| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2005/3/21-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:36788 Activity:moderate |
3/21 Nurse: Terri Can Eat Normally
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/20/102601.shtml
http://www.zimp.org/stuff/06%20-%20CindyShookDepo.htm
\_ "'When is that bitch gonna die?'" Do you really buy this?
\_ I really don't care about this case one way or the other,
but, do you this the Nurse is lying? How do you know?
\_ I think there's a lot of shit being piled on a guy who
has gone through a horrible ordeal. As he has no political
gain in the matter, and others do, I tend to give him more
benefit of the doubt than newsmax.
\_ You may very well be right, but it seems like there's
enough evidence of douchiness that it makes sense to at
least try feeding her by mouth. I mean, this sort of
decision is supposed to happen with full support of all
involved.
\_ Ordeal? 1.5 years after she collapsed he was screwing
another woman. At the same time he was telling a court
that he loved Terri! And only needed $1M to take care of
her. Then he got the money and hasn't stopped trying to
kill her.
\_ The money went directly to her care. He has declined
an offer of $1M from some loony businessman to walk
away. If he were trying to kill his wife for personal
gain, as you seem to think, would he have done that?
You suck.
\_ This case is not about the husband being a jerk. And
1.5 years is not short. Most people would have pulled
the tube within 6-months and move on with their lives.
\_ Um, yes it is. He's the one who decides whether she
lives or dies and he's fucking someone else. 1.5
years after her collapse he WAS IN COURT ASKING FOR
MONEY TO TAKE CARE OF HER, WHILE FUCKING ANOTHER
WOMAN.
\_ You do not know this person. You would never
have known about this person in a sane world.
You spout anger as though Terri was your sister.
Check yourself. When you can translate rage
at something like this (which is truly a false
rage perpetuated by selected facts and rumors)
into empathy, you might learn to get your point
across.
\_ Her parents encouraged him to get on with his life.
Look into it.
\_ I have no problem with keeping her alive as long as the medical
bills don't go to the taxpayers.
\_ What do you think happens when an insurance company pays for
medical care? They do it out of the goodness of their hearts?
\_ Insurance companies have no hearts. They're out there to
maximize profits.
\_ which is why they pass on their costs to their policy
holders; that is, taxpayers.
\_ She's on Medicaid, which Bush is in the process of trying to
cut.
\_ The congress should be focusing on the real problems.
\_ 70% of Americans think Congress is wasting time on this circus:
http://csua.org/u/bg1
\_ arbiter says she had no awareness
link:www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/2005/03/20/news/nation/11185214.htm
link:tinyurl.com/4vnsh
(mercurynews.com/noway1@nohow.com/nopassword1)
\_ Terri is practically Einstein according to some of the more fundie
websites. Let's see, she can talk, swallow, communicate, and her
husband tried to kill her. The big questions are, why did 7 years
worth of court trials and doctor examinations not uncover any of
this (are they all idiots or in a conspiracy), and why did the
husband not accept the multiple $1M+ offers to let his wife go?
\_ Her husband can't stop it now even if he wanted to. As for
medical care, you will see when you are very sick and/or old
that doctors stop caring as much when they think you are not
worth the effort. I watched my 86 y.o. grandfather die because of
this kind of nonchalance. "Well, we *could* do xyz, but he's
so old that..." I am sure the doctors think she's not worth
their time at this point. My neighbor is a neurologist and
one time he ordered an MRI for a boy who had severe
neurological problems. He was diagnosed with a stroke, I
think. Anyway, the insurance refused to pay.
one time he ordered an MRI for a boy who had severe neurological
problems. He was diagnosed with a stroke, I think, by the
previous doctor. Anyway, the insurance refused to pay for an MRI
on a 'stroke victim'. My neighbor resigned as the boy's doctor.
Later on, it was discovered the boy had a brain tumor. It was
removed and the boy is fine now. The MRI would have caught it.
There are a lot of doctors who don't care enough to fight
the bureaucracy and you can't really blame them.
\_ This is obviously not the case here since she's lived for
15 years despite having little brain function. Why can't
her husband stop now even if he wanted to? Take the money
and run!
\_ He can't stop, because it is the court's decision to
make now. My point was that maybe Terri would be
better now or would be improving if she had had
better medical care. However, lots of doctors see
'vegetative state' and 'Medicare' and don't do
anything for her. For many of those years she was in
a home with no specialized therapy or care. She has
had nursing, but not good physicians. Most of the
doctors around her now are trying to determine if
she is a vegetable, not what the best treatment
might be. Frankly, they hold out little hope and
project that lack of hope onto her.
\_ it's in the hands of the courts. congress is trying
to take the decision out of the hands of the state courts
right now. at this point it's out of the husbands control.
\_ http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/22/opinion/22tue1.html?hp
Republicans take a dump on the Constitution then wipe up
with the Bill of Rights.
\_ There is a strong possibility that the fed ct judge
or the 11th cir ct of appeals will rule that article
3 does not give congress the power to authorize a
new c/a wrt to a previously adjudicated state law
claim. The parents seem to have hedged their bets
and are claiming that the procedural errors by the
judge amount to a depravation due process rights
under the color of law, which is actionable in fed
ct. If this claim works out, the case may be remanded
to state ct to fix the procedural errors, assuming
that they were prejudicial. |
| 5/24 |
|
| www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/20/102601.shtml Sunday, March 20, 2005 10:19 am EST Nurse: Terri Can Eat Normally A certified nursing assistant who cared for Terri Schiavo in 1997 filed a sworn affidavit in the case stating that she was able to feed Schiavo n ormally on multiple occasions - but that husband Michael Schiavo would a llow only a feeding tube. "At least three times during any shift where I took care of Terri, I made sure to give Terri a wet washcloth filled with ice chips, to keep her m outh moistened. I personally saw her swallow the ice water and never saw her gag. and I frequently put orange juice or apple juice in her wa shcloth to give her something nice to taste, which made her happy. On th ree or four occasions I personally fed Terri small mouthfuls of Jello, w hich she was able to swallow and enjoyed immensely." Law testified that the only reason she didn't attempt to feed Ms Schiavo more frequently was "because I was so afraid of being caught by Michael ." Editorializing on the case in light of Law's account, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette said Sunday, "It is one thing to withdraw a feeding tube; Carla Sauer Iyer was a registered nurse at the same facility. |
| www.zimp.org/stuff/06%20-%20CindyShookDepo.htm EXCERPTS FROM CYNTHIA SHOOK MAY 8, 2001 DEPOSITION Backround: In late 1991, 1 years after Terris collapse, Michael Schiavo became inv olved in an intimate relationship with Cindy Shook. It can be documented that the two spent a weekend at the Don Caesar hotel in St. Petersburg Beach and they also co ntacted a Century 21 Realtor on the premise of purchasing a home. In May of 1992, at the apex of the romance, Schiavo had Terris 2 pet cat s euthanized to clear the way for his moving in with Cindy and her pet d og. In the summer of 1992, Schiavo moved into his parents home. We can specu late with reasonable accuracy, it was at the instructions of his attorne y, since the living arrangement would be contrary to Schiavos "loving h usband" image they were projecting for the upcoming November 1992 malpra ctice trial. In April 2001, Cindy Shook (married name Brasher) was interviewed by an i nvestigator working in Terris behalf. Unwilling to come forward becaus e of her immense fear of Schiavo, Cindy had to be subpoenaed and was the n subsequently deposed on May 8, 2001 to try and learn more regarding he r intimate knowledge of Michael Schiavos character traits. May 8, 2001 Deposition: Cindy Shook describing Schiavos possessiveness. He stalked me at myat where I worked after I stopped datingwhen he would get mad at me he would tell me, I would rather be laying in bed in the nursing home with her than with you. I mean he can be the most incredibly mean person" When asked if she were afraid that Michael would physically harm her or i f he would harm children. "I am concerned about retaliation because I have a child -I have children and a husband. I know him, I know what he told me I said he could be a very mean person." She spoke of how Schiavo stalked her for close to a year after the breaku p and that she received repeated phone calls. I felt it was out of character for him to get a job as an orderly at the hospital That was co ncerning to me. When he would come up to the floor looking for her she w as not scared the first time but later was scared. In town I would look up when I was drivingnot at my work- she would look up in the rear view mirror and there would be Michael Schiavo. It continued for several m onths after he didnt work at the hospital. She would change lanes, try to make a turn and he would do the same. One time he was behind me in traffic he got next to me in a two-lane goin g the same way, and he changed lanes basically right on top of where I w as at, and I had to swerve not to be hit. I considered it as stalking, dangerous and guessed potentially life threatening." She talked to an off dut y police officer in her building They discussed marriage. She said Schiavo asked what would you do if I as ked you to marry me. Cindy said Schiavo got angry when asked questions about Terri saying: "this had destroyed his life and he was being robed of a normal life." Regarding Terris care, according to Cindy Shook, Michael Schiavo said "How the hell should I know we never spoke about this, my God I was only 25 years old. |
| csua.org/u/bg1 -> abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=599622&page=1 March 21, 2005 -- Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstep ping its bounds for political gain. The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's f eeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal re view of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush si gned it early today. That legislative action is distinctly unpopular: Not only do 60 percent o ppose it, more 70 percent call it inappropriate for Congress to get involved in this way. And by a lopsided 67 percent-19 percent, most thin k the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more f or political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved. This ABC News poll also finds that the Schiavo case has prompted an enorm ous level of personal discussion: Half of Americans say that as a direct result of hearing about this case, they've spoken with friends or famil y members about what they'd want done if they were in a similar conditio n Nearly eight in 10 would not want to be kept alive. Intensity In addition to the majority, the intensity of public sentiment is also on the side of Schiavo's husband, who has fought successfully in the Flori da courts to remove her feeding tube. And intensity runs especially stro ngly against congressional involvement. Included among the 63 percent who support removing the feeding tube are 4 2 percent who "strongly" support it twice as many as strongly oppose i t And among the 70 percent who call congressional intervention inapprop riate are 58 percent who hold that view strongly an especially high le vel of strong opinion. GOP Groups Views on this issue are informed more by ideological and religious views than by political partisanship. Republicans overall look much like Democ rats and independents in their opinions. But two core Republican groups conservatives and evangelical Protestant s are more divided: Fifty-four percent of conservatives support remova l of Schiavo's feeding tube, compared with seven in 10 moderates and lib erals. And evangelical Protestants divide about evenly 46 percent are in favor of removing the tube, 44 percent opposed. Among non-evangelical Protestants, 77 percent are in favor a huge division between evangeli cal and mainline Protestants. Conservatives and evangelicals also are more likely to support federal in tervention in the case, although it doesn't reach a majority in either g roup. Indeed, conservative Republicans oppose involving the federal cour ts, by 57 percent-41 percent. |
| www.nytimes.com/2005/03/22/opinion/22tue1.html?hp To read the complete article, simply click on the BUY NOW button below. |