — was scheduled to be heard Tuesday by the Houston-based 1st Court of Appeals. But the case was transferred to the 14th Court of Appeals, which promptly issued a temporary injunction ordering St. Luke's not to remove the man's life support. No hearing date has been set.
Chronicle reporter Todd Ackerman contributed to this report.

posted March 23, 2005 12:16 AM            

Two additional nurses have filed affidavits in the Terri Schiavo case that corroborate bombshell allegations by nurse Carla Sauer Iyer, who went public on Tuesday with claims that Michael Schiavo had deliberately withheld treatment from his disabled wife.

Heidi Law was a certified nursing assistant at the Palm Garden Convalescent Center in Largo, Florida, where she treated Ms. Schiavo in 1997.

In an affidavit filed with the court in August 2003, Ms. Law maintained:
"I know that Terri did not receive routine physical therapy or any other kind of therapy. I was personally aware of orders for rehabilitation that were not being carried out. Even though they were ordered, Michael would stop them."

Law continued:

"Michael ordered that Terri receive no rehabilitation or range of motion therapy. I and [another CNA] would give Terri range of motion anyway, but we knew we were endangering our jobs by doing so.

"We usually did this behind closed doors," Law said, because "we were so fearful of being caught . . . . we were always looking out for Michael, because we knew that, not only would Michael take his anger out on us, but he would take it out more on Terri. We spoke of this many times."

"At least three times during any shift where I took care of Terri, I made sure to give Terri a wet washcloth filled with ice chips, to keep her mouth moistened.

"On three or four occasions I personally fed Terri small mouthfuls of Jello, which she was able to swallow and enjoyed immensely. I did not do it more often only because I was so afraid of being caught by Michael."

Like nurse Iyer, Law suspected that Michael was mistreating Terri, noting in her sworn statement:

"Several times when Michael visited Terri during my shift, he went into her room alone and closed the door. This worried me because I didn’t trust Michael.

"When he left, Terri was very agitated, was extremely tense with tightened fists and some times had a cold sweat. She was much less responsive than usual and would just stare out the window, her eyes kind of glassy . . .

"We were convinced that he was abusing her, and probably saying cruel, terrible things to her because she would be so upset when he left."

"The Palm Gardens staff, myself included, were just amazed that a 'Do Not Resuscitate' order had been put on Terri’s chart, considering her age and her obvious cognitive awareness of her surroundings."

Carolyn Johnson, a certified nursing assistant who worked at the Sabal Palms nursing home in Largo, said Terri's mistreatment went back to at least 1993.

"During this assignment I took care of Terri Schiavo several times," Johnson said in her own August, 2003 affidavit.

"I learned, as part of my training, that there was a family dispute and that the husband, as guardian, wanted no rehabilitation for Terri. This surprised me, as I did not think a guardian could go against a doctor's orders like that, but I was assured that a guardian could and that this guardian had gone against Terri's doctor's orders."

Johnson recalled: "No one was allowed to just go in and see Terri. Michael had a visitors list. We all knew that we would lose our jobs if we did not do exactly what Michael said to do."

Johnson continued:

"I remember seeing Michael Schiavo only once the entire time I worked at Sabal Palms, but we were all aware that Terri was not to be given any kind of rehabilitative help, per his instructions.

"Once, I wanted to put a cloth in Terri's hand to keep her hand from closing in on itself, but I was not permitted to do this," Johnson said, "as Michael Schiavo considered that to be a form of rehabilitation."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/22/235813.shtml

posted March 23, 2005 12:21 AM            

From April 1995 to August 1996, Carla Sauer Iyer was one of Terri Schiavo's caretakers at Palm Garden in Largo, Fla.

This morning on Fox News' "Fox and Friends" program, she gave a frightening account of Michael Schiavo's actions and words, and also a hopeful description of Terri Schiavo's condition at that time.

Ms. Iyer said that Terri could:

Interact with staff.
Laugh.
Talk - saying words like "mommy," "help me" and "hi."
Let you know if she was in pain.
React reflexively on command.

Interviewer Steve Doocey asked Carla why, in her opinion, Michael Schiavo was not telling people this. She answered that she believes "he wants her to die."

Doocey then revealed that Carla was fired from the care facility because of a disagreement with Michael Schiavo in an incident where she claims he injected Terri with insulin.

Ms. Iyer said that after Michael visited Terri one day for about 20 minutes, with the door shut, she went in after he left and saw Terri sweating, lethargic and "crying hysterically."

Carla checked Terri's blood sugar, and it was barely reading on the glucometer. She also saw a vial of "insulin concealed in the trash bin."

According to Carla, there were needle marks underneath Terri's breast, under her arms and near her groin. Carla talked to the police and then went to the director of nursing, who was very upset that Carla had gone to the police.

She doesn't think Michael Schiavo was a caring husband and claimed to Fox News that he refused to send Terri to rehabilitation of any kind.

Doocey then said that he had heard a story from another nurse who tried to feed Terri, and when Michael Schiavo found out about it, in Doocey's words, "it all hit the fan."

Carla concurred, saying that Terri could be fed by mouth - jello and pudding, etc. - without aspirating, but that when Michael found out Terri was being fed by mouth, he told the nurses he was going to get them fired.

posted March 23, 2005 07:36 AM            

By Manuel Roig-Franzia, Mike Allen and Lexie Verdon
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, March 23, 2005; 7:00 AM

TAMPA, March 23 -- A federal appeals court early Wednesday morning denied a request to resume feeding a brain-damaged Florida woman, but her parents vowed to quickly seek relief from the Supreme Court in their efforts to keep their daughter alive.

Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed under state court order last Friday. Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, with the backing of emergency legislation passed by Congress over the weekend and signed by President Bush, have been seeking a decision from a federal court to reverse the action while they continue their legal battle. They are pitted against Schiavo's husband, Michael Schiavo, was has argued that his wife said she would not want to be kept alive in such circumstances.

A panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, in a 2-to-1 decision released about 2:30 a.m. refused to take that action, and upheld a ruling Tuesday by a federal circuit court judge.

"There is no denying the absolute tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo," Judges Ed Carnes and Frank M. Hull wrote in the decision. "We all have our own family, our own loved ones, and our own children. However, we are called upon to make a collective, objective decision concerning a question of law. In the end, and no matter how much we wish Mrs. Schiavo had never suffered such a horrible accident, we are a nation of laws, and if we are to continue to be so, the pre-existing and well-established federal law . . . must be applied to her case."

Judge Charles R. Wilson dissented. He wrote that Schiavo's parents had demonstrated that they were entitled to a preliminary injunction while legal issues are debated and that failing to restore her nutrition "frustrates Congress's intent, which is to maintain the status quo by keeping Theresa Schiavo alive until the federal courts have a new and adequate opportunity to consider the constitutional issues" raised by her parents.

Rex Sparklin, an attorney with the law firm representing the parents, told the Associated Press that "the Schindlers will be filing an appropriate appeal to save their daughter's life," he said.

The Schindlers Tuesday made tearful appeals to Congress, the Florida legislature and the legal system. Mary Schindler collapsed weeping into husband Robert Schindler's arms outside their daughter's hospice in Pinellas Park, Fla., after pleading with Florida lawmakers in Tallahassee to intervene.

"Please, senators, for the love of God, I'm begging you, don't let my daughter die of thirst," Schindler said.

Congressional leaders -- who have begun to experience some political fallout from the new law, though the long-term effect is uncertain -- said they were disappointed with the federal court ruling and are looking for other ways to save Schiavo's life. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) called Tuesday "a sad day for all Americans who value the sanctity of life." He sent a letter to Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) urging him to push for a last-minute intervention by the legislature, which last week was unable to pass a bill intended to keep Schiavo alive.

"Federal action should not be her only remaining option," Frist said. "The extraordinary nature of this case requires that every avenue be pursued."

Time is working against the Schindlers. Their lawyer, David Gibbs, said Terri Schiavo is "fading quickly." Her feeding has been stopped twice before, including a six-day stretch in 2003, and doctors say she could live as long as two weeks or die within days.

The Schindlers' appeal was built on a contention that U.S. District Judge James Whittemore in Tampa misinterpreted the meaning of the For the Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo Act, which Congress passed in an overnight session last weekend. Gibbs wrote that Whittemore's decision not to resume Schiavo's tube-feeding during a federal review of her case rendered the new law an "exercise in futility . . . a vain and useless act." Gibbs said that Whittemore ignored the touchstone element of the law, which calls for a new review of the case, and instead relied on seven years of "fatally flawed" state court findings.

The ruling drew a similar assessment from congressional leaders, including House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), the chief backer of the new law. "Congress explicitly provided Terri Schiavo's family recourse to federal court, and this decision is at odds with both the clear intent of Congress and the constitutional rights of a helpless young woman," he said.

At the same time, Republican strategists were growing concerned that negative public opinion polls may indicate congressional Republicans made a costly political blunder.

"When you passed the bill into law, you expected to win," said a Republican aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was involved in negotiations over the measure.

Back home for the Easter recess, some Republican lawmakers found themselves confronted by skeptical constituents and talk-radio hosts.

"I got people saying, 'Why are you sticking your nose in this family's business?' " said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who represents a heavily Catholic district. "The less people know about the issue, the more opposed they are to what we did. . . . The more they understand, the more likely they are to agree with us."

But for all the hand-wringing and angry reactions on Capitol Hill, the fate of the case lies with the federal court system. The appeals court has been studying the case since at least Saturday, when it sent e-mails to the attorneys -- hours before Congress voted -- asking them to submit legal arguments about the bill.

Several legal experts said Tuesday that the request was unusual because the measure had yet to be passed. "That's a weird thing," said Charles Fried, a Harvard law professor and solicitor general in the Reagan administration who was one of the lead attorneys for Bush during the 2000 presidential court fight. "That's distinctly odd."

The appeals court is generally considered middle-of-the-road ideologically, or leaning slightly to the right. But it has shown a willingness to rule against popular conservative causes, twice rejecting appeals by lawyers trying to prevent the removal of a two-ton Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama Supreme Court building and refusing a Republican motion in 2000 to stop manual ballot recounts in Florida.

One of the judges, William H. Pryor Jr., who was appointed during a recess to avoid a Democratic filibuster, was named by President Bush. Eleven judges, including the court's part-time senior status judges, were appointed by Republican presidents and seven by Democratic presidents.

In his earlier order, Whittemore said there "may be substantial" constitutional issues related to the law passed by Congress after an extraordinary Palm Sunday session. But the judge did not rule on the constitutionality, instead primarily emphasizing the question of whether the Schindlers had a strong likelihood of winning their case if he issued a restraining order to have the tube-feeding resumed. Whittemore concluded they did not.

But Gibbs and his co-counselors, George Tragos and Robert Destro, of Catholic University in Washington, say Whittemore "judicially amended" and "effectively rewrote the act" Congress passed. Even though the act does not explicitly say so, the lawyers argue that it "assumes the federal court" will resume Schiavo's tube-feeding to allow for the federal review that the act requires.

They also made an emotional appeal, saying that last Friday, Schiavo "made her desire to live known to her parents." Six family members have permission to visit Schiavo at her hospice, and several have said they believe the 41-year-old woman is aware of what is happening to her. Such contentions have long been disputed by court-appointed neurologists, who say Schiavo has no cognitive functions, though the Schindlers' legal experts believe she does have some brain activity.

In their appeal, the Schindlers stress that Schiavo may have benefited from more medical attention, saying she has received no rehabilitative care for 11 of the 15 years she has been brain-damaged. Gibbs said those decisions, like Whittemore's, were based on the "shaky foundation" of evidence presented when a state judge ordered the tube removed in 2001. Under those circumstances, Gibbs wrote, one thing was clear from the beginning of the case: "Terri was doomed."

Allen and Verdon reported from Washington. Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher, traveling with Bush, and research editor Lucy Shackelford in Washington contributed to this report.

******

Schiavo Case Puts Face on Rising Medical Costs
GOP Leaders Try to Cut Spending as They Fight to Save One of Program's Patients

By Jonathan Weisman and Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, March 23, 2005; Page A13

As Republican leaders in Congress move to trim billions of dollars from the Medicaid health program, they are simultaneously intervening to save the life of possibly the highest-profile Medicaid patient: Terri Schiavo.

The Schiavo case may put a human face on the problem of rising medical costs, both at the state and federal levels. In Florida, where Gov. Jeb Bush (R) is pushing a dramatic restructuring of the Medicaid program, the cost of Schiavo's care has become political fodder. In Washington, where a fight over Medicaid spending threatens to scuttle the 2006 budget plan, the role of the program in preserving Schiavo's life is beginning to receive attention.

"At every opportunity, [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay has sanctimoniously proclaimed his concern for the well-being of Terri Schiavo, saying he is only trying to ensure she has the chance 'we all deserve,' " the liberal Center for American Progress said in a statement Monday, echoing complaints of Democratic lawmakers and medical ethicists. "Just last week, DeLay marshaled a budget resolution through the House of Representatives that would cut funding for Medicaid by at least $15 billion, threatening the quality of care for people like Terri Schiavo."

DeLay spokesman Dan Allen fired back: "The fact that they're tying a life issue to the budget process shows just how disconnected Democrats are to reality."

Lawyers for Schiavo's husband and guardian, Michael Schiavo, have said repeatedly that Medicaid finances her drug costs, but it is not entirely clear how dependent Schiavo's caregivers are on the joint federal-state health insurance program for the poor and disabled. In 1993, Michael Schiavo received a medical malpractice judgment of more than $750,000 in his wife's name, according to a report by her court-appointed guardian ad litem. The money was placed in a trust fund administered by an independent trustee for Schiavo's care.

Michael Schiavo's lawyers have said that $40,000 to $50,000 remains. Patient care at the Florida hospice where Schiavo lives averages about $80,000 a year, but the hospice now pays for much of her care. For two years, Medicaid has covered other medical costs, including prescription drugs, the attorneys have said in published reports.

Medicaid's share of Schiavo's care "is a big chunk," said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who until this year was involved in the case as a state senator. "Governor Bush and President Bush are both professing deep concern for the rights of one disabled person, yet their rhetoric doesn't match their actions," she said.

Florida's Medicaid program is expected to cost about $14 billion this year, with the state covering 41 percent of the budget, said Jonathan Burns, spokesman for the state Agency for Health Care Administration. For every $1 Florida spends on Medicaid, it receives about $1.44 from the federal government in matching funds.

The governor has proposed limiting Medicaid spending and in essence giving each beneficiary a voucher to shop for a health plan. Advocates for the poor and disabled contend the approach would leave the most vulnerable without adequate coverage.

If it passes, "I guess Mrs. Schiavo or someone on her staff would have to find a network that will take care of her for the amount of money" the state provides, said Andrew Schneider, a Washington-based health care consultant who specializes in Medicaid.

In Washington, House Republicans approved a budget resolution for 2006 last week that would order $15 billion to $20 billion in Medicaid savings over the next five years. But when Senate leaders tried to follow suit with a budget that trimmed $14 billion from Medicaid, 52 senators balked. The Senate and House differences over the program may jeopardize lawmakers' ability to craft a budget this year, thus threatening all of President Bush's cost-cutting efforts.

Ron Pollack, executive director of the health care advocacy group Families USA, denounced the "two ironies" of the situation.

"At the same time congressional leaders were trying to keep Terri Schiavo alive, they voted to cut the Medicaid program that keeps many millions of people alive," he said in an interview. Jeb Bush, meanwhile, "is grandstanding about Terri Schiavo at the same time he is pushing real hard to place a limit on the dollars available for people's care, including care like Terri Schiavo is receiving," he said.

Republicans say such rhetoric further complicates the unavoidable task of controlling Medicaid's growth. "Too many people would rather resort to scare tactics than have a constructive conversation about ways to fix the nation's long-term budget crisis," said Gayle Osterberg, spokeswoman for the Senate Budget Committee.

The cost of care in cases such as Schiavo's has vexed governments for years. In 1999, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush signed a law establishing procedures for hospitals and physicians to withhold life-sustaining care from patients with conditions deemed hopeless, even over relatives' protests. The legislation affords a family 10 days' notice to find another facility. Last week, Texas Children's Hospital in Houston invoked the law to remove a 6-month-old boy from his breathing tube against his mother's wishes.

It was a Republican, Rep. Steve King (Iowa), who first brought the issue of Schiavo's Medicaid support to Washington. On the House floor Sunday, he blasted Woodside Hospice, where Schiavo lives, for allegedly bilking Medicaid, citing a Government Accountability Office audit that he said ordered the company to repay $14.8 million in "inappropriately collected" fees.

The Hospice of the Florida Suncoast Inc., which operates Woodside, was cited in 1996 for nearly $15 million in payments for ineligible beneficiaries and patients who may not have been terminally ill. But the issue was Medicare charges, not Medicaid, and the investigator was the Department of Health and Human Services' inspector general.

Mike Bell, a company spokesman, said the not-for-profit did not have to repay any money. The investigation, which involved several hospice care providers, "led to clarification and directions going forward," he said.

But King was making a point other Republicans have argued: that waste and fraud can be wrung out of the Medicaid system without sacrificing patient care -- but only if Congress gives states more flexibility.

Said Osterberg: "The reason for the budget seeking . . . administrative modifications is to ensure the program is more efficient and financially sound moving forward, so that beneficiaries don't have to be kicked off down the road."

******

My views have generally been made clear regarding pro-choice issues and, I believe, right-to-die issues ... this is completely different. The woman is not on life-support, ie, her body is supporting its own functions. Granted her existence may be a miserable one and she may not be entirely conscious, or even conscious at all, but, good heavens, she is still alive. We would all die without food. I am utterly shocked that this case would go this far. Where are these "pro-life" people in Congress we keep hearing about?

posted March 23, 2005 11:24 AM              

I'M ANGRY! ANGRY! ANGRY!

posted March 23, 2005 11:57 AM              

quote:

---

.....it would be worse if he were to benefit from her death.....

---

Petron....I believe he benefits from her death, by silencing her forever!!!

I saw the nurses to whom jwhop referred and what they had to say....

I saw Kate Adamson...who said she knew everything that was going on while she was in a "vegetative state." She said, "When the feeding tube was turned off for eight days, I thought I was going insane. I was screaming out in my mind, "Don't you know I need to eat?"

....but most of all I saw Michael Schiavo...and his arrogant attitude...and shifty eyes...with guilt written all over his face...

posted March 23, 2005 12:58 PM            

A registered nurse who took care of Terri Schiavo last weekend at the Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, Fla., says she was threatened with dismissal if she told the press what she saw.

"[My agency] said that if I went to the media at all that I would be fired," Nora Lynn Wagner told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity.

Wagner's response? "I said, 'Well, then - consider me fired.'"
The agency, which Wagner did not identify, was nervous about the case, she said, since it had an ongoing contract with Woodside.

Wagner said that when she arrived to work the Sunday night shift, other nurses had begun to circulate a petition saying that they were appalled at the federal government's intervention in the Schiavo case.

"Most everyone who spoke up thought that pulling the tube" was the right thing to do, because "Terri wouldn't want to live like that," Wagner said.

"I had the opposite opinion. I said, 'No, I'd rather not sign it,'" she recalled.

The RN described her disagreement with co-workers as "a healthy debate" - but at least some of the participants were spooked by her comments.

"Apparently some people got upset and Monday afternoon at 3:30 I got a call from my agency saying that I was no longer to go back to Woodside."

In comments to Hannity, Wagner confirmed that no attempts were being made to rehabilitate Terri, noting, "I believe that was stopped a long time ago."

The RN backed the accounts of other Schiavo nurses over the years, saying that Terri "seemed to have responded to me."

posted March 23, 2005 01:13 PM            

Gov. Jeb Bush renewed his call for the Legislature to step in and "spare Terri's life."

In a 2-1 ruling early Wednesday, a panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta said the parents, who have battled with son-in-law Michael Schiavo for years over the woman's fate, "failed to demonstrate a substantial case on the merits of any of their claims" that the feeding tube should be reinserted immediately.

"There is no denying the absolute tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo," the ruling by Judges Ed Carnes and Frank M. Hull said. "We all have our own family, our own loved ones, and our own children. However, we are called upon to make a collective, objective decision concerning a question of law."

Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, said he was "very pleased" with the appeals court ruling. He declined further comment.

Wednesday's ruling was the latest legal blow for Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler. Doctors have said that their daughter, now 41, could survive one to two weeks without water and nutrients.

"It's hard to put into words how we're feeling right now. ... It's just hard to say," Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler, said after arriving in Tallahassee Wednesday.

In a Wednesday statement, the governor said he "could not be more disappointed in the decision announced this morning."

"Time is of the essence and I hope all who have the ability and duty to act in this case will do so with a sense of urgency," Gov. Bush said.

In his dissent to the appeals court ruling, Judge Charles R. Wilson said Schiavo's "imminent" death would end the case before it could be fully considered. "In fact, I fail to see any harm in reinserting the feeding tube," he wrote.

Wilson and Hull were appointed to the appeals court by President Clinton, while Carnes was appointed by former President Bush (news - web sites).

An appeal was still pending in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on whether Schiavo's right to due process was violated.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in Tampa also rejected the parents' emergency request.

Rex Sparklin, an attorney with the law firm representing the parents, said Wednesday that the couple will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. "The Schindlers will be filing an appropriate appeal to save their daughter's life," he said. The high court has previously refused to hear Schiavo's case.

Howard Simon of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida said the ruling pointed out the limited role of government in these matters and the need for a living will "to keep politicians out of your personal life."

"I do think we are coming to the end of this sad case," he said.

The Schindlers have long battled Schiavo's husband over whether her feeding tube should be disconnected. State courts have sided with Michael Schiavo, who insists his wife told him she would never want to be kept alive artificially.

Michael Schiavo has repeatedly urged courts not to grant an emergency request and restore nutrition. The tube had been pulled Friday afternoon.

"That would be a horrific intrusion upon Mrs. Schiavo's personal liberty," said the appeals court filing by Felos.

The Legislature had stepped in before, in 2003, and her feeding tube was reinserted after six days at that time. But "Terri's Law" was later struck down as unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court.

More recently, Florida lawmakers had failed to pass new legislation that could have prevented the removal of the tube. They may consider another bill Wednesday, and state Sen. Daniel Webster, the bill's sponsor, said it would be the measure's last chance.

"Today is it," said Webster, a Republican, who said Wednesday he still isn't certain he has enough votes to push the measure through. "But I'm going to try."

The state House could take up the bill very quickly if the Senate sends it, according to a spokesman for Speaker Allan Bense. After Wednesday, both chambers are in recess until next week.

Mary Schindler has pleaded with state lawmakers to save her daughter's life.

"Please, senators, for the love of God, I'm begging you, don't let my daughter die of thirst," she said Tuesday outside her daughter's hospice.

Terri Schiavo suffered brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped briefly from a chemical imbalance believed to have been brought on by an eating disorder. Court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

Her parents — who told the appeals court that her condition is rapidly deteriorating — argue that she could get better and that she would never have wanted to be cut off from food and water.

An emergency filing to the high court would go first to Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee who has staked a moderate position on social issues.

The Supreme Court's history on right-to-die cases is pretty thin.

It ruled in 1990 that a terminally ill person has a right to refuse life-sustaining treatment. And next term it plans to consider whether the federal government can prosecute doctors who help ill patients die.

Between those cases, the court has not said much, choosing to allow states to decide the issue.

Demonstrators who gathered outside Terri Schiavo's hospice decried the courts' decisions. One woman was arrested Tuesday for trespassing after trying to bring Schiavo a cup of water, and another group claimed they would risk arrest in a similar manner later Wednesday morning.

"This is a clear-cut case of judicial tyranny," said Tammy Melton, 37, a high school teacher from Monterey, Tenn. But Richard Avant, who lives down the street from the hospice, carried a sign reading "Honor her wishes."

Over the weekend, Republicans in Congress pushed through unprecedented emergency legislation aimed at prolonging Schiavo's life by allowing the case to be reviewed by federal courts.

posted March 23, 2005 05:50 PM            

It's OK for Bush to sign into law(as a governor) that it's OK for a hospital to remove life support from a baby that doesn't develope it's lung compassity fast enough and lets the baby die without the parent's consent, but it's also OK for Bush(as a president) to sign into law to keep a woman alive that suffers a lack of a cerebal cortex with out the husbands consent too as well?! Terri doesn't comprehend pain, but Sun did!

Does any of this sound alright with you guys?!

posted March 23, 2005 08:10 PM              

im afraid micheal would actually try to do this again...

so at this point i just wish her peace....

posted March 24, 2005 12:21 AM            

This is regarding another case where a child was born with the same problem as Sun Hudson.

Both these infants bodies' could not support their own lives. Hence, they were on life support. It may seem cruel to allow an infant to die as he naturally would without life support. But there is no way to make his body support its own life. That is fact. He would not "grow into" his condition, nor would his body be able to adapt to it so that he would eventually not need life support. Thus, he was alive only because he was kept alive by another source of life ... ie, the machine(s) sustaining his basic bodily needs and functions.
It is my belief that if your body cannot sustain its own life then you are not really and essentially alive. You are being kept alive by a cord, electrical or umbilical as the case may be. Are there many different situations wherein one might want to keep another alive regardless of this? Absolutely, and particularly if that cord for the support of life is only temporary and there are means for that life to support its own functions after a period of recovery or development. But I do not think it is murderous to cut a connection to sustain a life that cannot sustain itself.
Terri Schiavo is not on life support. Her body, damaged as it may be, is still supporting enough functions on its own to not need an outside source of life to keep her alive. All she needs is food. We all need food. To starve her to death because her husband wants her dead is, to me, unequivocally murderous. Does it matter if she is conscious? We spend 1/3 of our days unconscious while we sleep ... unaware of our surroundings and unresponsive to the world around us. But we are not dead. There are people who suggest that Terri is conscious. I have not seen her personally. They have. But even if she weren't conscious, her body is still ALIVE. By removing her feeding tube, you are not allowing her body to die naturally ... you are forcing her body to die through a lack of nutrition ... and every single last one of us would die through the same lack of nutrition. If she was on a respirator, if her basic bodily functions would not occur without a machine, then removing her from those life supporting machines would not be murderous in my eyes. But, for the love of God/dess, they are not letting her die of natural causes ... they are starving her to death. What part of that is unclear or acceptable?

posted March 24, 2005 12:54 AM            

There is also entirely too much controversy surrounding her true condition and prognosis.

Neurologist Hints Schiavo May Have Been Misdiagnosed
By Melanie Hunter, CNSNews.com
Thursday, March 24, 2005

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush Wednesday sought court permission to take custody of Terri Schiavo, pointing to a neurologist's review which "indicates that Terri may have been misdiagnosed and is more likely that she is in a state of minimal consciousness rather than" a persistent vegetative state.

Dr. William Cheshire, a member of the state's adult protective services team and a neurologist at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla., conducted the review.

Bush said he is doing everything in his "power to make sure that Terri is afforded at least the same rights that criminals convicted of the most heinous crimes take for granted."
"If a prisoner comes forward with new DNA evidence 20 years after his conviction, suggesting his innocence, there is no doubt that the courts in our state or all across the country for that matter would immediately review his case. We should do no less for Terri Schiavo," said Bush prior to the Florida Senate vote on the Schiavo bill.

In a vote of 21 to 18, the state Senate Wednesday rejected a bill that would have forced doctors to reinsert Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.

Prior to the vote, some senators indicated that they did not support the bill.

"This bill doesn't belong here. This decision belongs between the courts and the family," the AP quoted Republican Sen. Dennis Jones as saying.

"By the time the ink is dry on the governor's signature, it will be declared unconstitutional, just like it was before," the AP quoted Senate Minority Leader Les Miller, a Democrat, as saying before the vote. "So I don't see anything or any language that can persuade my vote."

Bush also urged Terri Schiavo's supporters to remain calm and not react violently "if this process doesn't go their way."

The governor said there are reports that some are making "threatening declarations" and reminded Terri's supporters that "even though we may disagree with the courts, there is no justification for violent acts."

Bush also sent a message of hope to the supporters. "Your prayers and your petitions are working," he said.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/23/215818.shtml

posted March 24, 2005 12:35 PM            

Michael Schiavo has made it abundantly clear that he wants her dead. Judge Greer could have ordered the feeding tube restored in light of Congressional subpoenas, but he too wanted her dead. Judge Whittemore did his part in wasting more than 24 precious hours by delaying his hearing until 3 P.M. and his decision until the following morning.

Now, with Terri's precious life slipping away from her grieving family, yet another court is squandering precious hours. After all, the court could take all the time they need to consider the case if they would just restore the feeding tube.
Apparently Terri Schiavo is the only human being with a condition that can't be cured by embryonic stem cell research.

There is, after all, a legitimate medical dispute. Dr. William Hammesfahr, nominated for a Nobel Prize for working with people just like Terri examined her on three separate occasions, spending more than ten hours with Terri.

He concluded that he "and others I know have treated many patients worse than Terri, and have seen them regain independence and dignity."

"It's time to help Terri instead of just warehousing her," Dr. Hammesfahr said. "She would have benefited from treatment years ago, but it is not too late to start now."

Dr. Hammesfahr is not alone. He is joined by 14 medical professionals, including 6 neurologists who believe that Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state and could be rehabilitated.

The woman has not received meaningful physical therapy since 1991 and so is it really unreasonable to give Dr. Hammesfahr a chance? After fifteen years, would one more year with a doctor committed to helping her really hurt anyone?

Of course we could speculate as to Mr. Schiavo's motives. But they are as unimportant as his opinion in this matter.

The real issue is the larger political agenda on the part of some of the major players in this case. Imagine if Dr. Hammesfahr were to succeed in rehabilitating Terri. Imagine if she could appear on national television and speak about her experience on a feeding tube and the pain she experienced when it was removed.

It shouldn't be too hard to imagine, since Katie Adamson did just that on Bill O' Reilly's program. She described the tremendous pain she experienced when her feeding tube was removed.

But in this case, the stakes are too high. The story has received too much national attention. If Terri Schiavo were to recover, the pro-euthanasia movement would be set back decades in the court of public opinion.

posted March 24, 2005 06:22 PM            

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 23, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Dr. Ronald Cranford

The neurologist chosen by Michael Schiavo to examine his estranged wife, Terri, is a right-to-die activist who has been a featured speaker for the pro-euthanasia Hemlock Society.

Dr. Ronald Cranford testified in the court cases before county court Judge George Greer that Terri Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

"I've seen her," he told CNN. "There's no doubt in my mind, whatsoever, she's in a permanent vegetative state. Her CAT scan shows extremely severe atrophy to the brain. And her EEG is flat. It doesn't show any electrical activity at all."

His diagnosis has been disputed by Dr. William Hammesfahr, who said, "I spent about 10 hours across about three months and the woman is very aware of her surroundings. She's very aware. She's alert. She's not in a coma. She's not in PVS."

Hammesfahr added, "With proper therapy, she will have a tremendous improvement. I think, personally, that she'll be able to walk, eventually, and she will be able to use at least one of her arms."

"There's no way," responded Cranford. "That's totally bogus."

Cranford is a member of the board of directors of the Choice in Dying Society, which promotes doctor-assisted suicide and euthanasia.

He was also a featured speaker at the 1992 national conference of the Hemlock Society. The group recently changed its name to End of Life Choices.

In 1997, Cranford wrote an opinion piece in the Minneapolis Star Tribune titled: "When a feeding tube borders on barbaric."

"Just a few decades ago cases of brain death, vegetative state, and locked-in syndrome were rare," he wrote. "These days, medicine's 'therapeutic triumphs' have made these neurologic conditions rather frequent. For all its power to restore life and health, we now realize, modern medicine also has great potential for prolonging a dehumanizing existence for the patient."

He explained that while landmark legal cases like those of Karen Ann Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan demonstrated it was "sensible to stop treatment in patients lingering in permanent vegetative states," it was now time to look beyond those cases.

"The United States has thousands or tens of thousands of patients in vegetative states; nobody knows for sure exactly how many," he wrote. "But before long, this country will have several million patients with Alzheimer's dementia. The challenges and costs of maintaining vegetative state patients will pale in comparison to the problems presented by Alzheimer's disease."

The answer, he suggested, was physician-assisted suicide.

"So much in medicine today is driving the public towards physician-assisted suicide," he wrote. "Many onlookers are dismayed by doctors' fear of giving families responsibility in these cases; our failure to appreciate that families suffer a great deal too in making decisions; our archaic responses to pain and suffering; our failure to accept death as a reality and an inevitable outcome of life; our inability to be realistic and humane in treating irreversibly ill people. All of this has shaken the public's confidence in the medical profession."

He blamed "right-to-lifers" and "disability groups" for discouraging families from making the choice for euthanasia. He applauded European values that embrace euthanasia.

posted March 24, 2005 06:52 PM              

Why the man just doesn't hand her over to her parents, shows how heartless he is....