« Republicans Scheduled For The Terri Schiavo "Wall of Shame" | Main | Musings on the Terri Schiavo case »

March 21, 2005

Support Terri at the Courthouse

Topics: Action Items

Anyone who can go to Tampa in show of support must get there by 2:30. Leave your phones, pagers and most everything in the car because will not be allowed in the building. Their security is much more strict than the Greer hearings most are familiar.

Downtown Tampa.

Sam M. Gibbons United States Courthouse
Courtroom 13B
801 N. Florida Avenue
Tampa, Florida

Posted by tim at March 21, 2005 12:05 PM

Articles Related to Action Items:

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Support Terri at the Courthouse:

» http://whatattitudeproblem.blogs.com/home/2005/03/update_court_he.html from What Attitude Problem?
UPDATE: Court Hearing For Terri Schiavo Scheduled For 3:00 PM ET There is a hearing scheduled in court today at 3:00 PM ET before Honorable Judge James D Whittemore in Tampa today for a restraining order to be placed on [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 12:32 PM

» Support Terri Schiavo at the Courthouse in Tampa from ProLifeBlogs
Anyone who can go to Tampa in show of support must get there by 2:30. Leave your phones, pagers and most everything in the car because will not be allowed in the building. Their security is much more strict than... [Read More]

Tracked on March 21, 2005 12:37 PM


Do you honestly think TERRI is not truly amazing?????


Christopher Reeve biography
read about this "Democrat" who did not even live 10 years past his accident.


Posted by: chardonnay at March 21, 2005 12:19 PM

snip from the article...

"At such high-profile appearances Reeve faces risk of embarrassment if he cannot speak because his tracheostomy tube is slightly out of position or if his body suddenly spasms and jerks about uncontrollably (as it did just before the curtain went up at the Oscars)."

This is to everyone who has been shouting "I wouldn't want to live that way"... Was Mr. Reeve's life not worth living?

Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 12:27 PM

My understanding is that not being able to breathe on one's own is very debilitating, leading to frequent bouts of pneumonia, which is (IIRC) what killed Christopher Reeve in the end. At least Terri can breathe by herself. And swallow, too. Maybe the feeding tube isn't even needed? That could explain the delay...

I think I'll keep ringing the phones in Jeb Bush's office.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 12:30 PM



Christopher Reeve biography

accident MAY 1995-died Oct 2004
9 years

In addition to being an actor, Reeve is also an active celebrity political activist. Reeve, who is a liberal Democrat, explained his politically active career: "I became politically active in high school, protesting the Vietnam War. And when I went to Cornell, I became involved in environmental issues. And then, as an adult, I became involved in First Amendment issues and funding for the arts. And now that I am disabled, of course my main focus is on the quality of life for all disabled people and doing everything I can to help scientists make progress toward cures." Reeve further explained his personal political preference for the Democrat party saying,


"Actually, the Republicans have done more for the disabled and for funding medical research over the past eight years than the Democrats.

Posted by: chardonnay at March 21, 2005 12:41 PM

Wow...if everyone would/did put so as much energy into demanding our gov't do something to stop sexual predators such as John Couey, as they are into saving Terri, I wonder what might get accomplished..heck, little Jessica might still be alive if crimes against children had received as much coverage as Terri Schiavo has. It amazes me that our gov't (and the people) will fight tooth and nail to save someone with no concievable future but once a murdered child's story fades into the background everyone forgets. Sad...sad indeed...

Posted by: Tina at March 21, 2005 12:47 PM

What’s truly amazing is that people such as yourself have yet to address the issue at hand – keeping a person alive – and instead change the subject.

Posted by: Mo at March 21, 2005 12:51 PM


Take your feelings about Jessica's situation to a board/thread/website about criminal punishment for sexual predators.

If you're so inclined, make a website like the people have done for Terri. Make the political contacts yourself, force the media to pay attention to what you and those who support your issue have to say.

That's the glorious thing about this country... the lengths one person can go to get continental support for an issue are endless.

But please, don't pollute a good cause with your ignorance of the issue at hand, simply because there is something you feel is more important. I'm quite sure that the majority of people who visit this site, would visit yours (yet to come?).

Posted by: lara at March 21, 2005 1:00 PM

I never thought of it until I read the above posts. Reeve needed help to breath, Terri does NOT! Dana Reeve NEVER tried to kill him. I still believe without a doubt that Michael scumbag adulterer wants to kill her to stop her from saying something bad about him. I pray her first 3 words are "Michael did it".

Posted by: Marine Momma at March 21, 2005 1:00 PM

"Brian Schiavo, Michael’s brother, said he spent Sunday afternoon with his brother and Terri at the hospice, but Terri did not move or make any noises. “Anybody that thinks that she talks and responds, they need to have a mental health examination,” he said."

Posted by: Amy at March 21, 2005 1:07 PM

So far people have come onto this site and accused defenders of Terri of not caring about 1) capital punishment 2) child poverty 3) sex offences 4) health care in general... the list goes on.

What is it with these sort of people? How do they presume to know what every single person who's defended Terri thinks and does about these issues? And why do they think it's relevant to the rights and wrongs of an issue to go on about how some other issue isn't being discussed here?

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 1:07 PM

Eileen... well said!

Posted by: lara at March 21, 2005 1:10 PM

Amy - it's been stated all over the place that like any other handicapped individual, Terri has good days and bad days. Maybe her brother's a jerk, and she knows it. You don't know.

Posted by: lara at March 21, 2005 1:17 PM

My wife and I are getting living wills drawn up this week.

Posted by: matthew at March 21, 2005 1:27 PM


Aspirates? Please do just a tiny bit of reasearch before posting your thoughts. The tube is in her abdomen.

And it appears you have your own ax grinding away.

Posted by: Brad at March 21, 2005 1:31 PM


The difference between Terri and the other patients in hospice care is that Terri does not have a terminal illness and is NOT DYING!

People who are actually dying come to a point where they refuse food and water. This happens with animals, too. Nature knows when the end is near.

And how can you call Michael a "hero" when he has refused Terri simple things like sunshine, music played in her room, antibiotics for infections, and even basic dental care? Don't you get it yet? If he treated an animal the way he's treated his own wife, he'd be in jail for animal abuse.

It's not hypocritical at all to want Terri treated without cruelty -- it's only decent. Don't muddy the waters by dragging the Iraqis killed by Saddam (not by us) into the case.

Finally, Terri is not likely to aspirate food. One of the nurses who cared for her said she ate Jello with no problem.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 1:32 PM

Michael Schiavo is a criminal!

Anyone tired of calling congressmen yet? Here... call the sheriff!


Posted by: Teri J at March 21, 2005 1:33 PM

I realize... I was posting some of the cruel things the opposition is saying. But thanks :)

Posted by: Amy at March 21, 2005 1:34 PM

No, the tube is NOT in her abdomen.
The tube was pulled OUT of her abdomen last Friday.
She is being cruelly STARVED TO DEATH RIGHT NOW. It's been just about 4 days since she has had food or water. Lord, please sustain her.

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 1:35 PM

To all folks how think Terri is suffering and should be allowed to die, I offer this logic proof to show that it's illogical to do that.

*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.

Problem solving this way 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.

So, one can remove religion, morality, ego projection, circular legal wranglings etc. from the process, thus reducing the entire argument to dry logic. There is no logic in allowing her to die. If you want to see the logic proof I did based on the scenario of Terri not being PVS, I'll be happy to post it.

Posted by: Ceci at March 21, 2005 1:35 PM

Forcing Terry to die...humm
Is it because she's different then us healthy ones?
Well then might as well make it a law that all disabled and retarded people on this planet must starve to death....right...so sad

Posted by: Shauwn at March 21, 2005 1:36 PM

I am so happy that the wheels of justice seem to be at last (hopefully) turning in Terri's favor.

I am a democrat, a liberal, a believer in a woman's right to choose, an avid advocate of stem cell research.... and a profound believer in Terri Schiavo's right to have a proper "day in court".

My problem: Michael Schiavo clearly is NOT your typical unbiased loving husband. He has long since had another agenda... to marry the woman who he purportedly became engaged to some years ago (about the time he started saying that Terri had expressed a wish not to be kept alive by artificial means).... and with whom he has two children. Early on, he might have even thought that he would inherit a substantial sum of money should Terri die.

Sure, he professes his "love" for Terri. But so did Scott Peterson profess his love for Laci... while all the time romancing other women... and plotting and executing her death.

Bottom line, I don't trust Michael Schiavo not to have caused the "almost death" of Terri.

Apparently, Terri's heart stopped due to some mysterious malady... possibly a "potassium imbalance".

I personally would not rule out the possibility that Michael Schiavo administered an almost lethal dose of potassium chloride.

See http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?docid=1P1:82197058&dtype=0~0&dinst=&author=&title=Vic%3A%20Deaths%20since%201992%20involving%20potassium%20chloride&date=09/25/2003&refid=ency_botnm for "Deaths caused by potassium chloride since 1992".

I doubt that this angle was ever thoroughly investigated by the police...

and could be one reason why Michael sought, for at least a few years, to keep Terri alive.

Furthermore, Michael is now a nurse... and his interest in things medical could have given him the knowledge to have administered such a potentially lethal dose of potassium. I heard Terri's family say that they didn't know her to have an eating disorder, as was the suspected reason for Terri's "potassium imbalance".

At any rate, because of the "doubt" that exists, I applaud congress's intervention... and hope for the best from the federal judge.

Jacqueline Corbett
Editor, TheLivingWeb.net

Posted by: Jacqueline Corbett at March 21, 2005 1:36 PM

Matthew, you are doing exactly the right thing.

If there's one lesson that EVERYONE should draw from Terri's case, regardless of which side they're on, it is that EVERYONE should have a living will.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 1:36 PM

Dear Mason,

I'm delighted to hear I'm killing people in Iraq, being an anti-war Canadian. How do I do this, I wonder? By sending out super secret mind rays that fry Iraqi citizens when no one is looking?

Seriously, you must understand that the coalition to save Terri is not a partisan thing. It is not even an American thing. It is people of all different faiths, political backgrounds, cultures, nations etc. coming together to defend a handicapped woman from being tortured to death.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 1:39 PM

Thank you, Eileen!!!!!

On an earlier thread I posted a link to http://notdeadyet.org, a disabled-rights group. To them, the issue of whether Terri Schiavo should live or die is one of equal rights for the disabled, pure and simple. Religion, morality, nationality, or relevance to other world events don't enter into the argument as far as they're concerned.

I think that is a very healthy way to look at the situation, actually. Why shouldn't Terri have equal protection under the law? How would deliberately killing her be any different from any other murder?

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 1:43 PM

Amen, Matthew, amen. It frankly scares me that people like the regulars of this board feel they can utilize our legislative and executive branches to impose their personal views on me and my family when the judicial branch has repeadetly said their claims have no merit.

Before I am attacked as "uneducated" or a "Nazi" as I have seen the regulars of this board do frequently when someone attempts to offer a differeing opinion, let me state that if it were my decision, Terri would be kept alive by whatever means necessary. I do feel Michael should have relinquished his guardianship years ago. However, the key point in this whole battle is that none of us have the right to make the decision to keep Terri alive-none of us-except for Michael Schiavo. If our society is to survive, there must be respect for the rule of law. In this case, all legal matters have been adjudicated ad nosium, with all proper appeals exhausted. Now, because a noisy minority in this country disagree with the outcome, they want to change the rules and restart the legal process all over. That is simply un-American and unworthy of individuals who claim to love our country.

I pray for Terri, and I pray for America. With the loss of the basic Federalist principles (cheifly checks and balances) that religious extremists int this country are pushing, this nation does not have long to survive.

Posted by: Dan at March 21, 2005 1:43 PM

Matthew, getting living wills drawn up is a very good idea. A word of advice, having some experience in these matters. Make sure you research the issues before you draw the wills up. It's important to have a clear living will that can't be misinterpreted, and that you understand the potential situations it could apply to. A flawed living will that doesn't accurately reflect your wishes could be as harmful as no living will at all.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 1:46 PM


Could you do a copy/paste of the article you linked? It appears that you have to join something to get to see it, and I don't fill out any internet forms or join anything anymore online. (spam prevention).

Thanks. I'm very interested in the article you linked to.

Posted by: Ceci at March 21, 2005 1:47 PM


I submit for your consideration the idea that Terri's individual rights as a U.S. citizen trump Michael's rights as her guardian. That's not a religious matter, but a legal one.

The laws that have made Terri subject to Michael are bad ones that need to be changed. It is the right of citizens in a democracy to change laws they find bad or harmful. That's what is going on now.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 1:48 PM


Well stated. But, just because it is "legal", doesn't make it right. Our laws do have limits, and let us hope that the right thing is done today.

Posted by: brad at March 21, 2005 1:48 PM


Many of us on this blog DO support the rule of law.

It is Judge Greer who doesn't.

Educate yourself further. Read: http://www.theempirejournal.com/0313055_schiavogate_the_big_cove.htm

If the judiciary isn't going to support the rule of law, then per the check and balances of the three branches of government, the legislative and executive have a responsibility to reign in the judiciary.

And the rule of law must be based on JUSTICE, otherwise it is tyranny, and therefore evil.

All many of us are asking is: where does the Constitution gives Judge Greer the right to
kill an innocent woman by torturing her to death by starvation?

It's been THREE DAYS since Terri has had food or water. You try it, then tell me Judge Greer can order her to be killed.

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 1:52 PM


I don't disagree with what you've said, but do you feel that the courts haven't already considered her rights in this case?

Florida law requires a judicial review in cases where advance directives have not been filed. That has occurred. Appeallate courts all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court have refused to overturn the determinations of that review. Is it the right of citizens in Texas and California to impose thier will on the citizens of Florida in what has traditionally been a state matter?

I honestly don't know the answers to these questions. However, I do know that this case is a tragedy, any way it resolves itself.

Posted by: Dan at March 21, 2005 1:53 PM

Seems like many Americans agree that the gov't is overstepping it's bounds.


"Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstepping its bounds for political gain.

The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal review of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush signed it early today."

For me it isn't about whether Terri lives or not, it's about bills being passed to save her, it's about our president doing this with lightening speed. You do realize that for them this ISN'T about Terri at all, it ISN'T personal...it's about pushing the pro-life agenda. There are so many better things that our lawmakers could be pushing for.

The courts have ruled on this case, that should be then end of it.

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

Do you think all people don't make mistakes? Do you think that judges don't make mistakes, or that some people are corrupt? The courts in this matter have been very corrupt, by denying her rights that the law should allow. Judge Greer has hidden motives. Haven't you ever heard of people buying other people off? I wouldn't doubt if Greer will receive some sort of compensation from Michael if Terri dies. Call me crazy, but something is fishy here.

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 1:55 PM

I have volunteered at a school for MR/DD children for the last 20 years and know many, many children who, for one reason or another, rely on a feeding tube for nourishment. These children are, in essence, no different from Terri. Many cannot speak and are confined to wheelchairs. The one glaring difference is that their guardians love them. I shudder to think what would happen if Michael is allowed to murder Terri this way. If a child is born without the ability to swallow or speak and has limited mobility, will the parent be permitted to kill this child because they are sure the child wouldn't want to live this way?

God bless Terri and all who are fighting for her.

Posted by: Brad at March 21, 2005 1:56 PM

Well, for most of us on this blog, it is about whether Terri lives or dies. Note the name:
Three days: no food or water. Try it, then see if you wouldn't want our government to do something.

Posted by: Bryan at March 21, 2005 1:57 PM

Yes, Dan, that's what I think most of us feel, that there's been a travesty of justice committed. If you read the details of the case, there was so much wrong in the review that it's sickening. Appointing an euthanasia activist with a habit of diagnosing non-PVS patients as PVS as court physician is just one of them.

What we want is not that the matter be taken away from the courts but that it be allowed a proper federal appeal. There is obviously a problem in the system that will have to be fixed that there weren't workable mechanisms there already for this. Not being an American I can't comment on how this could be permanently fixed, but I see it that Congress is taking the first step in fixing it for Terri Schiavo, letting her parents have their day in federal court.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 1:57 PM

do indeed feel that the courts have not properly considered Terri's rights in this case. No human being may be starved to death. That is illegal. Terri has not had her own attorney. That is lack of representation. I could go on and on, but I don't think I need to.

Just because the majority believes something doesn't make it right. Most people who are interviewed or polled believe that Terri is brain-dead, which is not true.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 1:58 PM

Eileen - KUDOS!

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 1:58 PM

Sorry -- above sentence should read "I do indeed feel...".

Someone mentioned the Texas "futile care" law earlier. I'm not familiar with it, but it seems like a bad law to me. Maybe the precedent set by Terri's case will allow it to be reconsidered and modified or overturned.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:00 PM

TI, it really doesn't matter to me whether President Bush and Tom Delay are sincere or not about wanting to save Teri's life or whether they're driven by wanting to win votes. It doesn't become less right or less wrong, depending on how the politicians *feel*. I think they did the right thing. I at least hope you think they did the wrong thing, and aren't just critical because you don't trust their *feelings*!

I think it's funny that most of the time we insist that we want politicians who follow principles, not polls, yet whenever there's a crisis, we yell "But the polls say X!" if it coincides with our side.

Myself, if every person in the world were to tell me it was all right for Michael Schiavo to torture his wife to death by dehydration, I would still oppose it.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:03 PM

BTW, that Reuters poll cited by TI, above, only talked to 501 people. Hardly a drop in the bucket.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:05 PM

Polls, did someone say "poll"?

The exit polls said Kerry was president, last time I looked W is president.

Posted by: imtoast at March 21, 2005 2:06 PM

The media frames this struggle as "right to die" matter or family issue. Why don't they report how many Florida statues that Judge Greer has violated so far?


Posted by: Miranda at March 21, 2005 2:08 PM

Clarifying: "Barely a drop in the bucket." I'm typing too fast.

Off to run up my cell-phone bill calling Jeb and Sheriff Coates...

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:08 PM

Yes, Eileen, I do think they did the wrong thing...honestly.

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 2:13 PM

Holding people whom do not agree with you and putting a wall of shame up is sick.. You people think that you can interfere with everyone's life.. I do not pay my taxes to have our congress create special laws just for one person.

What about the other people in the same boat? I know screw them.. Who cares about them.. I personally will not vote for anyone whom took part to make this illegal law. I will do what it takes to personally destory them politcally. Why not you pro-lifer do that same. Except that when 2/3rds of the nation feel that you have gone too far that this is just political grand standing then our tax money is being wasted.

Thanks for wasting my tax money, for making Terri Suffer for 15 years, for being a cancer.

Posted by: Jeffrey Bodenstein at March 21, 2005 2:15 PM

Don't bother calling Sheriff Coates -- it turns out he's out of town!!! Boy, did I feel like a moron. I talked to his receptionist, who said that they "have to uphold the law". Very true -- and I pointed out that President Bush signed the law this morning. To which she replied that "it's in the court's hands now." Aaarrrgh.

Oh, and Jeb's line is busy. Good! Keep it up!

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:16 PM

Terri Schiavo is alive. She has a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in this country. For a court, to rely on quackery science to determine a condition of the brain she does not have any different than most humans, is the result of neuroscience pretending to know what it does not know.

Posted by: AZ at March 21, 2005 2:17 PM

Jeffrey, what other people do you know who are "in the same boat", i.e. alive and being starved to death by court order?

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:17 PM

This is ridiculous. She's BRAIN DEAD. It's selfish of the parents to keep her alive. It's only for their benefit. This is just sad. And it's wasting tax payers money. Let the poor woman go already. She deserves that much.

Posted by: Kristie at March 21, 2005 2:18 PM

Jeffrey, if you believe Terri is in PVS, how is she suffering? If you don't believe Terri is in PVS, you should know that everyone realizes it's illegal to remove a feeding tube from a conscious person?

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:18 PM

Oh, and Jeffrey, that "2/3 of the nation" is from a poll of a mere 501 people. Five hundred and one. It's insignificant.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:19 PM

Here's the full story...

Posted by: AZ at March 21, 2005 2:19 PM

Kristie, Terri is NOT brain-dead! That is a myth!

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:20 PM

Kristie, why do you think she's brain dead? Have you seen the MRIs and CAT scans that are needed to make a diagnosis of PVS?

No, you haven't. Because they weren't done.

You have no evidence that she's brain dead, so why are you saying it?

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:20 PM

Well then instead of sending more bills to congress to make special laws for this, why don't they just do a stupid MRI or whatever it is they need to do? She's been "alive" for 15 years?!?! In THAT state??? And she's NEVER gotten better, correct? NOTHING MIRACULOUS HAS EVER HAPPENED.

She smiles. She twitches her head. All as natural responses that have nothing to do with whether she can understand what the hell is going on around her.

I think you people are seeing things.

You're seeing what you WANT to see.

Not what's actually there.

Posted by: Kristie at March 21, 2005 2:24 PM

Actually, a CAT scan was done, but no MRI, PET, or SPECT. The CAT scan is the one that purports to show that Terri's cortex has liquefied. However, CAT scans work by using X-rays, which don't give very good pictures of soft tissue. Follow-up MRIs or other scans should have been done, but never were, because Michael refused them.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:24 PM

Sick Sick and really sick

Her brian has liquified, you people are sad, the only way she is "alive" is with the feeding tube, remove it a let your GOD do his work, one way or another, I mean are you challenging GOD now, because the republican tell you to.

Posted by: Proud to be a Rational at March 21, 2005 2:25 PM

Kristie, I think I just answered your question. Michael refused an MRI for Terri (along with a lot of other things, like toothbrushing). With this law passed, I hope now she will have the diagnostics that have been denied her.

Have you written your living will yet?

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:26 PM

I just hope this judge will even consider hearing the facts of this case. If he chooses not to that is the end of the line. Judge Greer has ignored florida statue one after another in this case, Michael has no legal rights to guardianship. How can he have Terri best interest at heart when he is sleeping with another woman??!!

Posted by: adrienne at March 21, 2005 2:27 PM

Kristie, they won't do the tests because her husband won't let them. We also have no idea of whether Terri could have or could even now recover, because her husband wouldn't let her have any therapy.

I'm not seeing anything. I'm asking for justice.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:28 PM

Hey, Rational, this is a legal issue. You can take religion out of it completely and still come to the conclusion that Terri should not be killed.

It works like this:
It's illegal to commit murder.
Starving someone deliberately results in death.
Causing someone's death deliberately is the legal definition of murder.
Therefore, starving someone deliberately is murder, and an illegal act.

See? No religion, just law and logic.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:28 PM

Michael is not a hero. He is a monster! Look at the documentation of what he has done and also what he has not done all these years!

For goodness sakes at first he allowed a little rehabilitation, then whined and cried in court that he needed oodles of money to rehabilitate Terri with the best care possible, then stated that he wanted to take care of her personally for ever, and then one a bunch of money... then what did he do?

1) Stoped all rehabilitation once the money was in his hand (remember that before this he cried that he specifically needed the money for the rehab).
2) Eliminated all stimulation from her room such as radios, etc.
3) Would not allow nurses to SUCCESSFULLY feed her orally.
4) Refused to allow antibiotics to be administered when she had infections.
5) Threatened nurses and other staff who tried to show Terri the slightest kindness such as placing a rag in her hand to prevent her fingers from curling.
6) Obviously, has not taken Terri into his own home to care for her (actually, knowing Michael's abusive nature and contempt for her life that would be very scary indeed).
7) Has commited adultury with another woman and has fathered kids by her.

And these are not *all* the things he has done since crying in court about how much he "loved" Terri and wanted to care for her himself and rehabilitate her...

He is a monster, an adulturer, and one nasty sick person!

How can you call this guy a hero when he obviously has done everything he can to deny her any chance to recover (other people have recovered from much worse states of health), done everything he can to accelerate her death, and according to nurses in sworn affidavits has stated, "When will that (explative left out) die" and bragged about the money he would get at her death!

No one should be defending Michael, Judge Greer, or Felos. They are all monsters that are in league together to insure Terri dies to save themselves from being prosecuted for a tremendous number of crimes.

I REFUSE to let anyone run their mouth and say that Michael is a hero. He has claimed for ages that Terri would not want to live on life support, but for goodness sakes she is not even on life support!

Additionally, on Larry King Live.. he admitted that HE DOES NOT KNOW what Terri would want but this is what HE AND FELOS wants.

Terri must live both to reclaim the life she deserves and was robbed of by Michael, to expose this monster once and for all.

Additionally, when you see polls about this situation the truth of the matter is the average person does not know 10% of what has happened in this battle over the past several years. All they are told is that Terri is in a PVS and little or nothing else. Well, she's not in a PVS and if these same people know what Michael was like 98% of them would be opposed to the murder of Terri.


I am just waiting for the Republicans, Democrats, George Bush, and Jeb to SEND IN FEDERAL MARSHALS to bust Terri out of the evil clutches of Michael, Felos, and Greer.

Posted by: GeorgiaGuy at March 21, 2005 2:29 PM

Proud to be Rational, may I ask what's rational about saying her brain is liquified? Given you've no medical basis to be making a diagnosis? You're being very superstitious about this!

I don't do things because the Republicans tell me to. I wish they'd do things because I told them to, but that doesn't seem likely either! ;-)

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:30 PM

I only hope that all of you cruel, unthinking, uncaring monsters someday wind up in the same position as this poor woman has been forced to be in for the last 16 years. Let us see how much you enjoy "life" then, shall we? Her family are pathetic, cruel, obscene monsters.

Posted by: Ann at March 21, 2005 2:30 PM


Jesus christ, if my husband was diagnosed as BRAIN DEAD and they did the cat scan or whatever the hell it was and it showed that his brain was MUSH, I'D WANT TO PUT HIM TO REST!!!!!

He would deserve that!!

What am I supposed to do, let him live forever like a vegetable and get happy whenever he twitches his eyeball at me?


I wouldn't be able to forgive myself if I let him "life a life" like that!!

I'd look at all the options, LOGICALLY and realize, "This person here is no longer my husband. Not in his soul. not anymore. HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHERE HE IS!!"

The same thing for Terri.

Sweet christ let the poor thing die already. She'll be SOOOOOOOOOOo much happier in heaven!!!!

Posted by: Kristie at March 21, 2005 2:30 PM

Terri is not "brain dead." I feel sorry for anyone who really believes that. Under Florida law, if Terri was "brain dead," she could have been declared "legally dead" at any time in the past, and then we would not be debating this today.

I also feel sorry for those who think Terri is in a coma. That not true either.

What has happened is that some judge, who was never at any time in the same room with Terri, made his medical decision that Terri should go without food and water. According to legal papers at the court, it was ordered by the court that Terri is not even allowed to be given food or water by mouth. That's a fact, and it has been that way for a long time.

Terri's "guardian" decided that she should have no sunlight, no flowers in her room, no photos to look at, and above all no therapy. Many people have offered to pay for Terri's care and therapy, but this was rejected by her "guardian."

Posted by: AZ at March 21, 2005 2:31 PM

Ann, if you think Terri is in PVS, how is she suffering to be kept alive? Similarly, if I'm ever completely unconscious and unable to feel pain, I won't be worrying about it either, being unconscious and unable to feel pain. So your wishes of ill luck for me are rather pointless.

The only way Terri can suffer is if she is conscious and I do hope you aren't advocating the killing of conscious people. Everyone in the legal system is agains that.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:32 PM

What shocks me most is that death row inmates are afforded a humane way to die when an innocent disabled woman is left to starve to death.

Posted by: brenna at March 21, 2005 2:33 PM

Senator Delay is a hypocrit. Where was he when 6 month old Sun Hudson was taken off the ventilator at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, over his mother's objection. Funny how Texas allows hospital's the power to determine this be done even over parent's objections. I don't see are fearless leaders getting involved in this situations.

Posted by: Michael at March 21, 2005 2:34 PM


There's a lot more going on in this case than meets the eye. The fact that Michael denied Terri simple, free things like sunlight and music makes me suspicious. The fact that he wants her cremated (contrary to Catholic doctrine, and Terri is a Catholic) the minute she dies, with no autopsy, makes me very suspicious. The fact that some of Terri's neck X-rays are consistent with strangulation injuries makes me very, very, very suspicious.

Terri may well die. But if she does, there needs to be an investigation into a possible attempted murder.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:35 PM

Michael, I don't know much about the Texas law, but it sounds pretty bad to me. It's been said that "people get the law they deserve." I don't know how long ago Sun Hudson died, but it's possible that if that case were happening now, with the harsh light of the Internet shining on it, that the outcome would have been different. Maybe that Texas law can be changed on the strength of Terri's case.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:37 PM

Kudos to you Mary!!

Posted by: brenna at March 21, 2005 2:37 PM

Kristie, why are you so adverse to learning more about the science behind the case? Are you afraid you might learn something uncomfortable?

First of all, as others have pointed out, you seem to be equating brain death with PVS. No one thinks Terri Schiavo is brain dead. No one. Not even pro-euthanasia doctor Cranford. So I'd suggest you stop using that word.

Secondly, it is a medical truth that PVS can *not* be diagnosed properly with the tests Terri was given. Your feelings that you wouldn't want to be kept alive if you were PVS do not mean Terri was properly diagnosed. You can only find that out if you actually investigate the *facts*.

Please stop judging a situation before you actually know the facts, Kristie. If after you know them all, you still feel that way, it would be very different. But coming here and yelling at people with absolutely no knowledge of the case is not worth it.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:38 PM

No disrespect to Texans meant above. My mother's family is from Texas. "People get the law they deserve" when they don't consider all the facts carefully. When the "Futile Care" law was passed, perhaps money was uppermost in the lawmakers' minds -- if so, perhaps it's time to review that law in light of recent developments.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:39 PM

By the way, I am a Christian Libertarian and I am not doing things because Republicans or Democrats tell me to. I support Terri because her constitutional rights are being violated and of course because as a Christian I am supposed to care for others.

It is her life, her body, and it should be her decision to live or die. No one can prove she wants to die while she is in such a poor physical condition (severely disabled but NOT PVS by any means) and unable to communicate so the only way to protect her right to life is to do everything to keep her alive and REHABILITATE HER so she can one day TELL US what she wants! Which in my opinion, obviously, would probably be LIFE!

Additionally, Michael is committing adultury against her. If she was still healthy there is no way Terri would have stayed married to him and therefore he should have NO DECISION MAKING POWER over her life or medical care, PERIOD!

The moment he broke his marriage vows he should have lost ALL RIGHTS to make decisions for her!

If I was in such a state I would not want a wife making decisions about my life if she was fornicating with another man and therefore committing adultury against me!

Once again, I find anyone who would defend Michael's actions, motives, or behavior very dubious at the least and nefarious at the worst.

Posted by: GeorgiaGuy at March 21, 2005 2:40 PM

Tom Delay's a hypocrite? Very likely. I'm not an American, so I don't know much about the man. Doesn't mean Mr. Delay can never do anything right.

Posted by: Eileen R at March 21, 2005 2:41 PM

"When Terri Schindler Schiavo’s feeding tube was removed, some talk radio callers complained about Congress’ attempts to intervene and tried to justify starving her on the grounds that they would not want to live in that condition. I have a news flash for them: It’s not about you! It is about the rights of all incapacitated people including Terri Schindler Schiavo."

>>> http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/c-e/ellsworth/2005/ellsworth032005.htm

Posted by: AZ at March 21, 2005 2:42 PM

Eileen, very true! :-)

And everyone who's yelling "hypocrite" should remember that even a stopped clock is right twice a day (or once a day, if it's a digital clock and it happens to be 12:00!).

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:43 PM

The CAT scan didn't show her brain was mush. It can't. It was inconclusive, which is the worst answer that test can give. (And, if her brain was mush, she would be on a vent. Much easier decision. I know, because I made it for my mom.)

There is anecdotal evidence that she can swallow on her own, yet no swallow test has been given (that I can find.) Aspiration on Jello would be a far better death than slow dehydration/starvation. I say, leave out the feeding tube if you must, just allow her to wet her lips & mouth (as my Grandmother was allowed to do in hospice.) If she can eat, let her.

Follow normal protocol in regards to testing. Don't do an x-ray to determine brain function. It can't.

I have participated in DNRs for 2 family members.

Posted by: carson at March 21, 2005 2:43 PM

Ooh, Carson, ouch. That must have been rough. Bless you.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:44 PM

Mary...Sun Hudson was just removed from life support last week.

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 2:46 PM

Mary in LA, good point, they should try to let her eat and drink by natural means herself, and if that doesn't work then it was her will. End of discussion.

Posted by: dday at March 21, 2005 2:48 PM

Its probably not even Michael's doing, its probably his fiancee who is putting the intense pressure on him now to remove the tube. I wonder how Michael and his fiancee would feel if suddenly we told them "I'm sorry, but we can't allow you to eat or drink anymore".

No one, not even medical doctors can 100% accurately assess whether Terri is feeling the torment of starvation or not. I've heard some idiot commentators on television insist that starving someone at that stage is not painless. How the hell would they know if they have never walked a mile in her shoes.

Posted by: jen at March 21, 2005 2:49 PM

Hey, you may think we are monsters but consider this for a moment...

You claim that Terri's life has been so horrible all of these years. That's true! But the reason this horrible part of her life STARTED and CONTINUES is because of MICHAEL!

1) It is very probable that he was the one who CAUSED HER THESE INJURIES in the first place!

2) Just think how much BETTER her life could have been Michael would have kept his word instead of DIRECTLY contradicting what he stated in court and used the money he won to rehabilitate her! Just imagine what ONE YEAR of true rehabilitation could have done for this woman! Just one true year of spending that money on the BEST REHABILITATION medicine could provide!

But that did not happen! The very minimal rehabilitation that he allowed before he won all the money was immediately canceled after it was in his bank account.

You might claim that we are causing Terri more agony and pain but who are YOU to decide that she would just want to DIE rather than HAVE A CHANCE TO REHABILITATE AND RECLAIM HER LIFE!

Just because your body does not function as it once did due to an injury does not mean inside deep inside your mind that you don't want to live again.

And of course you forget the concept of the soul or our eternal spirit that we each have.

Ourselves, our basic self, is not just a meat-computer. We are more than just a brain or a few pounds of grey matter. For goodness sakes, look up the research on individuals who have lived their ENTIRE LIFE without ANY BRAIN AT ALL!

I am for real! There is a condition where people live an ordinary life, even attend college, but have no brain at all. Only fluid where the brain should be!

Guess what's letting them think? THEIR SPIRIT, SOUL, or LIFEFORCE (whatever you want to call the eternal and neverending part inside each of us).

Terri is still in there and who are you to claim that she is ready to die!

Posted by: GeorgiaGuy at March 21, 2005 2:51 PM

Maybe Terri's husband should have taken the million offered to him before.But he didn't because he knows if she gets help and can speak again she would speak the truth......God Bless you Terri and your parents ...micheal if you loved her you wouldn't have a girlfriend and kids . You would have stuck it out with her.Let the parents have their daughter abck, you don't want her.If so sat up and bed right now and ate by herself what would you do with your girlfriend then..You would file for divorce.

Posted by: Russ at March 21, 2005 2:52 PM

oops type o. I meant "painful"

Posted by: jen at March 21, 2005 2:52 PM

TI, that's terrible. I wish I'd known. What was the matter with the poor child?

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 2:56 PM

Will this hearing be televised by the media? I think it should be on national TV for everyone to see. Let the world see how much her parents love her and how much her cruel husband wants to rush her to an early death by starvation!

I hope after she recovers from this horrible attempt to kill her that after perhaps a year of rehabilitation she goes on Larry King Live herself and chews him, Michael, Felos, and Greer out!

Posted by: GeorgiaGuy at March 21, 2005 2:56 PM

It never ceases to amaze me the ignorance of people who think they know what they would do when their loved one suffers a brain injury . Since brain injury is so varied even doctors don't know how an individual will recuperate. Should we kill all who are in a coma after a car accident ? Many spouses will divorce. Michael didn't do this and then compounded her injury by denying rehab, isolating her from her family and came up with years later some hearsay to have her killed!

Posted by: Caryn at March 21, 2005 2:57 PM

Empire Journal (front page, lead article) says US Dept of Justice has filed a brief in the interest of the Bush Admin. and also requests preliminary injunction to restore nutrition and hydration.

Posted by: SMoore at March 21, 2005 2:59 PM


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

from http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3084934

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 3:03 PM

"Sun" was a dwarf baby (if I remember correctly) who couldn't breath on his own. His lungs were undeveloped. Without the machines he'd die within a matter of minutes (not days or weeks like Terri without her feeding tube(. I agree, they should have let the mother keep him alive for the amount of time they allotted (I believe November was the date that they would have been required to remove the respirator). It's still sad, but an entirely different siutation than Terri.

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 3:03 PM

Test message -- please ignore...

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 3:03 PM

That was weird. My last post got eaten. Sorry about that.

Anyway, thanks for the link, TI. I'm sorry that Sun died. If he had been kept on a ventilator, maybe he could have lived to grow big enough for a lung transplant. Hopefully Terri's case will shed more light on cases like Sun's, and maybe generate some changes in the law.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 3:06 PM

It is an outrage that the American people think that denying Teri food is the same as taking her life. It is not! It is letting nature take its course. The comparison with Christopher Reeve lacks any sense of reality.
Allow Teri to meet her maker. he has been waiting for her for fifteen years.

Posted by: Kees Oosterbos at March 21, 2005 3:09 PM

Kristie... Terri is not brain-dead. Why hasn't she made progress? Well, that's because her husband, who vowed to do whatever he could to get her treatment, has ORDERED there to be absolutely no treatment. Her husband, who has admitted to not knowing what Terri would have wanted, has kept treatment, therapy, medical testing, etc. from her. I don't know why you keep insisting she is brain dead, because that is not the case. And Mr. Schiavo has gotten no real answers, just what he wanted to hear.
Mr. Rational-- again, I challenge anyone who says to unhook her nourishment and see what "God" does to stop eating and drinking and see what "God" does to YOU. That argument that "If she lives without the tube, then God wants her to live" is utterly moronic. No one can live without food and water. Shall we just withhold nourishment for every person around the globe who can't eat without a feeding tube and see what God does? And FURTHERMORE, it isn't even about the stupid feeding tube. She IS able to swallow, and HAS taken in nourishment via her mouth. The judge has ordered people to starve and dehydrate her to death.

Posted by: Amy at March 21, 2005 3:11 PM


Sure, it's nature taking it's course. We'd ALL die if we didn't eat or drink.

What an asinine comment.

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 3:11 PM

I believe Terri would have been dead the last time they removed her feeding tube (in October 2003) if she REALLY wanted to die. (She was without food or water for 6 days, right?) She has an incredible will to live.

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 3:13 PM

Are these hearings on television? They should me meeting right now!

Posted by: Ruth at March 21, 2005 3:18 PM

I know somebody who had a family member at that very same Hospice...she essentially died in the same way that Terri would if her feeding tube was removed. Family members have told me it wasn't horrible...they were with her most of the time. She simply went unconcious and only opened her eyes and made a noise right before she passed on. The Hospice staff told them once she went unconcious it would take 3-4 days...she lingered for almost 10...and she was old and ill. Does that mean she had an incredible will to live and interventions should have been taken, even though she had requested none?

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 3:19 PM

Actually...thinking back on it, I believe she was without food and water for 2 weeks...

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 3:20 PM

Let's remember to tell all the family members of women killed by their spouses that it was the husband's right to decide whether she should live or die. I'm sure that will comfort them greatly.

Posted by: Rebecca at March 21, 2005 3:20 PM


It's impossible for someone to survive two weeks without some form of hydration. Food, yes, but not water. Your comparison of an elderly, terminally-ill patient with Terri Schiavo is unconvincing.

Posted by: Robert Baker at March 21, 2005 3:30 PM


Good one!

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 3:33 PM

TI, if that measure (offering no food or drink) had been requested by the patient, there is no reason to force it on them. If you read what Michael said to Larry King, he acknowledges that he doesn't know this is what Terri wanted.

There's an interesting essay on the constitutionality of the Congress's move and federalism at http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/03/terri-schiavo-and-federalism.html

If Michael Schiavo is sincere (and this is stretching the imagination a bit), he has gotten wretched medical advice. And for him to be right, many many people would have to be lying or wrong, from nurses to the attorney who interacted with her on Friday.

Mary in LA, thanks for the sympathies. It was so apparently the right thing to do to turn off the vent for my mom & allow my grandmother to die naturally from cancer. (But we did feed her up until that time, of course.)

One thing that I haven't heard addressed is FL law regarding cremation. My grandmother wanted to be cremated, but there was a mandatory waiting period of (I think) a week. Maybe even 10 days. This was in Jacksonville, FL, in 1998. Would the law have changed? Or is this a Schiavo end-run?

Posted by: carson at March 21, 2005 3:34 PM

Robert...simply stating something that proves that just because someone lingers does not mean the have the will to live. I "might" be wrong about not having water for two weeks...I do know that once they quite giving her any sustinance she did linger for over a week...I am sure of that. I remember asking her grandson "Are they giving her any liquids" after a week and him telling me know. The staff was quite surprised that she lingered so long. But NOBODY in that case believes it was because she wanted to live. Her body just lingered, period.

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 3:36 PM


Give me a break. A body doesn't just "linger". Period.

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 3:39 PM

From KC Star:

Woman Reunites With Friend Who Came Out Of 20-Year Coma
Scantlin Hit By Drunk Driver In 1984

POSTED: 1:15 pm CST February 16, 2005
UPDATED: 5:33 pm CST February 16, 2005

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- A local woman recently had the chance to reunite with her best friend -- Sarah Scantlin, the Hutchinson, Kan., woman who started talking this month after being in a coma for 20 years. Sarah Scantlin . . . .

(see article. Kansas City Star)

Posted by: Kare at March 21, 2005 3:41 PM

I think that Terrie's husband should legally step aside and let the family assume responsibility for her.

Please remember that Thousands of people die every year in the USA because they cannot afford medications or lack health insurance. What are these phony politicians doing about that?

Posted by: Ten10 at March 21, 2005 3:44 PM

So are you calling me a liar Sirena? Are you saying my friend is lying about his grandmother? Maybe you should look linger up: "a : to remain alive although gradually dying" All I'm saying is that just because someone doesn't die quickly does not mean that have an extraordinary will to live...I'm not saying it doesn't mean it either. Nobody knows what Terri's will is except for Terri and God. Speculation is just that, speculation.

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 3:45 PM

I'm not calling you anything. I'm just saying, in regards to Terri, she has a strong will to live, and if you've been following the case as long as I have and most people who contribute to this message board, do, you'd say it too.

Posted by: Sirena at March 21, 2005 3:51 PM


You repetitively use the word "linger" as if it were an inconvenience for you that she didn't kick the bucket earlier. How strange.

Posted by: Robert Baker at March 21, 2005 4:08 PM

Robert...I'm afraid that is your interpretation of the word. A scent lingers long after the origin of the scent has left, nothing wrong with that. I don't see it in a negative way. She did linger...she had cancer and was very sick, she was unconcious and because of her wishes no feeding tube was inserted or measures taken to prolong her life. It was no inconvenience to me at all, I didn't know her, she is a friends grandmother. I had never met her. In fact was an inconvenience to no one, they were simply surprised that given her condition she did not pass away sooner. And she didn't kick no bucket when she went...she simply took her last breath and went quietly. Yes, her family were relieved, saddened but relieved.

Posted by: TI at March 21, 2005 4:16 PM

So I have taken the time to read the comments before posting my own. It looks like the pro-euthanasia lobby are sending along some real bright sparks who have not even bothered to read up on the details of Terri's condition.

Believe it or not the Australian media have played the video clips that show Terri reacts to her environment. In some ways this is good news because people cannot be so stupid as to make a statement like "she's brain dead" when they see her interacting with her family. They can see that Greer's decisions are hogwash.

First off, I want to say how much I appreciate certain people who have stepped forward and who have stated that they are pro-choice yet they can see that this case is different and that what is happening to Terri is cruel and unusal punishment for an innocent person. In particular I want to thank Jaqueline for stepping forward with her comments. It is heartening to see people who are normally on different sides of the fence coming together to make sure that justice is done for a disabled woman.

Second, Matthew you are right about the need to have a living will in place. Might I suggest that when you set out your wishes that you make sure that you state that receiving food and water is not a medical experiment and that you do not want to starve to death. If you have not looked at the autopsy photographs of the dehydrated body of Lisa McPherson, I suggest that you take a look and then make up your mind if you want a slow and agonizing death. In that way the court and the government will not interfere in what are your wishes. Of course you do realise that if you are in a situation where there is a court appointed guardian anything that you write down will be disregarded if that guardian is intent upon making sure that you are dead.

To the other morons who have claimed that Terri is either PVS or brain dead, might I suggest that you go and so some homework. To be brain dead means that there is no activity in the brain. Terri has not been tested for brain activity. The diagnosis performed by Dr. Cranford is based upon a blurry CT scan. She has not had all the necessary brain scan tests to measure the activity of her brain. Oh and BTW I do not believe in this notion that her brain is so atrophied that the cortex has liquified. That is something that is not provable from the CT scan that was performed when she was first admitted to the hospital. PLEASE NOTE: Michael Schiavo has refused to allow any of this testing to be carried out on Terri. Dr. Cranford did not carry out the tests that he claims are necessary to determine the condition of the brain. He spent about 45 minutes total with her, and that means he did not make a proper diagnosis. Dr. Gambone signed a document stating that Terri was dying and was ready for hospice care, and this is a fraudulent document. Terri was not dying and she has no right to be in a hospice.

Posted by: Maggie at March 21, 2005 4:38 PM

Dr. William Hammesfahr is about to be on the radio with Sean Hannity. For those who don't know, he's the doctor who examined Terri for ten hours and says she's not in PVS and could benefit from therapy. He was nominated for a Nobel Peace prize for his work with brain damaged patients.

Posted by: Kim at March 21, 2005 4:47 PM

I just wanna know how come President Bush was woken up at 1:11 a.m. to sign the bill, but a Federal Judge WAS NOT subsequently woken up in order to hasten the process to possibly reinstate the feeding tube??? It certainly would have been the appropriate thing to do.

Posted by: jen at March 21, 2005 4:59 PM