|
| |
Regarding Schiavo: Facts
Need to Trump Emotions and Activism
Current Events/Frank
Salvato, Managing Editor |
March 22, 2005
- So it has come to this, a true test to see if the
American political system, judicial system and the American public as a
whole have the ability to set aside emotion and activism in deference to the
facts. So far the jury is out on this question. Just as it is out on the
question of whether or not Terri Schiavo will live or die. Personally, I
think we can do better, much better.
I find it reprehensible that in an age when gathering facts has never been
easier or more convenient, most among us prove delinquent in doing so, even
in matters of life and death and especially in those that will set precedent
for future actions. It is grave evidence that our society is in a
"persistent vegetative state” where the overbearing voice of the activist
agenda trumps not only the good of the people but common sense. Our failure
to ascertain facts or even be tempted by unanswered questions renders us
neutered by political correctness. This is the death knell of civic
responsibility and thus moves us closer to being considered cowards in the
eyes of our Founders.
It has become apparent that there is a need to consider the facts before we
can be moved to consider the questions that they raise. To this end the
mainstream media has been abhorrently delinquent, opting instead to report
sensational half-facts ala The Enquirer circa 1975. This proves one of two
things or perhaps both; that the mainstream media has lost its ability to
report the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and that it has
turned into an activist propaganda machine hell-bent on the destruction of
the American right to be informed.
Many questions have been raised over the course of the Terri Schiavo case.
The astounding thing is that few have been answered. Instead we see
reluctance by the court to explore all avenues of knowledge available while
it consistently rules in favor of a petitioner whose motives are
questionable at best. Make no mistake, a court that refuses to examine all
facets of an issue and excludes expert testimony presenting an alternative
opinion can only be classified as an activist court.
Terri Schiavo did not have a Living Will. Therefore, the issue of her wishes
is open to question. While it is normal for our society to depend on the
spouse to convey the wishes of the critically disabled or injured, in
circumstances when immediate family members hold adamant opposition to a
matter concerning decisions of life and death we must insist that all voices
be heard.
In this instance the Schindlers (Terri Schiavo’s parents), practicing
Catholics who have always considered their family close, claim that Terri
would never have considered ending her life given these circumstances. While
the tenets of Terri’s religion reinforce this claim, her spouse, with no
other proof than his word, claims otherwise. Thus we have a
"He-Said-She-Said” dilemma. That is until we hear a statement made by an
ex-girlfriend of Michael Schiavo’s referred to only as "Cyndi” due to the
fact that she fears the man. Obviously this is why she is an
"ex-girlfriend.”
On April 25th of 2001 Cyndi stated that Michael Schiavo admitted to lying
about Terri expressing anything about her wishes regarding life sustaining
treatment in the event of severe disability. While Cyndi later refused to
testify citing her fear of Michael Schiavo, the issue became moot when just
a day later on April 26th Judge George Greer refused to hear any testimony
at all regarding Michael Schiavo’s statement. No investigation. No
consideration. Nothing.
To say the least, Terri Schiavo’s wishes remain in question. For the courts
to rule on behalf of Michael Schiavo based solely on the legal point that he
is the next of kin, especially in light of her parents’ declarations and the
silenced testimony of a woman who feared for her well being, is
irresponsible and grounds for Judge Greer’s removal from the case, if not
the bench.
Florida Statute 765.101 defines a persistent vegetative state (PVS) as being
a permanent and irreversible condition of unconsciousness in which there is:
a) The absence of voluntary action or cognitive behavior of any kind, and b)
An inability to communicate or interact purposefully with the environment.
The opinion that Terri Schiavo’s behavior meets the medical and/or statutory
definition of PVS doesn’t take into account that she responds to stimuli,
tries to communicate verbally, follows limited commands, laughs and cries in
interaction with loved ones, physically distances herself from irritating or
painful stimulation and watches loved ones as they move around her. These
observations were made by medical professionals and are on record. Further
no MRI or PET scans have ever been performed on Terri Schiavo on orders
issued by her "husband.”
The question here is, who determined that Terri Schiavo met the criteria for
being in PVS? While 14 independent doctors – including six neurologists –
adamantly refute the diagnosis of PVS, stating that therapy would be
beneficial to Ms. Schiavo, Judge Greer has consistently excluded their
testimony in favor of opinions from four doctors that adhere to the PVS
diagnosis.
Of the 4 doctors selected to be the court’s medical authorities, three were
hand-picked by Michael Schiavo and one was selected by Judge Greer.
Dr. Peter Bambakidis, appointed by Greer, has questionable affiliations with
Michael Schiavo’s lawyer George Felos.
Dr. Melvin Greer insists that a doctor need not examine a patient to know
the appropriate medical treatment.
Dr. Victor Gambone has stated that he has been startled by Terri Schiavo’s
awareness.
Dr. Ronald Cranford, is on the board of the Euthanasia Society of America,
has ties to the Hemlock Society and even advocates denial of spoon-feeding
for the disabled.
To say the very least, the word impartial cannot be used when discussing the
medical testimony provided in this case, neither can the word thorough. In
fact, the "deck was stacked” in Michael Schiavo’s favor, something easily
done when one is the "dealer.” To say that there are no unanswered questions
and no bias regarding the medical opinions issued in the Terri Schiavo case
is to be ignorant of the facts and ignorant of the truth.
Add to just these two issues the following facts, and I beg you, challenge
yourself to be curious as to why:
▪ Terri Schiavo has always been able to swallow but her "husband” denied her
the therapy that would allow her to re-learn how to eat even though the
therapy is considered mandatory by Florida Statute 744.3215, even to those
diagnosed with PVS.
▪ Although Michael Schiavo was awarded $600,000 of his own in a malpractice
award regarding this case he has squandered the million dollars plus
settlement that was to pay for Terri Schiavo’s medical care. A ruling by
Judge Greer has allowed that money to be spent on Michael’s attorney’s fees.
▪ Although Michael Schiavo has remained married to Terri he has fathered two
children with his girlfriend whose mother has a connection with the county
sheriff (this would prove convenient when trying to allude investigation
into anything that might be construed as criminal).
▪ Michael Schiavo filed a petition to prohibit the media from seeing Terri’s
neurological examination videotapes or airing the videos to the public after
they had been presented to the court as evidence.
▪ Michael Schiavo has petitioned to have Terri cremated immediately after
her death.
The list of questionable issues surrounding this case goes on and on and on.
To say that this case is a tragedy would be the understatement of the
millennium. To say that this is a case about advocating the agenda of the
Right to Life crowd is ludicrous. This is more than a tragedy and it is
slowly becoming a judicial travesty. This case is about whether the life of
another human being, a damaged human being but a human being nevertheless,
should be snuffed out by the stroke of a pen and the disconnection of a
feeding tube, all on the unsubstantiated word of a man who couldn’t even
honor the vow of "’Til death do we part.” This case is about a murder of
convenience.
Florida courts have long been known for leaning towards the liberal and
activist agendas. In most instances of their activism the remedy of judicial
prudence was found in appeals to the federal court. This time they have come
dangerously close to setting a precedent that would allow for the
legitimization of an ideology that would advocate the termination of the
infirmed. It is chilling.
Image that when you arrive at old age you become afflicted with a
debilitating disease, your mouth doesn’t want to do what you want it to and
your speech isn’t what it used to be. Your arms and legs aren’t as quick to
react as they once were. You are incontinent and as your body begins to wear
out you require the aid of a feeding tube for nutrition and therapy to help
you maintain any semblance of mobility. Your memory is fading but you are
aware and appreciative of your surroundings, your family and your friends.
Now imagine Michael Schiavo is your guardian.
Sleep well, we all get older.
Related Reading:
Terrisfight.org: Most Common Questions and Answers
http://www.terrisfight.net/
Terri Schiavo’s Life and Death
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-smith091603.asp
Medical Facts About Terri Schiavo
http://www.blogicus.com/archives/medical_facts_about_terri_schiavo.php
Assisted suicide, euthanasia become issues in Schiavo case
http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/commentary_
articles_endorsed_terrisfight.org_euthansia_suicide.html
Florida State Statue: Civil Rights, Healthcare Advance Directives, 765.101
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?mode=View
Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=CH0765/Sec101.HTM
|
|
