It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Addressing the Schiavo concerns...(Fingers are pointed at those who deserve them)

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:05 AM
(Yes, I know there are many Schiavo discussions, but none seem to capture most of the elements that are needed in them.)


Conservatives, get a grip...after all, I thought you were the ones who were all for less FEDERAL REGULATION.

First and foremost, this debate is about the LAW. And, sadly, the law is on the side of Michael Schiavo. The law states that the husband has the rights to Terri's care, or lack thereof. If there are no know, legally binding contracts stating otherwise, then he is the guardian. The parents have ZERO choice in this.

I applaud the effort of this man to stand up against the government and send a big "F you". He is the person in control, whether you like it or not. And it is absolutely wrong for the Federal Government to step in and intervene. It sets tons of horrible precedents. And if you are applauding them, then you are encouraging the next line of rights to be removed from your hands.

And besides you, as well as I, do not care for this woman. You can stick around here and lie, but you know you don't. It is some type of obvious agenda fetish you have. I at least don't lie about my intentions. I would love to see our current laws upheld and for Michael Schiavo to sue everyone who stymied his rights as the husband. There should be an inquiry into the rights violated and punish those who offended them. And I denounce all of you agenda monkeys who are blatantly disregarding the legal ramifications of this issue. (Including anybody on any side.)

You need to butt out and accept that this woman will die. Do you know why? Because any court in any country in any friggin' universe will uphold the initial findings of every court before this. And, if not, the judge needs to be seriously examined and perhaps dismissed. Because obviously, he cannot do all within him to uphold one of the most defined laws in our country.

Secondly, yes this is torture. Starving someone to death is not only cruel, but is also unusual. This is hell being put on this woman's body. But, it is the only option that many conservatives have left us. The "life and life alone" movement has time and time again shot down active euthanasia. Yes, this is your side's fault. Why do ya' think Kevorkian is out of a job? BECAUSE OF YOU! Your ideals and standards are horrendous...but the other side is not that much better. In stead of trying to push forward the agenda of active euthanasia, they have left only one other alternative. They allowed it...and you guys pushed it. Now sleep in the mess you have made. (And please, noone respond with "Well, Hitler "euthanized" the Jews." That is false. Genocide is what he committed. There was no "mercy" in those murders.)

Thirdly, to those who are conspiracy theorizing this, you are barking up the wrong tree. Why did it take eight years for alleged abuse to come out about this guy? Why did it take years for her friends to come out and say she wanted to live? What money is left for this guy to take? Why did the doctors never cooperate with the police and have an investigation? Why is this guy so adamant about Terri dying and the parents terribly against it? He could have easily walked away a long time ago and taken half of the money there. Why did this guy refuse the one million dollars to walk away? Why did he refuse a "reported" ten million dollar offer?

Do you think maybe for one second he is actually doing what she wanted him to do so? Everyone is right. A lot of things do not add up. If this were for money, why didn't he take the offered money? After all, that money is quite a bit more than the expected 40-50 thousand dollars that is left from the settlement. Hell, a guy can get out of the country and hide with that type of money if dubious things happened between him and Terri. Hell, with that money, he could get away with murder...attempted murder. But he is not taking it...why do you suppose that?

Also, if a doctor suspects abuse, he is obligated to alert the authorities. Do you think doctors would put their careers on the line to fall in with the KILL TERRI conspirators? Not likely, my friends. There is a good chance that the doctors actually thought the warning signs, that are so apparent to the right, were consistant with the believed cause of the heart trouble and bone fractures.

Why is that the "Terri wanted to live" claims and the abuse claims come many years after the problem that occured? Perhaps they are complete fabrications...maybe? Hell, the abuse one should have come out immediatley after she went into the state she is in. But it didn't. It came out, I believe, six or seven years after the problems. What was going on at that time? Could it be during a fierce legal struggle between the husband and the family? Oh...well...isn't that convenient. Could it be possible that this is some concocted story to help give the parents control? one would stoop that low, would they?

There are way too many things that do not make sense about these claims that are out there. We can all sit around and conspiracy theorize this issue...all sides of it. But nothing is going to come of it.

Now, onto the actual part of the flimsy debate that the right tries to daze everybody with while they quietly take away rights. Yes, this person is alive. Her heart beats. I believe her excretory system works. She eats...she craps...her cells reproduce...and her hair grows. By all definitions, she is alive. But, is she mentally alive. Many people claim they see it when they look at the videos. Hell, I even almost saw it. But do you know why that is? Because:

1. Your heart and mind wants you to see it...see subconciously.
2. The videos are only a couple of seconds long and shows what the family wants you to see.

I believe that one of the two or a combination of both are true. I know the first one is true for everybody...even the family. Maybe they caught an odd glimpse of what she used to be and actually saw a living person. It happens. I'm sure we have all witnessed a family member slowly die. (Cancer, AIDS, etc.) Some days, you may see them as improving. Even though all of the tests say nothing but the negative. You may just see improvement. And I believe that is the cause of this hype of her being alive inside her brain.

The second option is just a downright dirty thing to do. But, it is a fair option. Heavy editing to push an agenda is not an uncommon practice. (See Michael Moore.) I am pretty sure, somewhere in the hours of film you can find one scene where it doesn't look like she is just staring at the ceiling. Finding one scene where her head just tilts right so it looks like she is looking at someone and the ceiling is not impossible. Hell, one of the biggest propaganda photos I have ever seen was the one with the mother kissing her and Terri's eyes are closed. But, I have seen the video and know that she was blinking. And this photo is designed to invoke the thought that Terri is enjoying the warm embrace of a loved one.


Now, after all of that, I believe this is the wrong approach to this situation. I despise the removal of her tube. Why? Because, like I said, it is torture. No one can argue against the fact that it is torture. But, we have no current system to allow a peaceful death of a person like this. We have no other option but to allow it. For one, it is against the law to intervene. The husband does have the rights here. And two, it has not been sufficiently proven that he has violated any of her rights.

Where can we go from here? I am hoping that the courts strike down these motions. They are unjust and violate the law prescribed. Then, hopefully the judges will speak out against those who are fighting this cause through illegal means. After all, neither the Congress nor the President has the grounds to do this. I am not saying any major motions against them...maybe at worst censure. But, we need to have the line drawn where our government can and cannot step in and override the rights of the people. Next, I really wish that this torture can result in good reform of euthanasia laws. Passive euthanasia is horrible. We are seeing it in the form of torture in the Schiavo case. People need to push for active euthanasia laws. Thirdly, I hope that everyone involved can finally move on from this point. We all know the outcome of this. It is as plain as day. Maybe the family can finally accept the fact their daughter will die and Michael Schiavo can continue his life with his new family.

EDIT: (Sorry, had to is getting rough here.)

And finally, perhaps this will jump start America into writing their wills at earlier ages and make sure their wishes will be recognized should they become incapacitated. It is sad that this had to result from such an awful case, but I hope we can truly learn from all of the mistakes made. Perhaps, this type of thing will never happen again.

[edit on 3/22/2005 by OXmanK]

posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 09:02 AM
I agree with you, the Terri case was caught in the greed of web for hidden agendas by the politicians, interest groups and religious groups.

The law should prevail, and that is the way it should be. For the benefit of all Americans in this country the right decision has been done.

And if the federal court wants to overrule 19 rullings from the state court then it will be the law to do that.

Not the congress and not the president that all they are doing is been pressure by interest groups that careless for the family and the poor woman.

posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 09:18 AM
Okman, I don't think there is a conservative or liberal side to this issue. Sleeper just made a thread about how he thinks they should let her die, and I've heard conservative talk-radio hosts saying how they should let her die. I would maybe have agreed, but after learning further details on Michael Schiavo, I'm not so sure anymore. There was a nurse on Hannity's show last night that used to care for Schiavo. She told Hannity, and the everyone else, that Michael was waiting for Terri to die. She said that Michael would repeated walk up to her and ask "When's she gonna die?", in a exited mood. She heard him saying "When's that B-tch gonna die?". Even though Terri showed signs of possibly getting better, Michael wouldn't allow anything but the feeding tube. He wouldn't allow for any decorations, T.V., radio etc. to be in Terri's room. The nurse said he seemed exited when Terri seemed to be on her deathbed, and often bragged about the money he's going to get and what he's going to buy with this. Now I can't say that Michael said and did these things for sure, but what reason would this nurse have to lie? She sounded genuine to me. There were also other nurses that heard these same things, and one of them was on the show as well. Her hospital threatened to fire her if she went on, but I don't know what's the case with that yet.

posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 12:18 PM
Ah, the sides have been drawn many years ago...with Kevorkian. And most conservatives were against him. Same is true here. Yes, there are some from each side on the life or death issue...but most fall into the same category. Dems line up there and Repubs go there...con and libs, you know which way to go.

And I honestly doubt the nurse actually witnessed this. This would have come out a long time ago, rather than, relatively, recently. And besides, there is something inherent that comes with almost motherly attachment to these people. And that can conflict in this type of issue.

Even if the nurse is telling the truth, it still won't matter. We cannot interfere. We shouldn't interfere. It sets tons of bad precedents that can be used to turn over your rights and "wills" to someone other than the legally defaulted person. If it scares you that one person decides your life, then change it. It is sad that this is what it has to come to attract attention to the living will issue, but at least people are learning. I really don't want to call it "a lesson to you all", but it is.

I wish things were different in this case. I despise passive euthanasia. I believe that many people can be rehabilitated. But I also believe in protecting a very clear cut law of guardianship. And I believe in not rocking the boat on the guardianship issue and rushing to a quick judgement. After all, rush decisions lead to bad consequences. Just think about your mom and dad telling your (hypothetical) wife that she is wrong and that you wanted to die. We will have a court battle and they may end up letting you die. Both paths are scary...but I will side with the current law that establishes a legal guardian over letting some potentially "agenda driven" judge choose your guardian. And that is what will happen if another case like this arises. They will cite the legal precedents of Schiavo vs. Schindler for years to come getting the guardian rights overturned to the parents. And I think the wife/husband knows the husband/wife better than the parents, outside of two-week old couples who went off and got hitched in Vegas...but that is not really the standard.

posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 08:02 PM
The scary part of this whole situation is that the Florida state legislature is now considering passing a bill that will allow the Florida state government to make people like Terri Schiavo a ward of the state. Such a law is unconstitutional, however. The Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws.

The key issue at stake is one of the Constitution and the rule of law. The Congress passed a bill requiring the Supreme Court to hear the Schiavo case. The Congress cannot do so. Congress can regulate the appellate jurisdiction of the Court. They tell the Court what types of cases they can hear and what types of cases they cannot hear, and of those types of cases that they are allowed to hear, the Court then uses its discretion to decide which of those cases to hear. However, the Congress cannot order the Court to hear this one particular case.

According to testimony, it has been decided that to die in this circumstance was Terri Schiavo's wish. Therefore, the courts hav been right in their decisions so far. If you have the right to life, you also have the right to give up that right to life. It has been established by the courts that people have the right to choose to terminate their life.

new topics

top topics

log in