« Bill Passes: Schindlers Want Terri's Feeding Tube Reinserted | Main | Terri's feeding tube may be reinserted (Update) »

March 21, 2005

Bush Signs Terri's Bill Into Law

Topics: News

President Bush signed emergency legislation sent to him by Congress early Monday to allow Terri Schiavo's parents ask a federal judge to prolong their daughter's life, capping days of emotional debate over who should decide life and death.

"In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life," Bush said in a statement after signing the bill.


Update: The President's Full Statement is here.

Posted by tim at March 21, 2005 1:51 AM

Articles Related to News:

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bush Signs Terri's Bill Into Law:

» New Hope For Terri from Cosmic X
"Even if a sharp sword is placed upon one's neck, one should not cease praying." [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 2:58 AM

» A Potential Pandora's Box from Our Life
Last week I said that the actions of Congress to prolong Terri Schiavo's life were a complete and utter abuse of power. I stand by that statement because there is no reason why the feds should be meddling in the... [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 4:52 AM

» Terri Schiavo -- My Take On The Case, Euthanasia, Abortion And The Death Penalty from Diggers Realm
I haven't written an entry on this and this will probably be my only entry on it. I'm going to post a couple comments I made at other sites which basically sums up my take on it. Comment made at... [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 5:54 AM

» Early this morning, Bush signed Terri's Bill from Patriots for Bush
From blogsforterri: For those interested, here's the roll call. President Bush signed emergency legislation sent to him by Congress early Monday to allow Terri Schiavo's parents ask a federal judge to prolong their daughter's life, capping days of emot... [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 9:05 AM

» Terri gets another temporary shot at life from Blind Mind's Eye
WorldNetDaily reports: WASHINGTON - The House of Representatives this morning passed a bill that could save Terri Schiavo's life by sending it to a federal court for review to determine whether her feeding tube should be reinserted. President Bush sign... [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 2:04 PM

» A Potential Pandora's Box from Conservative Thinking
Last week I said that the actions of Congress to prolong Terri Schiavo's life were a complete and utter abuse of power. I stand by that statement because there is no reason why the feds should be meddling in the... [Read More]

Tracked on May 17, 2005 11:01 PM


Terri and her parents deserve the opportunity to be heard.

No Justice Greer must be removed from the Probate court

Posted by: Maggie at March 21, 2005 1:54 AM

Here's my 2 cents...

Posted by: MoFiZiX Gr4FiX at March 21, 2005 1:58 AM

What scares me is if this ends up in the hands of a Judge that may drag his feet, in which case Terri could die.

Posted by: Donna at March 21, 2005 1:58 AM

I don't think they'd dare.. I mean heck, the Pres stayed up way past his bedtime for this, so I don't think any Judge who values his/her job is going to mess around, at least I hope not.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 21, 2005 2:10 AM

I hope so demonsurfer. I pray you are right.

I can not sleep till I know she is getting liquids and food.

Keep praying. Please.

Posted by: Ruth at March 21, 2005 2:15 AM

Just a thought too, isn't this supposed to be a democracy? It would appear that an overwhelming majority of US citizens aware of this case would strongly prefer not to murder Terri, so why has one prat of a Judge been able to disregard laws and the will of the people and order a death sentence on an innocent woman? I hope these people (Judge Greer & Michael Schiavo in particular) are made to pay for their actions, regardless if Terri is allowed to live.

"allowed to live" ..I can't believe I just said that and that it's a fact in this society, not something out of an Orwell novel. Certainly not a proud few days for America and its 'justice' system..

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 21, 2005 2:21 AM


Our side is winning the hearts and minds of America and the world.

I have faith that the electorate will cast those out that voted to kill Terri.

Posted by: Ruth at March 21, 2005 2:23 AM

When will she get hydration and nourishment? I am worried.

Posted by: Ruth at March 21, 2005 2:30 AM

Damn right, and it's the job of people like us to remind others of the actions of these 'people' when it comes election time..
Here's the list (thanks Teri J):

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 21, 2005 2:32 AM

"When will she get hydration and nourishment? I am worried."
Presumably not until 9am when a Federal Judge orders it so... you'd think they could get one Judge called out sooner considering congress just convened for this very reason.. typical.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 21, 2005 2:34 AM

demonsurfer: I understood it from Free Republic that it goes to a District Court that is open 24/7. I think that's what's going on.

Posted by: Ruth at March 21, 2005 2:36 AM

Good to hear Ruth - the sooner the better!
For now I better get some shuteye. I hope to see some good news when I get up in a few hours.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 21, 2005 2:40 AM


It's also a fact that Terri has never had an MRI, PET, or SPECT scan. The CAT scan that purports to show cortical liquefaction isn't accurate enough to determine that by itself. X-rays, used in a CAT scan, don't show soft tissue very well. There should have been follow-up diagnostics, and there weren't.

Therefore, everything that follows from the presumption of cortical liquefaction has to be re-examined.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:54 AM

> Why? It's certanly not for Terri! It's for YOU!

So Bill, who are you doing this for? I hope its not Michael. That man's going to jail.

And I'm going to bed. Grateful that I had dinner tonight, unlike Terri. Maybe she'll have breakfast in the morning.

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 2:55 AM

Actually, you are wrong. I have heard legal analysts all weekend say that if Michael, all of a sudden, said "I think the parents should have custody", the courts would immediately take that into account and turn over custody.

So, all your list of supposed myths and facts are simply wrong. You also ignore mountains of evidence which have never been given the opportunity to be heard.

And finally, who are YOU to make the judgement about her condidtion and who lives and dies? I suppose you have not seen countless stories of those who have been in similar situations as to Terri's and have recovered.

Make no mistake, Michael Schiavo is a cheat (he's been sleeping and having babies with another woman for 10 years--great husband there, eh?), a liar , and wants to see her die because he is hiding something.

Anyone with the gift of discernment can see right through his lies.

And shame on you for actually advocating the murder of someone innocent.

Posted by: MikeKS at March 21, 2005 2:56 AM

One more thing Bill, and anyone else still up championing for death at this hour... Can any of you say this with a straight face? "Michael Schiavo is a loving, caring husband who only wants what's best for his wife."

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 3:00 AM

Bill and Mary - fyi I removed the last of half of Bill's comment because it has been posted on this site numerous times. Bill - polls are biased by what is told to participants regarding Terri's condition and do not have any bearing on this case. The missing cerebral cortex belief based upon an antiquated CT scan has also been dealt with elsewhere and is contradicted by the observations of numerous individuals who have interacted with Terri.

Posted by: tim at March 21, 2005 3:00 AM

Ah, the rise of the pro-death religious people. It's great how so many of the pro-death people on here preach at us about how God, Jesus, etc would want us to kill Terri. I must have missed that part in the Gospels.

Posted by: JWL at March 21, 2005 3:07 AM

Hey folks, I was doing some research on the 11th circuit. One article talking about Judge Pryor (remember him, he's the guy Bush recess appointed to it) being appointed to it said how the 11th circuit court of appeals is one of the nation's most conservative.

I hope that bodes well for Terri.

Posted by: MikeKS at March 21, 2005 3:17 AM

Are you sure there is such a thing as a pro-death religious person? It does not gel with me.

It is amusing to see that there are folk that keep cropping up on this and other high profile sites making the same statements based upon what can only be considered conflicting evidence.

The proper tests have not been conducted. Michael Schiavo made sure that Terri could not respond to Jay Wolfson. The hypodermic syringe was found in the bin. It is incriminating evidence but nothing was done about it because of collusion and cover up.

What else is at stake in this case?

I am pleased to see that this bill has been passed. It is getting some press over here. Unfortunately the ABC news had an opinion that could only be described as biased, and anti-Republican, ignoring the fact that there were Democrats who voted yes for this bill, and who do have a sense of justice within them.

I just want to hear the news that Terri is receiving some nutrition, which is what she deserves.

It sickens me to see her husband bleating about what he claims to be Terri's wishes when they are nothing of the sort.

Posted by: Maggie at March 21, 2005 3:23 AM

> Are you sure there is such a thing as a
> pro-death religious person? It does not
> gel with me.

uuuhhhh, can you say Osama Bin Laden?

Evil will just as surely use a "religious" mask as any other. In fact it frequently tries to disguise itself and call itself "kindness" and "mercy". Before you know you can figure out what it's up to, an innocent woman is being put to death in the most cruel and drawn out way in the name of "mercy". Whoa to them who call good evil and evil good.

My Gosh, the President signed Terri's bill hours ago. When ARE we going to hear the ambulance has taken her?

Posted by: Suzanne. at March 21, 2005 3:39 AM

What kind of husband has a fiance and 2 other children and is waiting for his "wife" to die?

Posted by: Ruth at March 21, 2005 3:58 AM

"IF" Terris feeding tube is put back in, then it should remain that way permanently!!! It is cruel to take it away and to reinsert it and then to take it away again and again. If you read hospices action they take in her dying process there is an order to give her pain meds, and she gets some meds for pain when she is on her period so how can her husband say starvation for her wont be painful???? HE CANT EVEN LIE GOOD! "IF" he is respecting her wishes, I am sure one of her wishes wasnt for him to coomit adultry!!! And since he has commited adultry he should automatically have guardianship taken away from him. We all seem to have faith in God and in that case we must place this into Gods hands and whatever the outcome maybe it is Gods will and His plan. Terris so called husband will have to stand in-front of God one day too and his judgement will come. Time for him to move on and let go of Terri and let her family take care of her. This isnt hurting him and he isnt sad otherwise he wouldnt of moved on with his life. And what an asshole taking his girlfriend to see Terri! PRAY AND PARY HARD FOR TERRI AND HER FAMILY!

Posted by: Jennifer at March 21, 2005 4:02 AM

Love and hugs to Terri and her family. I wrote to my congressman and senator today. The choice isn't that hard, choos life!

Terri and family, you're in my prayers.

Posted by: Ada at March 21, 2005 4:07 AM

I would want my wishes respected and I would trust and know that my family would respect and know them especially my parents. "IF" there was no hope for me and i had every chance at rehabilitation and there was no way i could at all recover then yes, stop the feeding on me. God will decided when it is Terris time to go whether or not there is a feeding tube or not. IF today was her day to die , then God would take her home feeding tube or not. I pray that GOds will and GOds plan be done and He will do that.

Posted by: Jennifer at March 21, 2005 4:14 AM

15 years is too long to sufer... let her rest, she will find peace with the Lord Savior!

Posted by: truthseeker at March 21, 2005 4:33 AM

How can the pivotal issue be about whether Terri would want to be kept alive or not? Since when is hearsay enough evidence to make a judicial decision? The Shindler's lawyer stated that even if you believe the statement that Terri didn't want to have life support, at the time when the alleged statement was made nourishment was not considered life support so how could she have possibly been referring to it?

All of this arguing about Terri's wishes! Even Michael Schiavo's lawyer saying how the government is trying to force Terri to eat against her will. That is quite the assumption! No thought at all to the idea that maybe she is being forced to starve against her will! How could someone possibly be so certain they are following someone's wishes when even they themselves were not so adamant about this supposed belief as to share their wishes with their immediate family with whom they are very close!

Michael Schiavo in the replayed interview from 2003 would not say he would take a polygraph test, nor would he allow CNN to go and tape Terri to prove that his statement about the film excerpts being shown are set up. Judge Greer made all of his decisions without ever seeing Terri in person. If you are going to take someone's life shouldn't you at the very least see them for yourself? Terri's earlier medical records have been sealed upon Michael's request? Why is the law not looking into this situation? There are so many holes in this case and unanswered questions.

How is it that the Doctors that the Shindler's had were not credible, some witnesses were also found not credible. While I understand that it is a numbers game and you may find such rulings on both sides for a number of reasons, why is it so lop sided against the Shindler's?

If you read through the court documents Judge Greer wouldn't re-open the case when it was proven that the courts assumption that a witness was not credible because of the tense of how things were described and the assumption by the court that the discussion involved must have occurred when Terri was very young 11 or 12 yrs old was proven to be entirely wrong. He says that there was so much evidence about what Terri's wishes would be that what this witness had to say was not important. Yet if you read the document based on that decision you see that one of his biggest arguments was that this particular witness was not credible because of the tense of the words used and the age Terri Schiavo was assumed to be. Ridiculous!

All of the information necessary to make an informed decision has yet to be available. It is important that someone not invested in this case look over all aspects. It would also be just lovely if an actual police investigation could be held since they didn't bother to do so when this all happened. The ball has been dropped in this case so many times by now that I can hardly believe anyone knows where the ball is anymore!

Posted by: imdll at March 21, 2005 4:39 AM

Bill James said, "FOLLOW ONLY YOUR HEART!" Now, I assume that means follow your feelings.

I think that is a terrible piece of advise. The world would be a terrible place if people simply follow their hearts and act accordingly without thinking things through.

Example: Someone pisses me off. I feel like causing them harm. If I follow my heart, bad things would happen. But thank God I have a brain and a conscience that goes with it! Instead of just following my heart, I would think, "wait, it's wrong to hurt other people unless I am defending myself or others," and also, Jesus says we should forgive. Now having thought this through, I am not going to follow my heart and harm this person.

Also, I think you "let her rest and suffer no more" people should consider this:

If you were in that position (bed stricken for--possibly--the rest of your life) with the same level of consciousness, you wouldn't want to live. Sounds fair. However, Terri is brain damaged. We don't know at what capacity her mind operates. It seems obvious though, that it is not at the same capacity as ours. And neither is a new born child's at the same capacity as ours.

A new born child is also bed stricken. The new born child can not sustain his/herself. Now assume the child will stay at that level of development for the rest of his/her life. Do you think the child is thinking, "I don't want to live like this for the rest of my life?" On the contrary, the child is probably not even thinking about that. The child is happy to see his/her parents, comforted by their touch, and happy to receive nourishment. The child is content with attention and affection. I think the same goes for Terri.

Posted by: Chris at March 21, 2005 4:51 AM

Did anyone see the interview on CNN with the Lady that works with Brain and Spinal injury patients? She stated quite clearly that there are lots of people who think they know what they want until they are living it.

Michael Schiavo says Terri supposedly said her wishes when she was 20 or 21 years old. If you give him the benifit of the doubt, how may 20 year olds have a real clear understanding of life and it's possibilities and really know what they want with concrete certainty?

We need to understand that the only reason that nourishment can be taken away from Terri is because it has been deemed medical treatment. That is a relatively recent decision. We also need to understand that you do not have the right under present law to end you life just because you are not happy with the experience. It still takes extrordinary circumstances to be allowed to kill yourself even when you are able to voice your wishes.

Posted by: imdll at March 21, 2005 4:51 AM


Yes a Police investigation. If you watched Larry King and his interview with Terri's sister you would understand that there are questions that have not been answered and odd circumstances surrounding this whole situation. A police investigation would clear up any questions.

Posted by: imdll at March 21, 2005 4:54 AM

Well actually if you must know. My attention has been a bit fragmented since my nephew was abducted to Mexico a few months ago by his noncustodial mother! Also the reason I have interest in this case is because it came to my attention. I do not live in the United States so your cases do not always catch my attention!

This would be the World Wide Web and this is a human issue.

Having had much expeience with a Sociopath in my sister-in-law and doing some other studying over the past 10 years. Seeing Michael Schiavo and how he speaks and diverts attention from himself set off all kinds of warning flags!

Things don't add up and ussually when that is the case there is often a real good reason for it.

Posted by: imdll at March 21, 2005 5:00 AM

Fallacies in reasoning:

Bill said, "And Imdl, where were you when that poor black child's life support was taken off two days ago?" and Truthseeker mentioned the Africa situations.

It's the same reasoning as, "you can't really be against abortion unless you adopt kids."

Now that is just absurd. It is a categorical error. Because I don't expend my limited time and energy against every single issue having to do with the thing I am against doesn't mean I can't really be against that thing or that I am being inconsistent.

Also, abilities and actions have nothing to do with what is right or wrong. If me going out and murdering someone does not determine the immorality of murder, why should my failure to fight against any euthanasia cases determine whether it is actually right or wrong? And that is what we're talking about, isn't it? Whether a person has the "right to die"?

Of course, this case is different. Terri is not "plugged in" to anything. She simply can't swallow food (probably). If a person's heart is beating or if the person is breathing only because of a machine, fine. Different story. But that is not the case here.

If a person should have the right to kill themselves because they don't want to suffer, then why do we prevent people from committing suicide? Let them end their mental/emotional anguish by slitting their wrists. But, somehow, our consciences and humanity dictate otherwise.

Posted by: Chris Wu at March 21, 2005 5:10 AM

Whao - stay out of our bedrooms?

So a husband beats his wife. Should the government "stay out of their bedroom"?

Also, Congress did not overstep its authority in passing that bill. Article 3, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution says,

"In all other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

Posted by: Chris Wu at March 21, 2005 5:18 AM

What is all this talk of Terri suffering? There is no evidence that Terri is suffering. Michael himself says she has not had one bedsore, so she is far from covered with them. As far a preserving life at all costs. Food is hardly life at all costs. There are no extraordinary measures being taken or demanded.

Others are suffering the same fate, and Terri brings this issue to public awareness. There is always someone who becomes the face of an issue. Hopefully this situation will help others as well. Change can only occur when people are made aware of the issues.

I find it hypocritical that as a society we have many who argue a woman’s right to abort a baby as though it is an appendage belonging to her, but when Scott Peterson killed his wife and unborn son the fetus in question gets a name and is referred to as murdered! People seem to have a very fluid set of moral standards that change with what they see fit for the moment. I might add you can not go to the doctor and ask him to cut your leg off just because you would rather not have it.

There are lots of people who interact with the world at a very similar level to Terri Schiavo. Go to a health facility where severely mentally disabled people live or a nursing home with Alzheimer, dementia or stroke patients. What makes these people's lives less covered by the constitution? Why it is ok for someone to decide they should die but if you decide an able bodied person should die you are committing murder?

Posted by: imdll at March 21, 2005 5:28 AM

I know the lose of a family member is something all people do not want to deal with. I recently lost my father to colon cancer. There has to be a point when you realize, "the reality of things." Terri has already passed on, she is only living as a shell. Do you think she wanted to live like this? I believe (only stating my opinion) that her family is being selfish. I'm not saying that her husband doesn't have in own reasons, whatever they may be, but they do not change the simple fact, Terri has already passed. Let her go and move on with your lives. God bless you all.

Posted by: kpe6679 at March 21, 2005 5:44 AM

Politicians won't loose a minute of sleep over whether Terri dies in the end the or not. Their primary concern is staying in office and making sure they and their party become reelected the next term.
Republicans and Bush can say they're doing it because their morality compels them to do so, but in the end, they are very much aware of the fact that there is a good chance their measures will be declared unconstitutional.
Should that happen, they get to blame the justice system and walk away with a public pat on the back because "you tried".

Terri is being (ab)used by a lot of people pro-this or pro-that to push their own agenda without actual regard to her well-being.

I can't imagine how her parents feel, but this drawn out process isn't doing any good for anyone.
It is plain wrong for them to want to keep their daughter alive for the sole reason that they are unwilling to accept the fact that they lost her 15 years ago already.

I can't say I am very comfortable about letting someone die because they aren't being given food or water, even though I do believe doctors' opinions that she is incapable of being consciously aware of it, or that she would experience any discomfort. A pet is able to be put to rest more humanely than a person.

In the end, I - or for that matter anyone here or in the senate - is familiar with all the details of the case.
Both parties' concerns have been put through court and scrutinized over and over and over for a great number of years and each time the same conclusion was reached.

Finally, leave pro-abortion or pro-life issues out of this. If you are argueing pro-life then you believe Terri is a cognitant, aware individual and the fact that you would abuse her condition and suffering to push your own view is just beyond distasteful.

Posted by: Vanessa at March 21, 2005 5:57 AM

Here is a list of those members of the House to thank for their vote in favor of Terri: ***
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Bishop (GA)
Brady (PA)
Burton (IN)
Cole (OK)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
English (PA)
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Green (WI)
Green, Al
Hastings (WA)
Inglis (SC)
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (IL)
Jones (NC)
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
Kuhl (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
McCaul (TX)
Meek (FL)
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Peterson (PA)
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Rogers (AL)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Schwarz (MI)
Scott (GA)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Taylor (NC)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Wilson (SC)

Here are those who voted against Terri and pro-Death. Keep them in mind at their next election: ***

Bishop (NY)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Davis (FL)
Frank (MA)
Hastings (FL)
Kennedy (RI)
Larson (CT)
Lewis (GA)
Miller (NC)
Moran (VA)
Price (NC)
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (VA)
Thompson (MS)
Van Hollen
Wasserman Schultz

The remainder did not show up for the vote. Decide what that means on your own.


Posted by: Robert W. Smith MD at March 21, 2005 6:23 AM

This sorta reminds me of what happened at another blog site where all the "let Terri rest in peace" posts were being made by one or two people, but sent at a spam rate to seem like a majority. A very noisy minority, this is.

I wonder if the blogsforterri admins can take a quick look at this? ;-)

As for the incredulous "logic" behind these folks, a quick run-down of FACTS should be easy enough to digest:

- vegetative state diagnosis cannot be given in life and death situations in 10 minutes of look-see examination -- an MRI and PET scan are REQUIRED by neurology standards. No such scans results are available and were not the basis of the diagnosis of PVS.

- the court appointed a prominent euthanasia advocate to make their case that she's in PVS -- one who also advocates starving Alzheimer's sufferers to death even if they can receive nutrition and hydration without feeding tubes or other implements

- the court never investigated forensic evidence that Terri was strangled and beaten in the last two months (the data is a matter of public record, apparently)

- the court never investigated that Terri was transferred to a hospice which is only for patients with 6 months left to live without a signed authorization from a doctor

- Terri has never received a swallowing test, hence there is no basis for even requiring a feeding tube; there are sworn statements by at least one nurse who worked with Terri in 1997 that she has been able to eat (jello) and drink (juice) on her own

- the courts never investigated the complaint by a nurse working with Terri who found her with an unexplained level of sugar in her bloodstream one day, and a vial of insulin in the bin of her room -- the nurse was sacked by the hospice

- the courts admitted Michael's hearsay that Terri wanted to die in this state (hearsay is hardly ever admissible in court proceedings); the courts did not accept the deposition of Michael's ex-girlfriend who cited Michael's statement to her that he and Terri never talked about what to do when one of them was in an incapacitated state

- Judge Greer never took a look at Terri personally

- Judge Greer did not provide Terri with her own legal counsel

- Judge Greer never granted the Schindlers a jury trial for their numerous appeals

- Michael Schiavo is guilty of adultery in Florida for currently living with a girlfriend and having had a child (or two?) with her while still married to Terri

- Michael Schiavo broke the premise for the $1 million malpractice award in 1993 by forbidding treatment/therapy for Terri, whereas the award was supposedly for that purpose

- In March 18's Larry King Show, Michael slipped and said that "we didn't know what Terri wanted" which contradicts his sworn testimony that Terri told him that she would prefer to die than to receive care in her condition

Since the troll (or two) have been pouring in with propaganda about letting Terri go and leaving the Republican party over this issue, I thought it might be acceptable to post something long. At least my post is based on facts.

Posted by: Jeff Tan at March 21, 2005 6:41 AM

Since when is someone who has a differing opinion considered a troll?
The fact that you instantly dismiss other people's view as potentially having any merit only serves to detract from your own opinion.
I can respect your views and opinions, it would curteous of you to extend other people the same privilege.

Posted by: Vanessa at March 21, 2005 6:54 AM

I'm new here, but why isn't a moderator cleaning up the crap from Bill James, Sarah, and others? I thought this was a blog FOR Terri, not against her.

Posted by: MikeKS at March 21, 2005 7:05 AM

I support Kerri in the last election, but I am sooooo glad President Bush is the president and the Republicans are in power today!!

Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:08 AM

If anyone forgot to read, this site is Blogsforterri.com, get it? BLOGS FOR TERRI, so stay out if you are not for Terri.

Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:10 AM

Yes, 15 years is a long time to wait for justice. Give her justice!! She has a guardian who most likely beat her up and broke her bones. Who on earth would want a husband that is living with another woman to decide life/death, when blood relatives want her to live. If I were Terri, I would want to live at least for the sake of my suffering family (parents, brother, sister)

Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:23 AM

What is your evidence that it was Terri's wish??

Here's what Dr. William Hammesfahr, Nobel-prize nominee thinks.

Nobel prize nominee Dr. William Hammesfahr issued a statement saying he had examined Terri Schiavo and believes her injury, hypoxic encephalopathy, is a type of stroke that he treats every day with success.

“There are many approaches that would help Terri Schiavo,” he said. “I know, because I had the opportunity to personally examine her, her medical records, and her X-rays. It is time to help Terri, instead of just warehousing her. She would have benefited from treatment years ago, but it is not to late to start now.”

Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:26 AM

Educate yourselves as to Terri's medical condition:

"Medical Fact About Terri"

Educate yourselves as to the so-called "legalities" of Terri's case:

"Schiavogate: The Big Coverup"


Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 7:26 AM

Here's what Terri's first court appointed guardian Pearse thinks

*Pearse unambiguously accepted the diagnosis that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) based on the opinions of two doctors, one who treated her and one who consulted on the case. This diagnoses was--and remains-- disputed by Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler. Indeed, subsequent to Pearse's report, the Schindlers energetically attempted to garner evidence that she is conscious. To some degree, they have succeeded: Four board certified neurologists, two board certified internists, one neuro-psychologist, and two speech pathologists have testified in person or by affidavit that Terri is not PVS. These opinions were reinforced by the affidavits of three nurses who cared for Terri in the mid-1990s and who claim to have observed her being interactive. Moreover, millions have viewed videos of Terri and been shocked by the extent to which she appears to aware and awake. (The courts have ruled consistently that Terri is PVS.)

*Pearse claimed that Terri has muscle contractures despite receiving "regular physical therapy." He may have assumed that she received such care--it is routine for bedridden patients, after all. Yet, according to Patricia Anderson, the Schindler's attorney, there are no entries indicating that PT was ever performed in Terri's chart after 1992. Indeed, in 1998, when a new doctor urged Schiavo to approve an evaluation of Terri so that a plan of physical therapy could be developed, he refused to permit it.

*Pearse confirmed the charge by the Schindlers that once the medical malpractice money was in the bank, Schiavo began to refuse medical treatment for Terri, writing:

After February 1993, Mr. Schiavo's attitude concerning treatment for the ward apparently changed. Early in 1994, for example, he refused to consent to treat an infection from which the ward was then suffering and ordered that she not be resuscitated in the event of cardiac arrest. The nursing home where she resided at that time sought to intervene, which ultimately led the ward's husband to reverse his decision and authorize antibiotic treatment.

Perhaps because of the intervention by the home, Schiavo soon moved Terri to a different nursing facility.

*Schiavo admitted to the guardian ad litem that he had at least "two romantic involvements" after Terri's collapse. "It is apparent to me," Pearse wrote the court, "that he has reached a point that he has no hope of the ward's recovery and wants to get on with his own life." (To say the least. At the time of Pearse's investigation, Schiavo was already living with the woman who would become the mother of his children.)

*Contrary to Schiavo's allegation on Larry King last week that the Schindlers "really basically didn't have any care with Terri," Pearse painted a vivid picture of parents worried deeply about the quality of care their daughter was receiving and profoundly committed to remaining involved in her life:

From the time of the ward's accident, the ward's parents have been vitally interested in her welfare . . . After the falling out between the ward's parents and her husband, Mr. and Mrs. Schindler pursued removal litigation in an effort to have Mr. Schiavo removed as their daughter's guardian and to have themselves appointed guardians of her person . . . They have also pursued litigation against him to gain access to medical and financial information concerning the ward which was withheld by the ward's husband, with only partial success. They express extreme frustration with the current situation in which they have virtually no input into the decision making process concerning their own daughter. The ward's parents visit her regularly but at times when they won't have to confront Mr. Schiavo.

Moreover, rather than the Schindlers not being interested in seeing Terri, as was asserted on Larry King, Pearse noted that it was Schiavo who "has isolated the ward from her parents."

*As of April 4, 1998, Terri's trust fund held $713,828.85. "Thus," wrote Pearse, "Mr. Schiavo will realize a substantial and fairly immediate financial gain if his application for withdrawal of life support [tube-supplied food and water] is granted." (Schiavo now claims that there is only $50,000 left in the account, the bulk of the money having gone to pay his attorneys.)

*At the time of the report, only Schiavo claimed that Terri would not wish to be kept alive if severely incapacitated. "However," Pearse opined, "his credibility is necessarily adversely affected by the obvious financial benefit to him of being the ward's sole heir at law in the event of her death while still married to him. Her death also permits him to get on with his own life." (Subsequent to the filing of the report, and perhaps in response to it, Schiavo's brother and sister-in-law came forward to claim Terri made similar statements in their presence. In this regard it is worth noting that no member of Terri's family, or any of her friends, recall her ever making any such statements to them.)

*Pearse concluded, "Given the inherent problems already mentioned, together with the fact that the ward has been maintained the life support measures sought to be withdrawn for the past 8 years, it is the recommendation of the guardian ad litem that the petition for removal be denied."


Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:33 AM

All these rulings are one man (Greer)'s decision. There's also a conflict of interest here

Judge George Greer is not impartial. He has worked side by side as county commissioner with Barbara Sheen Todd (county commissioner) for eight years. Barbara Sheen Todd is on the board of the hospice. Also, Judge Greer's fellow judge, Judge John Lenderman is the brother of Martha Lenderman, also on the hospice board. Greer accepted as the basis of his rulings, the questionable testimony of Michael Schiavo that Terri would wish to be killed, yet Michael never stated this until he had received the 1.2 million dollar settlement. Greer also accepted as the basis of his rulings, the "opinion" of a third doctor who is the brother of a close associate of George Felos, right-to-kill attorney, and very significantly, former Chairman of the hospice board

) Denial of Guardian appointment to Ensure Medical Care

Judge Greer refused to allow a non-biased guardian to be appointed for Terri’s care, despite numerous citations of the violation of Terri’s rights under State and Federal Law for disabled persons, including assignment of guardian as a requirement under Fl Law, Section 744. Moreover, in the state court proceedings initiated by defendant Michael Schiavo, Terri Schiavo, a severely disabled individual, had no guardian ad litem and no lawyer for the majority of the proceedings. Attorney Pearse who was assigned by the court in 1998 was dismissed from the case by the state court on motion by Michael Schiavo’s attorney George J. Felos.


Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:39 AM

The rulings you quoted were by Greer and Greer has pass 72 rulings on this case. Why is even a Nobel-Prize nominee's recommendation being ignored?

Posted by: sujata at March 21, 2005 7:57 AM

"I've sent my GOP rep a note that I'm not voting for him next time because of his interference."

Right, as if you ever did before. I dont think he will be falling for that.

"Based on discussions this weekend, most people are very concerned that the GOP overreached this time."

Based on discussions in the lefty websites perhaps...



Quixote1818 (1000+ posts) Mon Mar-21-05 03:42 AM
Original message
Censorship on the Terrisfight Blog. These People Are Sick!

I posted a link to a very unbiased website that gives both sides of the case on their blog and it stayed their for about two minutes before they deleted it. Zap! Can't let anyone find out the truth!

If anyone wants to e-mail them your thoughts you will be directed to their blog where you are free to post and watch your post disappear. These people are scary! I mean it's absolutely frightening when they won't even allow people to see different and even unbiased viewpoints.


Posted by: AJ at March 21, 2005 8:01 AM

The issue here is Judge Greer ignoring the law, plain and simple. Where in the Constitution does it give him the authority to torture someone to death by starvation?

"Judicial Terrorism"

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 8:03 AM