Printable View
I'm sorry your colleague had that experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
Judge George Greer ordered and adjudged that the Respondents' Emergency Expedited Motion for Permission to Provide Theresa Schiavo with Food and Water By Natural Means is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, on March 8, 2005.
I don't think it gets much clearer than that. You can find the document all over the internet. Go to www.terrisfight.org. You'll find it under court documents.
Sorry the link you gave me is slightly one-sided and just googling for the "Respondents' Emergency Expedited Motion for Permission to Provide Theresa Schiavo with Food and Water By Natural Means" came up with so much garbage on the internet that I cannot weed through it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malim
No wonder no one seems to know the truth.
If you cannot find a reliable (maybe press - CNN or something like that) link about that order then I am going to assume that it's just one more block in the building of urban legend about this poor situation.
By that statement I'm assuming you mean the doctor that wanted to keep the 90+ year old woman alive - right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Malim
What I meant was I am truly sorry that your colleague had to go through an experience where he/she had to make an end of life decision for his/her mother. It's never a good situation to be in.Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
My husband had to make a end-of-life decision for his 67 year old mother 5 years ago, and it was very hard on him. Even though it was very clear that her wishes were not to receive extraordinary care. But, he followed her wishes. And, I encouraged him to do so, because they were known, written down wishes. And, even if they hadn't been written down, she was so verbal about it that everyone in the family knew, and all her friends knew. So, you see, I'm not against letting someone die if there is the clear and convincing evidence to support that that is someone's will.
I knew you wouldn't believe the link that I gave you. So, I almost didn't bother to reply. Even though the site is in support of Theresa Schiavo's plight, you can see there's a link to a court document in black and white that he ordered her not to be fed by natural means. Unless it's forged, it's pretty much black and white.
We really do have to stop this debate - it's so not any of our business.
Seeing the ORDER in BLACK and WHITE and not hearing the actual arguments that arrived at that order is worthless to me. That's why I was suggesting a reliable media source (is that an oxymoron)...
But really we need to stop this debate - you will not win me over to your side (the dark side :) )...
I got thinking about this last night.
Malim, you'll understand me when I say that I don't actually know whether Terri ever existed (I don't use her last name because I can't spell it, and am too lazy to look it up). I don't watch TV, and have been too buried in work to follow many sources of media. I had never actually seen a picture of her until yesterday (as far as I can remember).
Most of the information I have comes from one of three sources: 1) NPR. 2) A Time magazine article. 3) The ramblings of a well informed, but very left leaning (I'm pretty well left myself, so that's saying something) employee of mine who whines about issues whenever he can. I think the first two sources are reasonably unbiased, while the third source has never been wrong to my knowledge, despite my not agreeing with his fanaticism.
There has been one other source, which has been this thread. I have heard all kinds of accusations leveled against the judge, the doctors, Michael, etc. Charges of abuse, charges of deriliction of duty, charges of neglect. All of these accusations are coming from the religeous right group that sprang up around the Schindlers. None of these accusations have gotten more than disparaging remarks in any of the media sources I have heard. Since these accusations have come forward beyond the eleventh hour, and leave out a few negative items about the Schindler's themselves, I put no credence in them whatsoever.
If you choose to believe these things to be true, that's ok. Your decision is based on the facts as you believe them to be. My decision is based in part on the belief that most of what you have said against the court was delivered to you as a deliberate lie. Since neither of us has been there first hand, what each of us believes to be true is a matter of choice.
As an example, you quoted a large figure (1.5 million) as the malpractice settlement. That was 1.2 million for Terri, and 300,000 for Michael. Of the 1.2 million, it has been reported that 50k remains. The rest has been used on medical and legal bills.
Time magazine reported in the latest edition that the Schindlers got along well with Michael up until this settlement, then they fell out with him because they wanted a share of the money. The magazine reported this in two different places, along with other interesting things, such as the Schindlers encouraged Michael to see other women in the three years that they were on good terms following the accident.
Now it could be that Time magazine is either misled, or deliberately prevaricating. However, I see no particular reason why they should do so, whereas I see plenty of reason why terrisfight.org would do so.
For this reason, I choose to believe that Time magazine has reported the situation more accurately. Furthermore, since none of my other sources have coroborated the claims that you say come from that web site, I believe them to be false. Worse, it is my opinion that they are deliberate lies intended to stiffen the resolve of people who would be otherwise conflicted had they nothing but the truth (whatever that ultimately is).
Since we are accepting of different facts in the case, we are arguing about two different events. The facts that I am arguing for are facts from a case that is similar to, but not the same as, the case for which you are arguing.