Centerfield

I have made a decision... If Bill Frist is the Republican nominee for President in 2008, I will be voting for my first Democrat for President, regardless of who he or she may be.

Give me a break, Bill, you are a heart surgeon. You are as about as much qualified to answer whether or not Terry Schiavo should live or die as a veterinarian, and you want us to believe that you came to a conclusive medical decision that Congress should invade on a personal and private family matter because you viewed tape of her for an hour? That dog don't hunt. Could it be that you are attempting to solidify support as the front runner for the Presidential nomination, and that you really could give a rat's ass about Terry Schiavo?

Ron Gunzburger on Terry Schiavo:

The highly-politicized personal tragedy of the sad Terri Schiavo case continues to dominate headlines. Congressional politicos and President Bush wade in and change the law just to create an opportunity for a federal judge to block the husband's desire to let his wife die after 14 years in a persistent vegetative state. According to the National Institute of Health, a person in a persistent vegetative state "cannot think, speak or respond to commands and are not aware of their surroundings." Here is how Terri's husband bitterly responded on Monday: "Come down, President Bush. Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it." As for me -- editorializing for a moment here -- I don't know if there is any clear right or wrong side here. I just don't like it when Congress (or any other politicians) want to step into the middle of very personal decisions between patients/families and their physicians. From my perspective, I cannot think of a single illness that was cured or major medical decision that was improved upon by the interjection of politicians.

Absolutely... I agree fully. My wife asked me last night if I would pull the plug on her in the same situation, and the answer is that I do not know. I have no idea whether letting this poor women die is right or wrong, but I do know that it is none of my damn business, and it certainly isn't the business of the U.S. Congress. The moral offense here is Congressinoal intervention into a private family matter.

From Outside the Beltway.

Sadly, there has been a lot of distorted coverage of this in the press. Some headlines that have been applied to this ruling illustrate the point:

US Judge Refuses More Feeding in Schiavo Case (ABC News)

Judge Decides Brain Damaged Terri Must Die (Scotsman UK)

'Judge rules that Terri Schiavo should die' (Times Online UK)

Yes, I have to say that I am less confident of the whole Schiavo case than I was previously. Of course, I have not been following it up to now, but once I got interested (and I still don't have the level of info I feel that I need to take a political position here), some facts have presented themselves which are a little disturbing:

Apparently, M. Schiavo has permitted very little in the way of diagnostic tests, and virtually no therapy. He's had next to no contact with the parents over the several years. The money from a malpractice suit (? I thought this was the result of a heart attack, not a medical procedure) was spent on his lifestyle, not her therapy. He has a "girlfriend" he refers to as his fiancee, they have several children together, but he refuses to divorce T. so that her parents can assume full responsibility for her care. Very odd (and as a separate matter, I wonder if this will affect how society finally accepts gay marriage - by requiring that all spouses act like spouses. In other word, marriage is a contract. If you fail to live up to the spirit and letter of the contract, it becomes void and damages may attach.).

I have more questions than answers, and no opinions at all. But it seems that this case will radiate through society and government for some time (or maybe not).

LR:

Beware the "facts" on this case floating around in the media. I have tried to find some reliable information, and from the best I can find, much of what you've stated simply isn't true, but a reflection of her parent's claims. Most of which they have only brought out in the last few years, and much of which is eminently and obviously false.

Without any reliance on either party, husband or family, it is obvious to me that Terri receieved about four years worth of intensive therapies in the years immediately after her heart attack, and modest but regular therapies since, and they accomplished absolutely nothing. That she has received impeccable medical care, entirely as the result of Michael Schiavo's continual efforts to insure that she did.

It's also obvious that the money from the malpractice suit for Terri's care has indeed been spent on her care, not on a lavish lifestyle for Michael Schiavo. Schiavo received some money as well, a good portion of which he seems to have spent on Terri.

Also obvious to me is that the Schindler family hates Michael Schiavo, has hated him for years, and the initial split came about the time her malpractice case was decided. That the Schindler family has materially misrepresented many aspects of the case on a consistent basis. That every independent court-appointed doctor that has reviewed her case has come to the same conclusion--that Terri is PVS, without cognition, and will never get better. That her cerebrum is gone. That most of what the Schindlers have said to try to keep Terri alive has been reviewed by the courts and found wanting in veracity.

Also obvious to me is that Michael Schiavo didn't seem to mention any pre-injury desire or statements on Terri's part to be unplugged until about eight years after the incident, when he got an attorney. I don't really trust either party to tell the truth, but the records produced in court tell me that Terri has not been neglected, has received excellent treatment, and is indeed not going to get better no matter what is done.

Past that I dunno. I still have more questions than answers myself. But I don't think we'll find answers in the news, or from the screaming ranting factions who are making Terri Schiavo a poster child for their assorted grandstanding.

Tully,

Your warning to beware of the facts is well taken. I didn't mean to imply that I believed all that about M, only that it seems to have burbled to the top in recent days.

I still don't know what to believe. I hope someone can put it together quickly.

Yeah, I'm not sure what to believe regarding the acounts of either side.

But one thing I do think it seems reasonable to believe is that Terry Schiavo is probably already long gone in any meaningful sense. Sure, that human spirit which her friends and family once acknowedged as Terry might still be residing somewhere in the recesses of her broken body and atrophied brain. This is possible despite the lack of any objective evidence to support this. (like brain waves and genuine responsiveness, as opposed to a subjective opinion about activities that are likely to be caused by involuntary brain function.)

But I sure doubt it. I think she's been gone for some time.

Yeah, every time I try to get a grasp on it from either "talking-point" side by simply taking them at their word, there are still questions left disturbingly unanswered. If M. Schiavo was so anxious that Terri's wishes be honored, why did it take him over seven years to mention them and start the process? Why did Terri's friends who testified as to her wishes not come forward before trial? If the Schindlers were so anxious to help Terri and loved her so much, why did they let months, even years go by without visits? Why did their antipathy towards Michael start immediately after the malpractice verdict, when Terri was still receiving intensive therapy, and not four years later when Michael filed for termination?

We may never know the truth, certainly not with any reliability. We're left with a very morbid circus. Both political sides are pushing my disgust levels in their pronouncements.

My question about all of this was: if the feeding tubes are re-inserted, then what? Mr. Shiavo still has the right to deny any treatment or medical tests. Was her family expecting a long court battle over her? Hasn't that been played out over the past years to their loss?

Yep--unless the guardianship is changed.

But I don't think it'll happen. Judges aren't all that wild about Congressional intereference, and the appeals are not likely to succeed. The court battle is now eight years ongoing.

The facts of the case are that Michael attempted intensive therapy for over three years after the malpractice case, and there was no result. It was only after all these options were exhausted that he petitioned the court to establish a court appointed guardian. The guardian's report is here: http://floridahealthinfo.hsc.usf.edu/TheresaSchiavoFinalReport1December2003.pdf

The parents broke off contact soon after Michael Schiavo refused to give them a portion of the malpractice settlement. Since that time nearly all of that money has been spent on caring for Terri Schiavo.

The original court case result can be found here: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder02-00.pdf

As far as any other information, please allow me to recommend Hilzoy's post on Obsidian Wings. She is a bioethicist and provides an impressive overview of the entire case. A direct addy is: http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2005/03/terri_schiavo.html

Quick followup, the reason an MRI and other newer procedures have not been performed is that it would require two major surgeries to remove and then replace surgically implanted life support equiptment. Given Terri Schiavo's condition, she is unlikely to survive such a series of events and it would undoubtably be a far more painful death.

All the sordid details or pseudo-details are why such cases should not become political cases. The Congress of the US is not family court. Again the basic facts: permanent vegatative state, no likelihood of meaningful recovery, no written advanced directive, request by legally appropriate surrogate decision-maker, the husband to withdrawel therapy, appropriate legal proceedings when family conflict. This is all legal, medically, ethically and in my mind "Christianly" appropriate.

The guardian report Chris references above is one of the better overviews I've found, and mostly matches what I've been able to ascertain as reasonably certain facts on record.

Here's a link to an e-mail from the Doctor that testified as the expert at the hearing. He didn't believe an MRI would show anything. He's the doctor...I guess at some point, I just have to trust his opinion. Like all of you, fact and fiction in this debate are increasingly blurred. It's sad to see both sides, but particularly the right in this case, batting around rumors like they were gospel truth.

http://pekinprattles.blogspot.com/2005/03/schiavo-dr-cranford-offers-reply.html

When you get the True Believers stirred up (from ANY side) all rumor becomes Gospel truth. The propaganda becomes the party line becomes the dogma that it is heresy to question. Heretics burned daily, matinees on Sunday.

Ugly. Very ugly. An inherent fixture of partisanship, and why I'm not a partisan.

Court Rejects Schiavo Parents' Request

In a 10-2 decision, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused Bob and Mary Schindler's request for an "expedited rehearing" by the full court. A three-judge panel from the same court ruled against the family earlier Wednesday.