[I’m “promoting” this comment left by “Cerebrocrat” in the Terri Schiavo News thread. –Amp]
Cerebrocrat wrote:
But there’s something being lost in this discussion of brain imaging methods. The fact that an MRI would give a better structural picture of Terri Schiavo’s brain does not at all mean that the existing CAT scan isn’t good enough for present purposes. I see much serious armchair scan-reading in this thread that signals ignorance of the subject. Let me tell you: if you are sufficiently familiar with brains and brain images, you do not need an MRI to tell you how severely the brain in the pictured CAT scan is damaged, nor do you need to see more slices than the one depicted here. This single image shows a very severely damaged brain. The large “blue blobs” in the middle are ventricles, also present in healthy brains (you can see the two little dark crescent shapes in the brain on the right) that have expanded to such a large size because the overall brain volume is so low. Cranial space that would otherwize have been filled by gray matter is now filled with cerebrospinal fluid. And yes, that’s what the blue space is: cerebrospinal fluid that is filling up space left behind by necrotic brain tissue that has been scavenged and removed by the body. The white squiggly things are white matter – connective tracts that have the loose, uncoiled look about them that they do because, again, the grey matter that once compressed them is no longer there, so they “float” loosely in CSF. The gigantic ventricles, expanded white matter, and undifferentiated blue space in that scan all point to the same thing: massive loss of grey matter in the cerebral cortex. You don’t need an MRI to tell you that, it’s clearly visible in the CAT scan.
It is true that given the poor resolution of this image, it’s possible that some cortical tissue has been spared. But that doesn’t matter. Whatever wisps of cortex we might be missing in this image are not enough to sustain behaviors that could differentiate Terri Schiavo from any other vertebrate. All the neural equipment you need to do ocular following and emotional responses is subcortical. All the neural equipment you need to be a self-aware, reasoning, behaving human being is cortical. And since i gather this image was made some time ago, the present condition of the brain can only be worse.
There is no way any qualified brain doctor or scientist could look at this image and suggest that significant recovery of function is possible. The fact that we could have all this discussion on the subject is a triumph of politics over science. Tragic for Terri Schiavo, and really for us all.
(Please see the comments for Cerebrocrat’s description of his background).
I don’t believe this is a left/right issue. I think it’s a human rights issue. I think anytime we make it partisan Terri loses. With that understood I still need to say something delicately. There was a time when some people took a great deal of pride in defending the powerless and abused women.
Dr. Cranford, one of the experts who examined Terri Schiavo:
“An MRI was never recommended because, in this case and other patients
in a permanent vegetative state, the CT scans were more than adequate
to demonstrate the extremely severe atrophy of the cerebral
hemispheres, and an MRI would add nothing of significance to what we
see on the CT scans. Plus the MRI is contraindicated because of the
intrathalamic stimulators implanted in Terri’s brain. A PET scan was
never done in this case because it was never needed. The classic
clinical signs on examination, the CT scans, and the flat EEG’s were
more than adequate to diagnose PVS to the highest degree of medical
certainty, along with the credible testimony of the three neurologists
at the longest evidentiary hearing in American law, whose opinions were
strongly affirmed by the trial court judge and three appeal court
judges. Please see Judge Greer’s opinions on the credibility of the
experts testifying on behalf of the Schindler family.
http://pekinprattles.blogspot.com/2005/03/schiavo-dr-cranford-offers-reply.html
David says: “Since multiple witnesses have heard her speak and some have heard her put together a complete sentence that really makes the reults of your scan reading mute.”
I saw the nurse aid who was interviewed who claimed she saw Terri sitting up, talking with staff and visiters, responding etc. Unfortunately, she is the only one who is saying so. No one else has come forward with the same eyewitness accounts. There is a lot of emotion tied up with this case and there are a lot of uninformed activists out there making their cases. The keyword here is “uninformed”.
Who has motive and desire to tell the truth or an untruth? Many, many.
David is just a sad creature. If the CAT scan at the top of this blog is true, what is the point? The fight is just political and “my philopshy is correct and yours is wrong”. Stick to the facts. What was is?; 80% of Americans would not like to live like Terri? If heaven is real…let her go there. This is an ego fight, nothing more.
(Sorry, but up my other website. )
David Helson said ‘He made a faux pas on Larry king saying “We didn’t know what Terri wanted but this is what we want”?.’
That wasn’t any faux pas. The court ruled on that from what her friends and relatives testified to. A sister-in-law and a brother-in-law, and friends, testified in court that Terri told them that she didn’t want to be kept alive like those whose funerals they were attending.
The court didn’t come to the conclusion from anything that Terri’s husband or parents said.
Oh, one more thing too. Much is made by some of the statement that Terri told her best friend that she was thinking of divorcing Michael.
Well, I’ve done more than think about divorcing my husband, I once moved out for some weeks, with the intention of divorcing him.
That was many years ago. We’re still together, 37 years now. Just because someone thinks about divorcing, or even talks about it, doesn’t mean the marriage is necessarily doomed. We don’t know what would have happened.
These are all private matters. Terri’s ambivalences towards her husband. His ambivalences towards her, his reaction to her heart attack. Her eating disorder. Whether he gets along well with her parents. (He lived with them for some time right after she collapsed.) Her current condition, and what she said she wanted. Her mother’s reaction to that. All the private matters of this family, which have been dragged into the open. But none of us knows these people, and so we don’t and can’t make judgments about them.
A court of law has determined – several times, actually – what Terri wanted under these circumstances. That’s all we know, really.
We should, if so inclined, pray for all these people, that the right be done (whatever that is). I’m a Catholic, as I said, so I do not believe that this life is all there is. I hope Terri and everyone else finds peace.
This case has only been heard once and only heard partially at that.
A list of the laws broken or ignored by judge greer.
There is no way this monster will ever win another term on the bench. The only question is whether he will be impeached. Sadly too late to save Terri.
David. Terri is dead already. Move on.
Here is a good article about all the isssues, from an atheist point of view of course.
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/154583.htm
By the way David, please stop embarrassing the Christians.
David Helson’s Godly website – ‘A list of the laws broken or ignored by judge greer.’
What a silly website that is. The very first charge that it makes is factually inaccurate.
Judge Greer is one of your own. He’s a devout Christian, conservative Republican, and has never been overturned.
Please don’t do put-downs of other posters on my website. Thanks!
Ampersand, I was not putting down or trying to surpress David Helson. I am only stating the obvious. He is not representing his faith faithfully. I did not call him an idoit or a troll or insulted him in any way. I ask simply that he not embarrass the Christians. How is that a put down?
We are aware of the facts of this case, as stated in numerous court decisions thanks to your blog, yet David refutes them based on his beliefs. The legal system’s willful blindness to facts cannot succeed forever.
Is he not embarrassing himself and his fellow Christians?
Athiestfundimentalist, either you know perfectly well that “please stop embarassing yourself/your allies” is an insult, or you have a tin ear. If you have a tin ear, then I’ll just have to ask you to take my word for it.
David, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE be careful that when you use “blockquote,” either typing it out or using the button, that when you post there is a closing “/blockquote” at the end of your quote. Also, please try to put a paragraph break (i.e., pressing return once or twice) before the opening blockquote and after the closing blockquote. Otherwise the page layout gets all messed up in some browsers.
Barb
One nurse telling the truth would be all it would take to prove Terri was not PVS. But it is not just one nurse.
Nora Lynn Wagner,
Carla Sauer Iyer
and here the nurse describes the time Michael tried to kill Terri and the nurse called the police and lost her job over it.
What a guardian Michael makes huh?
All that responsiveness that a piece of meat PVS patient can’t have but Terri has? Well you brainscan readers can try and pull rank on objective reality but we both know that postmodernism stuff is just crap don’t we?
IF these two ladies are truthful, why have the experts, the doctors, the lawyers, etc., disregarded their claims? Frankly, I don’t believe these ladies.
“Judge George W. Greer, the Florida circuit judge who
has presided over several aspects of the Schiavo case, dismissed Iyer’s
allegations as “incredible” and noted in a September 17, 2003, order
that not even Terri Schiavo’s parents sought her testimony in the case.”
http://mediamatters.org/items/Â200503230001
If there were and or is, any doubt, it would be an easy thing to test her again. You are asking me to go paranoid and believe dozens, scores of people are trying to kill this clearly damaged woman. I’m sorry, I don’t buy it. I’ve seen the videos of Terri, I would not want to live like that even if I were cognizant. She is not.
Nurse Heidi Law thinks Terri is very responsive…and talkative…
[court documents
Heidi Law]
Barb
Let me know how many nurses you need to hear desribe Terri talking and I’ll keep posting till I get to that number.
Hey David, you sure she wasn’t saying ‘kill me!’
[Personal attack snipped by Amp.]
I truly feel for the true victims of this case, the Schiavo family (both parents and husband). A horrible situation has been magnified greatly by zealots who want to use the situation for their own ends.
Thanks but I’d rather hear from knowledgable experts than the emotionally overwhelmed, or those with a “cause” to support.
Shes already dead. Now let her body die.
Geeze, next thing you know people will want machines to hook their lifeless pets too so that they ‘dont have to die’ .
They are dead. Machines are doing the other work.
Yeah, those nurses…must just be emotionalism huh? They’re women so you can’t take them for serious professionals? Is that your point?
How bout doctors?
Richard Neubauer
Ooooh there he goes getting emotional…gotta find someone more serious than a doctor…shall I quote scripture?
I can’t believe there are so many people willing to inject their own personal opinions into what is a private matter. Butt out! This is no one’s business outside of the family.
God forbid any of you ever experience anything like this. If you do, I hope you are able to avoid every busybody with a keyboard as well as those all those unmentionables in Congress.
Err on the side of life? Think about what that really means the next time you vote. Does it mean all lives, or only those that you personally care about? Think about all the lives you don’t care about before you get so opinionated.
David, you can quote all that you want to, but it doesn’t change the scans in the post – they clearly show that those quotes can’t be accurate.
I have asked medical people I know to comment on those scans, and they all reach the same conclusion as the original commenter.
Mr. Helson, you ignore and omit the most important part of Dr. Neibauer’s affadavit:
The problem with Dr. Neubauer’s statement is that he never examined the patient nor did he review her charts. As the aged doctor (86 or so) makes clear in his sworn testimony all his contact with Ms Schiavo consists solely of viewing a tape. (If you bother to research the case, you’ll find this is a heavily edited tape, too–not a realtime tape.)
Further, it should be noted that Dr. Neubauer is not a neurologist. Generally, one requires training in neurology or neuropsychiatry to undertake this sort of examination of a patient. (Of course, in all cases this kind of examination always requires physically examining the patient.)
As a physician I find it incredibly irresponsible that Dr. Neubauer would offer testimony on a patient’s condition only after the viewing of an edited tape– with neither a physical exam nor review of the chart. The fact he is offering testimony outside his field of formal training, internal medicine, is also telling.
Dr. Neubauer’s “examination” of a heavily edited videotape to diagnose an individual simply does not meet standard of care in any state of the union or modern country. Offering an affadavit with such an unequivocal opinion on such scant evidence suggests that Dr. Neubauer really did not care about the truth.
It is no wonder why the courts found Dr. Neubauer’s testimony unbelievable.
I am a real live board certified neurosugeon. The scan at the top of this thread is not conssitent with the stories from the nurses quoted here. Our human brains are wired for empathy and pattern recognition. It is natural and common for family members to see purposeful activity in patients who cannot respond. Even brain dead patients will move when the ventilator expands there lungs. I myself can feel their “humaneness” but I also know that the observed response is tricking my empathetic mind onto seeing something that is not real.
When nurse Heidi Law proves she can pass neuro boards and shows her ability to make accurate diagnoses and prognoses of multiple patients with an acceptable level of inter-rater reliability with board certified (current board certification, medical license & actively in practice) neurologists, I will lend credence to her testimony. So far, all of the Terri has been misdiagnosed statements have been by healthcare professionals has been by those with a stated bias, those who have neither examined her nor her EEGs and/or have been enlisted (and paid for) by agents on behalf of the Schindlers. Her own neurologist and the impartial one appointed by the court have concurring diagnoses and their statements have been substantiated with appropriate clinical correlative data. I wonder how many of the healthcare professionals making/disputing Schiavo’s diagnosis would be willing to undergo a practical examination diagnosing other patients using redacted medical records with CT Scans, EEGs and other records to see how they compare to the diagnosis of neurologists who care for them. I have a feeling that without the politics and decisions regarding support, objective diagnoses would be different than those they would make in charged cases like this (by those who are even qualified); I also highly doubt they’d be willing to stake their medical licenses on their performance of this sort of test.
Article with people who know Micheal Schivao speaking out – he sounds far from the monster everyoneon the right makes him out to be. For godssake her parents encouraged him to date, they figured he’d divorce her. But no. This all comes down to the malpractice judgement he got in her name 10 years ago, he didn’t share it with them instead put it in a trust in her name for her care they have been fighing ever since to get custody.
They wanted the money, no w it’s gone, so now it’s all about who’s right for them.
jen, like I don’t like people telling us Michael Schivao’s motives, I think we should be careful in making statements about the parents’ motives.
As Gallileo would say to authority “and yet she speaks”…
Braindoc, another person trying to pull rank on objective reality…wow.
The nurses just all lied, huh? Terri’s parents are lying huh? Have you looked over the credentials of all the doctors on Terri’s parents side? People who actually worked with the guy who invented the term PVS. BTW I’ve also seen Wolfson be very very quick to point out just how wonderfully qualified Dr Hammesfahr is when it was pointed out Hammesfahr denies Wolfson diagnosis categorically.
It only takes one person hearing Terri speak to trump any expert on this by virtue of the very definition of PVS.
I wonder how many of the healthcare professionals making/disputing Schiavo’s diagnosis would be willing to undergo a practical examination diagnosing other patients using redacted medical records with CT Scans, EEGs and other records to see how they compare to the diagnosis of neurologists who care for them
The 34 doctors tesitfying she is obviously not PVS [as opposed to your 4 court appointed doctors and one main one, Cranford] are begging that she be given those very tests.
Cranford btw is a featured speaker at Hemlock society fuctions, makes his living going around the country labeling borderline patients PVS, spent 45 minutes complimenting Terri Schiavo for how well she was responding and then sentenced her to death. Dr Hammesfahr spent ten hours with Terri and a year going over her complete medical records and says she may be better than minimally conscious right now, an opinion held by dozens of the top professionals in the field.
Has anyone noticed how quiet Michael Schiavo has been? Few press releases, only the one interview I’m aware of, no ranting and raving website that I can find at least.
Whatever his motives, I’m favorably impressed by that. This is his wife, after all, and she is dying. He doesn’t seem inclined to parade his side of this story over and over in front of the media. If he is not the monster so many people say he is, it must be difficult not to lash out in his own defense, but he doesn’t.
Polls show that the overwhelming majority of Americans think this is a private matter which should not be subject to interference from the federal government. I’d have to say that I’d agree – I don’t want my wishes on something like this debated in Congress, certainly.
Cransford, once having been given the description of Stephen Hawking but not the name, called him PVS. I’m supposed to take the word of someone whose wet dream is pulling the plug on Stephen Hawking?
Barb:
Thanks but I’d rather hear from knowledgable experts than the emotionally overwhelmed, or those with a “cause”? to support.
But don’t you too have a cause to support? I am agnostic as to the claims of both sides, and from my position I see that both sides are looking to the evidence to support their cause, based on their a priori view of the issue in general, and not approaching the evidence in a truly empiricist manner.
How anyone can say that they know the proper resolution of this case is beyond me. Have you all really investigated all of the evidence? Do you really know that those you don’t agree with are biased and incompetent, and based on what information? Or is it just based on your information that the right/left pro/enti euthanasia side MUST be wrong, because they always are? Because you wouldn’t/would want to live in such a situation?
I am an atheistic humanistic left-wing sort, but I am very concerned about the assumption that virtually nobody would want to live in such a circumstance. Are we sure that it is not that assumption, WHICH MAY NOT BE TRUE OF TERRI (the courts notwithstanding; courts can be wrong and indeed frequently are), , that is driving the interpretation of this case by the judiciary and the public? She must feel that way, because anyone would! Well, not anyone would. Check out the arguments by mostly left-wing disabled proponents, like those of the members of Not Dead Yet. It is those sorts of assumptions, and the potential for biased interpretations of particular cases and societal pressure on the disabled, that terrify the members of this organization. Based on the records (which may be forged, for all I know, of course) of the nurses, Terri shows some enjoyment of basic bodily comforts like baths, body lotion, and having her hair combed. I might want to live if I could enjoy those comforts, especially since I do not believe in an afterlife. Frankly, I believe that sleep is pleasant enough to be preferable to death (not that I am saying she is in a sleeplike state; frankly, I do not believe we currently know what the experience of being in her physical condition is like).
As for the examples above of people being denied food and water because of advanced directives, those stories may not be true. However, they are enough reason for me to have an advanced directive indicating I am never to be denied those things. Being denied such things when I am not able to completely defend myself (when I am in a locked in state, or minimally conscious, but declared PVS; or the doctors think I am near death and refuse my request despite the fact I am a human being and I state I want foor and I should determine whether I am fed or not) is frankly terrifying.
And I write this all as a pro-choicer who would support federal funding for medical care and more funds for the poor, not a right winger.
I maintain that artificial life support involves mechanical subsititution of bodily functions. Artificial breathing machines breath for the patient. Dialisys machines process the blood for the patient.
I argue that a stomach tube is only a delivery method the same as a food tray and qualifies as maintenance. A tube is not digesting the food for the patient.
My father suffered severe brain damage and in a coma for 8 months. I fought my family and his neuro doctors at Washington DC from delivering the final dose of morphine. He recovered after a year of physical therapy. We now pick out books at the library, watch John Wayne movies, discuss international trade policy and deep sea mining law. But he can’t remember what he had for lunch (great for left overs!).
On the occasion (common for his condition) he is dehydrated, he loses congnitive abilities. When I admit him for rehydration, doctors that do not know him rate him as vegatative. After a few bags of saline, he bounces back. Then they change the admit records. Every time.
I agree that in the case of Schiavo the brain damage has been extensive but has all efforts for therapy been made? Look at her hands and feet. I see no signs of therapy.
My questions are two fold: brain damage can be extensive yet there are many cases where “quality of life” can be obtained. Does wearing a diaper or Depends qualify as a loss of quality of life as my sister would say?
What about the handicapped at state schools? Should we stop feeding these people?
For the lawyers out there: does feeding through a stomach tube qualify as maintenance or life support?
I find withdrawing the feeding tube so outrageous and the same as putting a pillow over her face and withdrawing her right to breath.
Pingback: dangerousmeta! » NY Times:
No, David, for the zillionth time, we’re all taking the “word” (we lawyers call it the “ruling”) of the trial court. Both sides had ample opportunity to bring out all the evidence they could, and the trier of fact made a decision. Which decision, by the way, was that Terri wanted that tube removed. It was only tangentially a decision about her precise medical diagnosis.
Some say she didn’t think that. These people are in conflict with the trial court, who said she did. Some people think she shouldn’t have the right to demand that even if she wanted to. These people are in conflict with the Constitution, and with long-settled principles of common law.
It is regretable that so much of this public debate is founded on a profound misunderstanding of our legal system. All appellate courts, including the Supreme Court, are required by law to take this statement about Terri’s wishes as fact unless they can find that the judge made legal mistakes, which they have not found in spite of repeated review. David on the other hand wants a new trial on the whole issue because he’s unhappy about how the first (actually there were two) trials came out.
This could undoubtedly be said of every trial. Certainly the losing party usually feels that way. That does not mean that we try everything over and over again, for obvious reasons.
Is this a correct decision? How would I know? and I’d suggest that David doesn’t know either. Neither of us attended the trial (so far as I know), and almost everything both of us know about this matter is hearsay, some of it wild stories without any substantiation whatever, picked up somewhere on the internet.
Terri’s case has probably had more judicial attention than any guardianship case in history, and all the courts agree, in the end, about how it should come out. We are to follow her wishes.
To take a trivial example, I think OJ Simpson murdered his wife. It’s a totally incompetent opinion, since I wasn’t there, never reviewed the evidence, and have never met any of these people, but it is nevertheless an opinion I hold. However, under the rule of law (as opposed to Rule by Newspaper and Internet) I accept the decision of the trial court that he didn’t.
That’s how we do things here. If you prefer a society where we examine bird entrails, or take the word of Mr. Helson without question, you’ll have to move.
Again David Helson ignores facts. If Mr. Helsom were to bother to acquaint himself with the facts, of which he is woefully ignorant, he would realize that the nurses’ affidavits were worthless. The court basically saaid the two lied. Here’s what the order says :
A PDF image of this order may be seen here.
Rarely in an order does a court discuss credibility in this detail. The extent the court attacks the affidavits shows how the court regards them as utterly worthless.
The court was right in doing this. As Cerebrocrat noted, the CT shows that Ms Schiavo’s brain has suffered such insults as destroy almost all of the cerebral cortex, the part of the brain that holds her personality and reason. I am sorry Ms Schiavo is in a permanent vegetative state but lies and denial won’t change this.
You can honestly look at this list of guardianship laws broken by judge greer and say with a straight face that her interests were ever adequately represented in court?
Wow, and you are a lawyer…what a screwed up world we live in.
I’m a nurse, have been for 30 years. All institutions have rules and regulations about how documentation is done in patients’ charts, and if I had ever found that someone had removed notes from a chart, (she saw the notes in the trash and didn’t take them out??), I’d have had the VP for Nursing and the head of the Medical Records dept on the unit in an instant. Tampering with medical records is grounds for losing one’s nursing license, and so is NOT reporting it when you find it has been done. Any nurse worth her salt protects her patients and doesn’t let another medical professional “intimidate” her, as Ms. Sauer-Iyer stated she was intimidated by Mr. Schiavo’s size (6’7″) and “loud voice.” Where is the proof that these nurses went to their nursing administration to voice their concerns about the situation? Why did Sauer-Iyer call the police instead of going FIRST to the administration and documenting the meeting? Did these women go to the state Board of Nursing when/if they weren’t happy with the responses of the nursing administration? Did they report same to the regulatory agency that oversees nursing homes and hospices in Florida?
The accusations these nurses made smell very very fishy to me.
Responding to Susan’s post #129—Mr. Schiavo was interviewed one morning last week on the Today Show, and was surprised at his calm but firm answers to the mewly Katie Couric. Whatever else he may be, he has the courage of his convictions. It is to his credit that he stays away from the press.
yikes. That should say, “I” was surprised at his ….answers.
Whether or not her husband is a good guy or not is not an issue. Whether or not starving is a good way to die or not is not an issue. The law is written a certian way, if the voters of Florida ( ie the legislature) want to change the law, then do it. If not, then the situation is be handled according to current law.
I seem to recall reading that Judge Greer was asked to leave his church. The last time I checked, weren’t judges supposed to use the law when they rule and not base their ruling on their religious beliefs? It appears that this was what he did. The fact that he was asked to leave his church over this further cements my beliefs that some Christian churches don’t have a clue. Didn’t god say something about being forgiving? Didn’t he say something along the lines of forgive them because they know not what they do?
Don’t the fundies realize that their actions push those of us who are “on the fence” away from religion? You couldn’t pay me to worship in any of these churches.
I was a nurse’s aide while in high school and college and saw things that I would never wish upon another human being. Shortly after I started working there, I made it very clear to my family that I wouldn’t want to live like that and to take me out to a field and shoot me if I ever got to that point. I now have a living will and anyone, I mean anyone, who even thinks of challenging it will pay dearly when I come back to haunt them.
Let this poor woman go…
The boards of hospices have had a sea change of opinion and can no longer be trusted to hew to the ethical standards you are refering to. Please be concerned enuff to look into all the nurses’ charges, [and there are more here] and make some noise about it before hospices are nothing more than pretty death camps. Most of the nurses at these hospices are some of the finest people on the planet but if they keep having to choose between their jobs or their ethics that will change. I can’t say such nice things about the board members tho.
Euthanasia Advocates Taking Over America’s Hospice Industry
– What are leaders in the euthanasia lobby like Ira Byok doing leading the hospice movement? You don’t find that chilling?
Pingback: The Geek’s Blog » Terri Schiavo’s Brain
Y’know, eventually, Terri Schiavo will be dead. At some point, she’s just not going to be alive any longer.
Perished. Not breathing.
Pushing up the daisies. Insert the rest of Python’s “Pet Shop” dialogue here.
The issue isn’t whether Terri lives or dies, because death is a part of life. She’s gonna die. Oh yes. Maybe not in the next few weeks, but dead Terri is gonna happen.
The issue is who takes responsibility for death.
Oh, everyone wants to be responsible for life. Life’s where it’s at. Sweet happy num-num, you can thank me for Life any time! I’m all about that.
But Death, well, sir, that’s a scary bad boo-boo. Fingers must point away, over there. No refunds on the parrot.
It comes as no surprise that politicians would cashier all the public’s trust in law and faith just to score points that they have no responsibility for.
They’re all cowards, of course. Cowards are irresponsible by definition.
Only the brave know how to shoulder the responsibilty of death.
David, here are my standards for this discussion.
1) I believe that it’s always best to make decisions based on hard evidence whenever possible.
2) When hard evidence is unavailable, decisions must be made based on softer evidence, like hearsay, but this evidence is always trumped by hard evidence.
3) Conflicting sorts of soft evidence must be evaluated for credibility and bias in order to determine which evidence is most likely true.
For example: In the absence of any hard evidence of Terri Schiavo’s wishes regarding her health, the court was forced to evaluate her husband’s claims and her parent’s claims, and found her husband’s claims to be more credible. However, if tomorrow we found a legitimate living will signed by Terri saying “KEEP ME ALIVE AT ALL COSTS,” that would neatly trump anything and everything her husband has said.
Keeping this in mind, I would like to request some sort of hard evidence, any sort of hard evidence that Terri Schiavo is able to speak or concious in any way.
This evidence could include but is not limited to an unedited videotape of Terri audibly speaking and responding to questions.
See, the reason I ask for this is because we have hard evidence that she’s utterly incapable of thought. It’s up at the top of this page, and it’s called a CAT scan. This CAT scan shows that her brain is, essentially, gone. This hard evidence trumps any amount of soft evidence you’d care to offer, and can only be refuted with some sort of contradictory hard evidence.
Think of it like this: A photograph of a double amputee clearly showing that his legs are gome neatly trumps any number of nurses stories about how he would hop out of bed in the middle of the night and dance irish jigs around the hospital. Offer me something solid, and then I’ll take you seriously.
—Myca
David. I do not find any “list” at the site you link, just a screed about how Michael Schiavo is allegedly a liar.
I keep saying this over and over, but I guess you’re incapable of understanding it. One more time through. The trial court found what it found. Several appellate courts reviewed the entire case, and found no judicial error. All these people know more than you do, more than I do, and more than the person who posted the blog you listed does, about the facts in this matter, and about the provisions of Florida law which bear on this case. I trust them. And anyhow, that’s how we do it here.
You seem addicted to the idea that you, in your infinite wisdom, all by yourself, with no checks or balances, based solely on random blogs on the internet, at least half of which are totally incorrect, know more and would have made a better decision than the people who were there, and who spent many hours reviewing the evidence and listening to testimony.
You’ll forgive me if I’m a bit skeptical.
Carla Sauer Iyer worked at the Convalescent Center in Largo, back in ’95-’96, not in the Hospice where Mrs. Schiavo is now. I don’t know how “hospice” works in Florida, but here in Connecticut you cannot be accepted to a hospice level of care unless your doctor asserts that you have fewer than 6 months to live. Should it become apparent that you will survive 6 months, you will be transferred to another level of care. I believe this is true for everyone, and not related to insurance issues. Perhaps in Florida the terms “hospice” and “long term care” are interchangeable.
In any event, regardless of what standards the institution’s board may have, Ms. Sauer Iyer must be held to the oath she swore when she became an RN, and to all of the state of Florida Nursing Board standards.
Thank you, Myca.
This decision had to be made somehow. If they’d had a writing from Terri, that would have solved it. Lacking that, the court did the best it could after listening to conflicting testimony, weighing the credibility of the witnesses, all that. Since neither David nor I was there, we are not qualified to do this over, and neither is the appellate court, which is why they can’t. We have to rely on the finder of fact.
Solid evidence to the contrary would be most welcome to all concerned. I suggest that you’re not going to find it by cruising blogs on the internet, however.
There is a lot of misinformation in these comments, some of which is most likely disingenuous. I’m a doctor, I’ve seen dying patients, I’ve seen PVS, and I’ve been there as families made decisions to hold or continue various treatments. Here are some facts.
1. TS has PVS.
2. TS’s wishes, as stated by her next of kin, would be for no further medical intervention in her situation (which makes her exact diagnosis, PVS or MCS, a bit less important).
3. Tube feeding is an artificial medical intervention, much like sticking a tube down someone’s throat to breath for them.
4. Forcing someone to undergo an invasive medical treatment against their will (except in rare instances) is considered assault and battery.
5. Without water, death results in about two weeks. It is peaceful.
6. Because TS has no content to consciousness, she has no capacity for suffering, no capacity for thirst or hunger, and no awareness of the events around her.
Keeping this in mind, I would like to request some sort of hard evidence, any sort of hard evidence that Terri Schiavo is able to speak or concious in any way.
I don’t know why notarized affidavits from four of her nurses doesn’t count as credible evidence. These nurses had to pay with their jobs for their willingness to tell these stories. They all testify to the fear the entire staff at the Woodside Hospice of losing their jobs if they revealed Terri’s responsiveness.
For years Michael Schiavo has had Terri’s parents practically strip searched to prevent them from bringing in a video camera for fear the videos will destroy his case and generate sympathy for Terri. Michael is even today threatening lawsuits against Terri’s website from linking to the videos that escaped his censorship.
That sort of dispicable conduct should not be rewarded by fair-minded people or succeed against Terri’s interests.
I don’t know how “hospice”? works in Florida, but here in Connecticut you cannot be accepted to a hospice level of care unless your doctor asserts that you have fewer than 6 months to live. Should it become apparent that you will survive 6 months, you will be transferred to another level of care.
Exactly. Judge greer has violated that very law. She is at the hospice illegally as she has never been diagnosed with a terminal illness.
He is legally blind in more ways than one.
David,
The court answered your question about the credibility of these nurses (which is not “hard” evidence anyway) at some length. Do you read other people’s posts?? Or do you just talk on, without listening to what anyone has to say, even people who are close to the facts?
The courts are all in on this conspiracy too, according to you? Florida courts, federal courts, the entire Eleventh Circuit, the Supremes? Only you know the right answer? Please. Talk sense.
You think the trial court’s decision was the wrong one, on the basis of nothing much, except that you don’t like the answer. You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and you may be right, since no court is infallible. But no one is going to re-try it. And we don’t try cases in newspapers or on blogs. This one was done in a court, where it belongs.
That’s how we do it here. We’re not going to erect the Tyranny of David Helson any time soon.
It is obviously all a vast right wing conspiracy…..
It would be a lot easier for the parents to get a credible doctor to state that she is not in PVS than to petition the supreme court. Of course they have not been able to…..Kinda tells you something. Maybe she is indeed in PVS.
Even if it is morally wrong ( we all have our opinions) the law is clear, if she can’t tell us her wishes, then her legal proxy can. The legal proxy is the husband. Whether or not anybody likes it.
I don’t know why notarized affidavits from four of her nurses doesn’t count as credible evidence.
David, you’re not hearing me.
I’m not making any judgement as to the credibility of these nurses. What I’m saying is that since we have hard evidence opposing them . . . since we have PROOF, we don’t need to judge their credibility. The only judgement I’m making is that ‘what they say’ isn’t the same thing as “proof.” Hard evidence trumps soft evidence. This isn’t difficult to understand.
This isn’t a judgement I’m just making for them, either. It applies across the board. No matter how personally credible I may find Michael Schiavo, if tomorrow he began to claim that the moon was made of green cheese, I’d disregard that claim as well. Why? Because we have proof that it isn’t, goddammit.
This isn’t a “he said/she said” situation. In a he said/she said situation, we judge the relative credibility of the speakers.
This is a “he offered a series of medical exams and charts and scans resulting in pretty damn irrefutable evidence that Terri Schiavo’s brain is gone/she said ‘nuh-uh'” situation. In a situation like this, credibility doesn’t count. It’s not important.
I’m offering you the opportunity to present some sort of hard evidence of your own. Something to counterbalance the hard evidence we’ve seen from the other side. It’s not surprising to me that you balk at this eminently reasonable request, because I don’t believe that you have any hard evidence. What I believe that you have is quite a lot of wishful thinking.
If you want to prove that the moon is made of green cheese, show me a videotape of an astronaut eating that cheese. Until I SEE that moon cheese, though, I’m going to go on believing that it’s a hunk of rock.
And I’m going to go on believing that Terri Schiavo is already dead.
—Myca
The fact is only one court has ever heard [as in ruled on] the fac ts of the case. All other appeals courts have merely ruled on process.
Judge Greer is a fully conflicted member of Florida’s vulture community. All the people on Michael’s side of the court were maxed out contributors to Greer’s campaigns. Florida judges are elected and have a max contribution of $500 to their campaigns.
Judge greer had a founding member of the euthanasia lobby on one side in George Felos and he conspired to keep Terri unrepresented or represented by members of the euthanasia lobby like Cranford.
As you know one glaring hole in our ‘justice system’ is that some people are much better represented than others and this has a huge role in who gets justice.
In this case judge greer and his friends/maxed out campaign contributors on Michael’s side of the courtroom conspired to keep Terri represented by euthanasia lobbyists, often without any ad litem at all, with a conflicted judge acting as ad litem illegally. With no one on her side she was lost from the beginning and no amount of appeals could ever save her unless one agreed to hear the facts which none have.
Judge Greer was a fellow council member with Barbara Todd Sheen who was a county commisioner serving with Greer and a board member of the hospice that has been trying to kill Terri.
George Felos in fact resigned from the board overseeing the Woodside Hospice to ‘avoid the apearance of impropriety’. We shouldn’t be so easily fooled.
>”Felos … was a founding member of the National Legal Advisors Committee on Choice in Dying, and served as Board Chair of The Hospice of the Florida. Where did the phrase “choice in dying” come from? Well, there was an organization called the Euthanasia Society of America which changed its name to “Choice in Dying” which no longer exists – it merged into the “Partnership for Caring” which was founded by Ira Byock
I believe Ira Byok is a member of the board that Felos resigned from.
Greer allowed Michael to flout every conceivable principle and law regarding guardianship.
The truth is only one corrupt judge is the cause and perpetuator of this human rights disaster. He simply papers over his own corrupt rulings, one patently faulty ruling with the next.
David,
Do you know what Terri wants?
Judge Greer is a fully conflicted member of Florida’s vulture community
Aside from the fact that this sentence is gibberish, to the extent that I can figure out what it says, there doesn’t seem to be anything here but pure invective. Pure emotion.
doc nos, your analysis is admirably brief and admirably correct. That’s where we are.
I’d advise us all to stop arguing with David. His sentence structure is deteriorating, and we’re all just saying the same thing over and over, and he’s not listening.
Brad. Yes. David knows what Terri wants, along with every other fact in the universe. Or lacking that, he knows what Terri should want, according to him, and for him that’s good enough.
Because we have proof that it isn’t, goddammit.
Even if your proof could trump the objective reality that she can talk, your proof has been interpretted by other neurological experts just the opposite of your conclusions.
What does this professional think of the interpretation such as those presented by the posters in this thread?
Thank You Susan…my point exactly. 90% of the comments on the web about this case have one thing in common….the person is injecting their own beliefs into a foreign situation.
Remember folks….Law is black and white, however, life is very gray. It is impossible to construct laws which fit every case the way we wish.
Blockquote begins at…My Grandmother’s Brain … OK … But Would I Stop Feeding My Grandmother?
Please excuse the syntax error.
[For those who were wondering, this post of David’s refers to missing blockquote tags in his previous post. I’ve added in the blockquote tags – Amp.]
One word…..Huh?
BTW Terri has therapy devices in her head that were supposed to be removed because they are an infection risk. Michael was instructed to have that done. Just another instance of attempted murder.
Even if your proof could trump the objective reality that she can talk,
Right, David, that’s my point. I believe that Terri cannot talk. I believe that your ‘objective reality’ is a lie, and I want some proof of it.
You are making a statement which I do not believe, and I am asking you to back that statement up in a concrete way.
I HAVE SEEN MANY WALKING, TALKING, FAIRLY COHERENT PEOPLE WITH WORSE CEREBRAL/CORTICAL ATROPHY.
Lovely. Please submit a video of these people along with an accompanying CAT scan so that we may compare and evaluate.
Kindly either do so or admit that you are utterly unable to do so.
Of course, you are unable to do so. There is no evidence.
Offer some hard evidence. The harping on bias and corruption doesn’t do much to convince me that a body without a cerebral cortex can think.
—Myca
David, it’s hard for me to take the claims of a medical site which posts theories that Bill Clinton secretly has AIDS all that seriously. Also, he so far hasn’t been able to back up the claims you quoted with documented evidence.
I’m not willing to have my site used for extreme rhetoric like accusing someone of attempted murder when no one has even found enough evidence to call a grand jury. If you’re not willing to dial back your rhetoric a bit, I think I’m going to ask you to stop posting on my site.
As has already been pointed out, removing intrathalamic stimulators – even from a brain in great shape – is a difficult operation that carries risks of its own. Maybe they should have been removed, maybe not; but there isn’t enough credible evidence to make that judgement, let alone enough to justify accusations of attempted murder.
I got stuck here:
Michael is even today threatening lawsuits against Terri’s website from linking to the videos that escaped his censorship.
Let’s assume that Michael is indeed suing “Terri’s website” for releasing videos of his wife, even if it isn’t true. Why would he bother? The courts have seen every piece of evidence against Michael’s position that Terri’s parents can muster, including, I’m sure, all those “censored” video and photos. But they keep ruling in his favor, so I sincerely doubt that anything could possibly “destroy his case and generate sympathy for Terri” at this point.
Could there be any other reason for such a lawsuit? Well, maybe because anybody in his situation would be upset if videos of his wife were being disseminated over the Internet. In fact, if the lawsuit were real, I’d be rather surprised if Terri’s parents weren’t included in it. How would you feel if images of your daughter, whom you love very, very much, were being trotted out on the Internet by a bunch of strangers who never knew her, don’t really care about her, are only interested in her situation for ideological reasons?
Terri’s parents are probably heartbroken; they may hate Michael, but I don’t think they’re doing what they’re doing because they want to get revenge . They genuinely care about Terri and her welfare. They have no agenda other than helping their daughter.
But the government has an agenda. The media has an agenda. Everyone who’s trying to demonize Michael or Terri’s parents have an agenda. What saddens me most about the whole affair is that Terri the person has been replaced by Terri the symbol, which is often what happens when everybody gets involved in what should be a personal matter.
I don’t know if I’d make the same decision Michael is making. But I realize it isn’t any of my business, which is pretty much the point of this whole debacle. This decision should be left up to the people who really knew her and really love her, and I’m sorry they disagree about what should be done and had to resort to litigation. But they do, and they did–over and over again–and at this point we really need to respect that process and its outcome. There’s no other way to do it.
If she were able to sit up and have conversations….even a devout euthanasia advocate would agree she should live and get therapy.
Michael has succeeded in preventing almost all video evidence. Congratulations.
…and Hitler tried to prevent the outside world from seeing the truth.
…and Kim Il Jung tried to prevent the outside world from seeing the truth.
…and so forth…
If the absence of video evidence proves anything at all it is that Michael doesn’t like what videos would show, ergo the evidence favors Terri’s parents.
The love and joy in Terri’s eyes as she gazes into her mother’s eyes in the few videos that escaped Michael’s clutches are all the evidence I need of Terri’s consciousness. I have truckloads of other reasons to side with Terri’s parents however.
If she were able to sit up and have conversations….even a devout euthanasia advocate would agree she should live and get therapy. – Brad
Except two witnesses say she has actually uttered a complete sentence. The euthansia lobby wants this as their point of critical mass where euthanasia gains acceptance and they want her dead period.
I have to admit…Michael an impressively powerful individual. He has been able to construct a conspiracy that goes from the janitor all the way to the Supreme Court, all for the purpose of commtting a murder ! And right under the most intense media scrutiny since OJ !
David, can you please document this claim with evidence?
Also, can you please link to the evidence showing that Michael has prevented video of Terri speaking from being released?
Thank you.
The euthansia lobby wants this as their point of critical mass where euthanasia gains acceptance and they want her dead period.
So….They need to use her as an example? I assume there are no other “real” PVS cases in the US that they could use…they needed to make one up.
and at this point we really need to respect that process and its outcome. There’s no other way to do it.
Nah, it is still not too late for the ADT [adult Protection Team] of the Florida DCF to do the job they have not been doing up to now. The DCF is part of the process too.
That’s fine, David. I would also be happy to look at any evidence that indicates that a body without a cerebral cortex is still able to think.
Surely Michael Schiavo hasn’t been able to eliminate all of that evidence as well?
What? He has? That man is fiendish, I tell you.
Fiendish!
—Myca
Ampersand
I will track them down.
David Helson – I went to the web site, and see an anonymous poster using an idea saying ‘DOCTOR”.
Can you tell us why you would put a lot of faith in such a post on a website that is obviously biased against the many, many court decisions and witnesses?
I suggest you look at this report by the person that Jeb Bush picked to investigate and report on the case a few years ago.
http://www.miami.edu/ethics/schiavo/wolfson%27s%20report.pdf
Well, David, you’ve finished with a flourish, comparing Michael Schiavo to Hitler. Something of a flourish. It’s pretty boring, actually.
It’s been real, David. However, you’re not listening to anything anyone says, much less to the rule of law, so this conversation is getting a bit repetitious.
Also, I am a Roman Catholic, and today is Holy Thursday, so I’m logging off until after Easter, because these days are for prayer, not for arguing. Those of you here who believe in prayer might try some: for Terri, for her parents, for Michael, for the judges who have worked so hard and so thanklessly in this case, for the attorneys and nurses and doctors and everyone involved. And for all of us, that we all find the peace of Christ.
I believe this legal case is the origination of this meme that is very much around the web atm. [151 googles]
Also, can you please link to the evidence showing that Michael has prevented video of Terri speaking from being released? – Ampersand
I can show you plenty of quotes that he has attempted to prevent any video of any kind from being made of Terri. This is common knowlege I thot. You really need this documented? I will if you like.
David:
So you’re now claiming that Dr. Cranford saw a patient using a wheelchair similar to Dr. Hawking’s, and diagnosed that patient as having PVS? That’s a significant shift from your earlier claim.
Also, as far as I can tell, your new claim isn’t true. I’ve been searching newspaper archives (lexis/nexis) and the court rulings relating to Mr. Wendland’s case today, and I have not found anything at all to support the claim that Dr. Cranford diagnosed Wendland as having PVS, let alone supporting the claim that he did so after Wendland starting using the wheelchair.
I did find a decade-old medical journal article in which Dr. Cranford discusses Wendland’s case, and that article doesn’t support the claim you quoted.
So, again: Do you have any evidence that supports your claim (either your first claim, or this new one) about Dr. Cranford?
That’s not what I asked. I asked why Terri’s parents, who it is very well known have access to hours of video of Terri, haven’t released any video of Terri speaking. If Terri speaks so often, why didn’t they release any video documentation of her speaking?
The real answer is, there is no video of her speaking, because she does not speak.
Given the extremely deceptive and dishonest way the existing videos of Terri have been edited and released, I don’t blame Michael in the slightest for not wanting to allow more of the same.
The most famous image of Terri, looking at the balloon….impresses a lot of people. But, Stop and think about it. It is not that we see a smile, or a reaction etc….what we see is what we call a twinkle in her eye. I submit, that a twinkle in the eye, is in the eye of the beholder, not of the eye in question.
Karen
And I suggest you take a look at the current doctor Jeb Bush is quoting from the Mayo Clinic. Dr Cheshire
Ampersand
I don’t believe she speaks often in complete sentences. That is certainly not what I said. I believe she’s managed the feat of three and four word sentences just a few times ever, but she has been denied therapy. Any severe stroke patient could be executed if speaking in complete sentences was the new test for deserving to live. That she has said innumerable appropriate single words to many many witnesses is also beyond dispute among honest people who are paying attention.
To Doc,
As a doctor you would also agree that dehydration also leads to extreme imbalances in mineral and salt levels in the blood especially potassium, magnesium. This causes confusion and anxiety while the body begins to steal minerals from tissues and the muscles begin to cramp.
Ultimately, the imbalance and lack of potassium predecates a very painful and final heart attack. Also, there are severe migraines and painful kidney failure. Hardly a peaceful and painless death. Perhaps with those who have consciencoisly made this choice they have some medications to help them smoothly through this.
While some would hope they fall into a coma before the organs fail, it may just be an alert human being too tired and weak to struggle in the final throes of death.
Please tell me I am wrong and that chemical imbalance induced heart attacks are not painful.
She apparently says a lot of things….strange that “LIVE” isn’t one of them.
Brad, if you offered her a chip of ice right now i am sure she would not turn her head away.
Not turning her head away is not meaningful. Turning her head to take it would be.
If i offered ice chips to a rock, it would not turn away either.
( not meant sarcastic )
She apparently says a lot of things….strange that “LIVE”? isn’t one of them. – Brad
Now I don’t know to a point of metaphysical certainty that she wasn’t trying to say “I waaa to die” but I would bet my car it wasn’t and I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt who doesn’t want to find out what she was trying to say.
I already knew of the “I waaaant” story. It is , however, utterly irrelevant.
My point is, you would think they could get her to say live, rather than a more complete sentence of i want to live.
David, if there was any real evidence of her speaking, then you’d have a point.
There is not. Neruologists who have examined her in person have not found her to speak. No one has been able to video tape her speaking even one word.
As Judge Greer pointed out, an incredible conspiracy of silence – including Terri’s parents – must be going on if the Nurses’ testimony you’ve cited is truthful. Why would Terri’s parents choose not to subpheona a nurse who had been calling them and reporting Terri speaking on a regular basis?
I think what you have is wishful thinking, not evidence.
Finally, aside from doctors who apparently write for Supermarket Tabloids (“Bill Clinton’s secret AIDS crisis!”), all the credible medical evidence seems to indicate that she lacks a cortex, and would thus be incapable of speech.
* * *
Again, where is the evidence of the accusations you’ve made, that Cranford diagnosed Wendland (or Stephen Hawking) as having PVS? Please either provide evidence, or admit that you can’t back up your claim.
Do we KNOW that Bill Clinton DOESN’T have a secret AIDS crisis? Hmm??
So Mr. Terry, the well-known political activist and extremist, claims that a lawyer told him that she had heard Terri speak. That’s not exactly compelling evidence; he would say anything. The Boston Globe reported that R.T. said that Terri Schiavo was “chipper.”
The Associated Press reported the lawyer’s anecdote (in a collection of notable quotes), but at that time the anecdote didn’t include Terri responding. That bit appears to have been added later.
Brad,
My point exactly. Thank you. I am sure she would turn to the ice regardless of her lack of physical therapy. The level of neglect reflected by her drawn hands and feet is apparent.
It is not surprising she has not curled into the fetal position yet although her neck has declined forward from sitting in a wheel chair.
Sorry Kim, but I doubt any of us can be sure of that. I supose that is the issue.
Working with the elderly for 20 years, I witnessed over a hundred people who died after having been without water or nourishment. Some of them had had their feeding tubes withdrawn, others had cancers of various kinds, and others had terminal illnesses like Parkinson’s disease. Some had had devastating strokes, others had multiple strokes, some had ALS.
Their bodies were already pretty ravaged, so they did not last long once food and water were stopped. I can tell you that none were in pain. Unlike the dehydration that occurs in otherwise healthy people, that is caused by some external event (overexertion on a sweltering day), the sudden drop in potassium and electrolytes doesn’t bring on a (painful) heart attack.
Instead, the organ systems shut down in a slow progression–kidneys first, heart last.
Think of a dessicated peach, rolling gently downhill to a stop.
Now, in cases where a family wanted to keep the IV or the feeding tube going, patients really suffered if they were near the end—fluid overload makes breathing labored and painful, and aspiration pneumonia causes fever, pain, and the feeling of being strangled. We always made sure these patients were getting morphine, because of the obvious distress they had.
I meant to say, changes in electrolytes.
Ampersand
Well played. That is about the only tactic my debate oponents have ever had success with against me. Send him on a wild goose chase and maybe that will take some of the wind out of his sails. Maybe Terri will die in the meantime.
Well I have a crucial religious meeting to attend and I am knee deep in findlaw documents but I will find it if it is on the web.
Yeah, David, that Ampersand sure is sneaky, using that underhanded tactic of “asking you to back up the obviously invented claims you’ve been making.”
What a groundbreakingly brilliant debating strategy! Require your opponent to use only facts and evidence? It’s so crazy it just might work.
—Myca