« Attorney General Gonzalez Asked To Intervene | Main | Court Hearing For Terri Schiavo Scheduled For 3:00 PM ET »


March 21, 2005

Feeding Tube Not Reinserted Yet

Topics: News

Apparently, the bill President Bush signed into law early this morning allows for the Schindler family to file a motion with a federal court asking for Terri's feeding tube to be reinserted. The judge has yet to rule on the motion. So Terri is still going without food and water. This information comes from My Way News.

Posted by powersthatblog at March 21, 2005 9:49 AM


Articles Related to News:

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments

The story is also here...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=599518

I don't want to sound pessimistic, but I have a bad feeling about this. The federal judge who has been asked to reinsert the feeding tube is in Tampa. As in Florida. All this, and we're still in Florida?

I know its a federal judge, but the whole problem has been cronies who wink at each other's bad motives. Who is this guy? Does HE have relatives working at the hospice, too?

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 10:10 AM

Here another piece of drivel from ABC "News"...

Poll: No Role for Government in Schiavo Case
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=599622&page=1

I'd say when you report lies (as in death by dehydration is peaceful), you're margin of error goes up a bit.

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 10:20 AM

Here's our judge...

"(the case) was assigned to U.S. District Judge James Whittemore, who was nominated to the court in 1999 by President Clinton. Gibbs said the judge sent a message that he would call the Schindlers' lawyers back to court once he completed a review of the filings in the case. Whittemore's staff was not available for comment early Monday morning."

That's from:
http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=1007477

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 10:22 AM

She's still starving.

Jeb can protect her per Fla. statute 415.1051(2); he hasn't.

"Emergency Protective Services Intervention"

Jeb fiddles while Terri burns.

SHE'S STILL STARVING TO DEATH! Why won't they help her NOW?

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 10:23 AM

You are all nuts. It is a damn shame to see our country return to the days of god fearing naivity. Let this woman go. It is her time.

Posted by: adam at March 21, 2005 10:23 AM

Great: another Clinton appointee. So if (when) he rules against Terri, we are back to Square One with Terri being starved to death, and our masters -- er -- "elected officials" continue to allow a precious human being to be slowly TORTURED TO DEATH. Thanks so much, Jeb.

If I neglected my cats the same way they are neglecting Terri, I'd be in jail.

Where are the "compassionate" animal rights activists? Terri is an animal, albeit a human animal. Or are "human animals" somehow exempt from brutal treatment?

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 10:28 AM

I have some pretty strong opinions about this too posted at www.powersthatblog.blogspot.com

Posted by: powersthatblog at March 21, 2005 10:30 AM

This is a mystery to me, how as a people we have come to a place where there is a question "do we feed her? should we allow her to starve to death?
In the absence of a living will specifically stating that the individual would not want to live under such circumstances, there is no question, morally legally we must do what ever we can to provide assistance to individuals that can't provide for themselves. In terri's case she is not on "life Support" she soley recieves nutrition via a tube this is not life support, this is "life assist" The pursuit of life and liberty is above all the most important of our basic rights as Americans. I Feel if one can live without a device on their own, in the absence of a living will we have the moral responsibility to care for and help such individuals. What has happened to this country? There are those who would watch this woman die based soley on hearsay and that is exactly what this is. Unfortunately she did not express her wishes into a document that could transend her situation. Based on that single idea Terri should live until the lord sees fit to bring her home in his time. Her husband should be ashamed of himself, I hope to
God I never run into him I would have a few choice words for him. This is a tragic event but as a parent I would move heaven and earth to keep my child alive in any state, do people treasure the gift of life anymore?
I applaud the congress for this act. As a country we need to get back to basics Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Posted by: drogers at March 21, 2005 10:32 AM

Teri J - Are you buying really buying this? The MSM is totaly in bed w/ the radical left! If you look at most of the reporting that's taking place on this subject and heard their obvious bias, you would see how closely it echoes the pro-death Democrat's rantings on Capitol Hill yesterday. And since when do pro-lifers trust MSM polling data anymore anyway? Remember the 2004 election polling! Filthy lying liberals! Need I say more?

Posted by: MoFiZiX Gr4FiX at March 21, 2005 10:33 AM

MoFiZix,

Yes, I'm sorry I lost my head.

The hearing is at 3pm...
http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/al-arian/Opinions/schiavo-v-schiavo-NoticeOfHearing.pdf

This from the court website...
http://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 10:39 AM

Hey Adam, if you want her to die so much, why don't you go inject her with something, or shoot her? Make it quick so there's no pain? No, that'd be murder, right? Why is her husband and his judge friend ordering her death by starvation different? ESPECIALLY since Mr. Schiavo has been caught in lies about Terri's "wishes"?

Posted by: Amy at March 21, 2005 10:39 AM

If this BJ Clinton appointee dismisses the case, I'll be crowning him with the dunce cap this afternoon!

http://www.mofizixgr4fix.com/

Posted by: MoFiZiX Gr4FiX at March 21, 2005 10:41 AM

I can't find much on Whittemore... Looks like his confirmation to the post in 2000 wasn't smooth sailing, but I'm having trouble finding much info.

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 10:42 AM

Terri is not brain dead. Her "loving" husband has refused for ANYONE to rehabilitate her. She hasn't even been allowed out of that room for five years to see the sun. Shortly after she "suddenly collapsed", he was awarded around $1 million - he pleaded that he needed the money to care for her for however long it took. Once the money started coming in, Michael suddenly remembered that she told him she never wanted to be on life support. Hmmmmm....

A feeding tube IS NOT life support. I bet Christopher Reeves was on a feeding tube after his accident. God rest his soul - and every effort was made to rehabilitate him in short order - but money and fame will do that to a person.

Why is the fact that a judge and Michael Shiavo are desperately trying to prohibit Terry from recieving a basic human need not considered murder? Why was Dr. Kevorkian thrown in jail when his patients were pleading for mercy, and were granted their "right to die" in a humane way?! Don't get me wrong, life is a gift from God and I strongly feel that no human has a right to play that role. But Terri is not on machinery that helps her breathe or keeps her vital organs functioning. She is simply on a feeding tube because she cannot take nutrition orally.

Mr. Shiavo needs to step away from this and live the life he apparently is more interested in living. He is no longer Terri's husband in the sense that two short years after her "accident", he knocked up some woman and is now living with her and their two kids. If anything, Terri's/Mike's marriage should qualify for annullment due to his abandonment of her!

Posted by: Barb at March 21, 2005 10:44 AM

Terri still starves; Jeb does nothing. Congress doesn't enforce its subpoena.

I guess they set a 3pm hearing to allow enough time for lunch.

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 10:53 AM

Disgusting... isn't it?!

Posted by: MoFiZiX Gr4FiX at March 21, 2005 11:01 AM

There's no logic in wanting Terri to die. Nothing I can concoct gives any reason for someone to want that. Think about it this way:

*If* Terri is Vegetative which would mean that she has no consciousness and thus body reflexes only:

1. Is it possible for Terri to still be in that body and therefore suffering? NO

2. *Based on statement 1 and the assumption of being vegetative*, What would be the problem with someone taking care of the body indefinitely if they have the private funding to do so? (malpractice money and private donation) I CAN THINK OF NO REASON THAT THIS SHOULD BE A PROBLEM

3. If Terri isn't in that body any more (lack of consciousness is a prerequisite for being declared vegetative), should *possible* verbal directives of "right to die" issued by someone who doesnt' exist anymore supercede parents desires. IT COULD BE DONE, BUT THERE'S NO *REASON* TO DO SO. THE PERSON WHO SUPPOSEDLY MADE THE STATEMENT IS ALREADY GONE IF THE BODY IS REALLY VEGETATIVE.

This logic proof method can be used for the scenario of if Terri isn't PVS also. *Both* logic proofs end up with the same conclusion that the body should be preserved until both sides of the argument are in agreement. If this never happens, then the body is preserved indefinitely.

Being logical doesn't rely on form or legal process. Using proofs is an objective way to discover what is the reasonable solution to a problem based on the actual data of the problem not semantics or former judgements.

It's a shame that the court based shenanigans are continuing. By the time they get around to hydrating her, she may be too weak to undergo the surgery. Hopefully, they'll use an IV to rehydrate her enough for the feeding tube surgery. Why in the world would a facility go to such lengths to make it so hard to restore feeding when there was a chance that the courts would tell them to start feeding her again?

Posted by: Ceci at March 21, 2005 11:07 AM

So, reading Judge Whittimore's order for the 3pm hearing, it seems that Gibbs did not file the required legal memorandum along with the motion for the temporary restraining order. Not to be a Monday morning quarterback, but don't these guys know how to file a legally correct motion?

I don't wish to be critical, but c'mon. She's starving to death!!

It seems the judge gave them more time to get their paperwork house in order. I think he could have just said "no" and in fact, if the proper paperwork isn't filed by noon today, the motion WILL be denied, according to the footnote in the judge's order.

C'mon team, let's get our act together! We slam Judge Greer for bad legal actions, and we can't even file a motion properly in federal district court?

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 11:08 AM

It's amazing what lengths humans will go to in order to save suffering animals. Hundreds of heart-warming stories about kittens being rushed to vet hospitals after being resuscitated by rescue crews and being cared for day and night until their health returns ... WPSA - an organization that is dedicated to "raising the standard of animal welfare around the world" ... owners of starving dogs serving jail time for animal cruelty. All of which is fine and good.

But a woman is being starved to death in a facility meant to aid humans, and there are more people fighting for her "right to die" with this very painful and inhumane treatment. Why? Because the husband that "loves" her so much wants to do what's in her best interest. I guess that puts a new twist on the phrase "loves her to death".

Posted by: Barb at March 21, 2005 11:34 AM

I struggle with the implications of this case.

On the one hand, I think the government should keep their nose out of my business...they are much too intrusive anyway. I don’t want them to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body, and yet I could be arrested for failing an attempted suicide and I cannot have my uterus removed for birth control reasons...as well as other benefits. Still I can make my boobs the size of balloons and I can make myself look like Michael Jackson if I wish.
YET, a young woman who failed to have a “Living Will” drawn up to protect her “alleged” wishes is now in a crazy debate of whether she should be allowed to die or allowed to live.
Last I checked, I HAD to have a Living Will drawn up, for my wishes to be honored. Terri Schiavo did NOT, and for some reason this is an issue.
Her husband seems determined to have her die. Her parents are determined to keep their “little girl” around them for as long as possible. I think we can all agree that Terri Schiavo is no longer alive for herself. She may not be brain dead, but she is not far above that, in a vegetative state...to what degree, we don’t know.
Apparently, her husband doesn’t care to know how brain damaged she is. I have heard that he refuses to allow testing on her...however I have gotten so many conflicting statements about other issues in regards to Terri, that I have a lot of questions that I desperately like to have answered so that I, Teri McPhail, can make a smart decision as to my Primary Directive.
The story on Ms. Schiavo goes something like this...
She was supposedly at home for a normal day, when she suddenly collapses. WHY? I have heard that she collapsed due to the ravages of anorexia. Then I heard that she had a heart attack. I heard that she had some fractures in her spine and I have heard that she was deprived of oxygen that caused the brain damage and the supposition was that she didn’t magically do this on her own. My questions are as follows. If she collapsed, unexplained in her home, wouldn’t that throw up some signals to Drs that something might be wrong? If she collapsed, unexplained in her home, would you not want to find out the cause of this collapse? If she did collapse because of a heart attack, while not unheard of for a rather young person, what might cause such a reaction in a woman younger than me...and I am 41...and then take into consideration that this collapse happened 15 years ago, and how old was she then?? If there were fractures, doesn’t that send off all kinds of red lights?? Shouldn’t you run some tests to help determine what caused such a thing in an otherwise seemingly healthy young woman?
The above questions then lead me to a scenario that maybe congress, and the general public hasn’t then thought of. WHAT IF this was an attempted murder scenario? WHAT IF her husband tried to kill her? IF HE DID try to kill her, do we not owe it to her to find this information out? IF HE DIDN’T...don’t we owe it to him to exonerate him? IF HE DID try to kill her, then doesn’t that make him the worst person in the world to say that this (Primary Directive) was what she wanted? It seems that Mr. Schiavo does not want an autopsy (and at this point why should he when the cause of death would not be because of “attempted murder” but that she would have starved/dehydrated to death...making the cause of death apparent). Her husband wants to have her cremated. He is adamant about Terri dying, he is adamant about an autopsy, and he is adamant about her body being cremated. Her family (blood relatives...who love their daughter EVEN THOUGH they continue to have a life as opposed to a man who wants Terri gone to neatly tie up his life because he has “moved on”), wants her, to hold her and love her.
Why is Mr. Schiavo so insistent? Why does he not divorce her and let her become her parent’s burden? Why is he so INSISTENT that she die? Does her life hinder his? If he divorces her, how can this bother with his life in any way?? If she does die, does he financially gain? Does he say that the church (Catholic, I do believe) does not recognize divorce, and as I can recall to the best of my knowledge, the Catholic church does recognize annulment, and I believe that in this case this would not be a problem for the church to grant an annulment. Why does he not go this route and turn the care of Terri over to her parents? Why is he so insistent that she die? Why at this point after 15 years does he really care that much to fight for her to die, UNLESS until she is in the ground he can breathe a sigh of relief because her body...possibly living evidence, is then six foot under....OOPS! I forgot, he wants her cremated.
Let’s say he didn’t do anything to her. Let’s say she did just collapse of odd circumstances in her home, not totally impossible, and it is just time for him to move on. Does she REALLY have to die for him to move on, gain happiness, remarry and live a life of peace? If Terri really did want to die, instead of being revived, then a Primary Directive, DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) , Living Will should have been drawn up and this should be a lesson for all of us.
But then again, if her husband did do something to her, should the Living Will become null and void? When you get to the hospital with a Living Will and under these odd circumstances, does the Drs just idly stand by and do nothing? It seems that starting with paramedics, if she had a Living Will then they would have been in violation of her ultimate wishes when they started life saving measures that first day in her home. A lot of the Living Wills are worded that they do not want to be kept alive artificially on machines. Most of us envision that to mean that we don’t want to sit on machines for an indeterminate amount of time, hooked to respirators, IV’s, and being zapped with an electric surge to start a heart pumping again even though our brains are gone. In this case, then, Christopher Reeves was on machines for many years before he finally succumbed and if he had a Living Will then this would have DEFINITELY been a violation of his wishes as he was on a respirator until his death...where Terri Schiavo is not.
What does THAT mean? Is Terri Schiavo brain dead? I take it to mean that brain death is not only where there is no brain waves whatsoever, but also no living a life WITHOUT a machine making sure that I live, and no response not only visually, but that the eyes don’t even have enough brain waves to make the pupils constrict and dilate. This does not seem to be Terri’s case. She is living without any machines whatsoever but must be fed with a tube directly linked to her stomach....a fact, by the way that is not so far off as MANY Americans alive now, in nursing homes, children who were brain damaged due to tragic accidents and children that have a horrible debilitating disease that renders them being fed by a tube. Are they not worthy of life? What kind of quality of life do they have? Who are we to judge that that is not much of a life and that we should let them starve to death? Science has come so far and we are saving lives every day, but are we now going to say that God should make that decision and we need not to interfere? What does that mean, to interfere? Did Drs start to interfere with the process of life and death when they learned how to do CPR? Did Drs step over the God-line when they invented a machine that would breathe for a patient? (I personally know of someone who was on a respirator and is now living a full life, free of machinery and feeding tubes). Did Drs walk into land that was none of their business when they started using electric current to jump-start a heart that had stopped? If Terri had a Living Will drawn up before any of this happened, would it be God’s will that she be allowed to die right there in her living room? When is it neglect and when is it “my right to die”?
What about children with Cerebral Palsy and other like diseases? There are a lot of them in the same state as Terri Schiavo...are we just post0poning the inevitable? Do we need to shake these mother's that are insisting that their children live and FORCE them to allow those children to die? Who's next? Down's Syndrome?
I don’t know the answers to all of this. It just seems a horrible shame that this woman is no longer viable enough to the general society that she should be allowed to starve to death, and I find this unconscionable. It has caused lots of questions for me and I want some answers. If I make up a Living Will and then someone tries to kill me, are the Drs “aiding and abetting” if they just keep their hands off of me? Terri is not alive because she wants to be alive or dead at this point. She is alive because someone used the power of our new science and kept her alive, healed her body to the point that her body now survives without machines, and her family (her parents and siblings) WANTS her to be with them, even if they don’t have Terri fully alive as she was.
Michael, it appears you are guilty of something, even if you aren’t. Can you just get a divorce from Terri and let her be the burden of her family and leave her alone? Is that too much to ask?

Bryan, make sure your family doesn’t have any life-saving measures done on them...including chemo, radiation and blood pressure medication....it’s their time.
Gosh, God-fearing = naive in your opinion, Bryan...interesting. You sound pretty naive to me. Just keep in mind what I said about the life-saving measures. They (you and your family) might not want to eat either, as that is only sustaining you for the inevitable.

Posted by: Another Teri in FL at March 21, 2005 11:44 AM

Another Teri in Fla:

I am Bryan. I did not post the post you are referring to. "Adam" did.

The name of the person that posts in UNDER the actual post itself. I do not like this format because it makes it seem that the poster name is ABOVE the post, when it is BELOW the post.

I, Bryan, share your sentiments Teri.

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 12:00 PM

Another Teri in Fla:

I am Bryan. I did not post the post you are referring to. "Adam" did.

The name of the person that posts is UNDER the actual post itself. I do not like this format because it makes it seem that the poster name is ABOVE the post, when it is BELOW the post.

I, Bryan, share your sentiments Teri.

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 12:00 PM

You are correct, Bryan, I also do not like the format. My apoligies.

Posted by: Another Teri in FL at March 21, 2005 12:04 PM

OOPS, apologies.
Adam...see my note above on my long blog...this blog's for you.

Posted by: Another Teri in FL at March 21, 2005 12:05 PM

Anyone consider letting Dr. Kavorkian handle this mess? He would get the job done in a much more efficient manner than the court system.

Posted by: Robbie at March 21, 2005 1:54 PM

I wonder what Christopher Reeves Wife thinks about this situation. She loved her husband and she did everything she could to prolong his life and improve it, not kill him because he was disabled. I wonder if Terri's so called husband is worried about his life, I would be.

Posted by: Barbara at March 21, 2005 2:21 PM

I am sure Judge Whittmore will rule for Terri's feeding tube to be reinstated! HE PROBABLY JUST HAD TO BREAK FOR DINNER!

Posted by: Linda at March 21, 2005 7:19 PM

This is clearly a sad case. But please don't fool yourselves into thinking that Michael and the court system are somehow conspiring to subvert the law just so he can kill his wife.

I know many of the judges in this case and their integrity is beyond reproach. The fact remains that under the facts of this case and the law in place Michael is entitled to order life sustaining treatment from Terri.

This isn't some grave miscarriage of justice - nor is it some subversive plot carried out with a wink and a few dollars.

Don't let your emotions short circuit clear thinking. And don't think for a moment the judges in this case overlooked the fact that they were dealing with a human life.

Posted by: Brad at March 21, 2005 8:01 PM

To Brad: Knowing the judges, does not change how ignorant they are acting with the law. Terri Schiavo DID NOT have a primary directive. Don't you think she would have mentioned SOMETHING to her parents if this was her wishes? What about Terri's pusuit of life, liberty, etc? AGAIN, last I checked Terri HAD to have a Living Will executed to have her desire known, otherwise she was at the will of Drs who would know how best to proceed. She is not on LIFE SUPPORT. The circumstances of her colapse are shady at best and it appears your wonderful judges are aiding and abetting in a possible attempted murder case...have they thought about that!?!?!?

Posted by: Another Teri in FL at March 22, 2005 8:36 AM

Whoever wrote this:

You are all nuts. It is a damn shame to see our country return to the days of god fearing naivity. Let this woman go. It is her time.

IF IT IS HER TIME,THEN DON'T YOU THINK GOD WOULD HAVE ALREADY TAKEN HER?????????????

Posted by: Jennifer at March 22, 2005 10:08 AM

It's a shame what is happening. People are so blind to the fact that a feeding tube IS NOT life support. Somehow we who understand that God, the creator of absolutely everything, is in control of this situation too, no matter what the outcome. We can only continue to pray for His divine intervention and His will be done, and the softening of Michael Shiavo's heart as well as those ruling against Terri's life.

If Terri is allowed to die by starvation and dehydration - a cruel, painful fate - I agree she will be with the Lord without pain in a perfect, new body. The eternal fate that awaits those with alterior motives in this situation will be grim and desolate beyond imagination, unless they repent and start choosing morally. I feel sad for everyone who is blind to the truth for they will face a horribly grim eternal separation from God - a unimaginable state.

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose."
-Romans 8:28

Posted by: Barb at March 22, 2005 10:39 AM

I am relieved to see the "experts" report that dying by starvation/dehydration is a painless process. This should open a lot of doors for folks with severe cerebral palsy or alzheimers or other condition that might warrant a person unfit for further care including basic nutrition.

Thank goodness the "experts" are sure that this is the peaceful way to die. I wonder if the nursing staff at Terri's hopsice will be able to withstand her moans and groans as she slips into agony. Will her loving husband sit with her during these last days and comfort her by holding her hand? How about the judges and senators that voted "no" - will they stop in to verify that she is peacefully slipping into a coma rather than trying to communicate her need for food?

This makes me sick!

Posted by: Barb at March 22, 2005 2:32 PM

When do we start killing people with alzheimers? They don't have a good quality of life. What about mentally retarded people? Who decides who lives and who dies?
I will tell you...God!!!! Terri is not on life support. She is not in a coma. She is not brain dead. She is a "person" being starved to death. We would die the same horrible death if we were not allowed to have food and water.
Did Terri tell her "so-called" husband that if she was on a feeding tube, starve her to death? She may have said don't keep me alive on life support. I have said the same thing to my husband. But this is totally different.
For all you people that are okay with this because of this questionable husband claiming she wanted this, wake up!
What happened to for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health? This man lives with another woman and has had two children with her. As far as I am concerned he lost all guardianship when he began committing adultry.
She breathes on her own. She is awake. She can even eat a liquid diet by mouth...until her concerned husband wanted a feeding tube. And yes, the nurses agreed to that most likely so she wouldn't have to be hand-fed. We wouldn't want to over burden that husband of hers! God help us, because this is just a sample of more things to come!

Posted by: sandy at March 22, 2005 4:37 PM

However this case turns out it deserves further investigation. Michael Schiavo acts if he has something to hide. I didnt realize bygamy was legal in Florida. Judge Greer is more interested in his reputation than getting to the truth. I wonder what he would do if he were in Terri's position. The police department definitely needs some work, they are a complete joke. The hospice should have their licensce revoked, their job is to protect life. I'm so sick of seeing Felos' face, what a sorry excuse for trash.
Whats happening in Florida is a embarrassment to society.

Posted by: ralph in calif at March 23, 2005 2:14 AM