3/26    I don't get it.  Why didn't the Schindlers get some well respected
        neurologists to do an exam on her?  They already presented two at
        trial:  one of them was a quack, and the judge ignored the other one.
        If they could have gotten a prominent neurologist to back their claims
        when her eyes and tongue weren't bleeding, maybe an appeals court
        would have ordered the tube re-inserted.
        The William Chesire opinion was based on watching edited video, and he
        did not bother to do a neurological exam, and he does not explain why.
        If Michael Schiavo blocked further neurological exams, don't you think
        this would be the main complaint by the Schindlers?  Something like,
        "He doesn't want neurologists to see her!"
        The only conclusion to me is that the Schindlers CAN'T get a competent
        neurologist to back their opinion.  The weight of science is with
        Michael Schiavo.  Her condition hasn't changed in 12 years, and there
        are ~ 4 known cases where those judged to be in a permanent
        vegetative state have come back -- and that happened 2 years into the
        PVS at most.
        \_ most likely, well respected doctors are reluctant to take up this
           case. If you know your odds at low, why take it up when it can
           ruin your medical reputation?
           \_ Why would a Mayo Clinic doctor visit the patient and not
              conduct a neurological exam?  Why didn't he say something like,
              "Michael Schiavo prevented me from doing the full exam!" or
              "I didn't have enough time!" or "The courts prevented me!".
              The guy is biased.
              How about:
              "He generally has a reasonably thoughtful, conservative
              Christian right-to-life perspective," said David Magnus,
              co-director of the Stanford University Center of Biomedical
              Ethics. "He definitely is not a neutral party with respect to
              these culture wars. He has turf to defend."
              "I think he is clearly biased against declaring her in a
              persistent vegetative state," said Dr. Gene Sung, director of
              the neurocritical care section of USC's department of neurology,
              who read Cheshire's report. "He feels there is something there.
              That is not a scientific nor medical decision -- it really
              sounds like it's a personal feeling. It's hard to reconcile that
              with a medical decision."
        \_ you can't do nuerological exams if the courts bar you from doing
           so.  Cheshire examined Terri for 45 minutes in person, essentially
           the same time as the other neurologists who had testified in the
           earlier trial for the state and for Felos.  You have to understand
           access to Terri is heavily restricted by the court.
        \_ I'm not sure under FL state law, but at least under the fed rules,
           you can't have a medical exam conducted till you get to discovery
           and even then you need a ct order. The case in fed ct is no where
           close to discovery.
           BTW, an appellate ct rarely, if ever, asks for new evid to be
           presented to it.  If her parents wanted to present new medical
           they would have had to make the appropriate motions in trial
           ct and then if the motions were refused, they would have had
           to ask the appellate ct to allow the motions b/c the trial
           ct erred as a matter of law or it abused its discretion.
           \_ To the two folks above:
              Even though it's kind of too late, as I already suggested, I
              believe if Michael Schiavo had allowed it, then a neurologist
              could have performed a neurological exam on her.  If Michael
              Schiavo was not allowing it, then this is what the Schindlers
              should have been complaining about.
              Since they were not complaining about it, I don't think they
              cared about the objective truths that may have come out from
              another neurological exam from a competent doctor.
              By the way, the exam by Chesire was notably NOT a neurological
              exam, and he hasn't explained why.
              http://www.mayoclinic.org/news2005-jax/2724.html
              \_ Certainly if he allows it, an exam can be conducted.
                 However, an exam may be conducted even if he does
                 not agree to it as part of a discovery order from
                 ct b/c her medical condition is at issue.
                 \_ no it can't.  The court, ie. the legally blind judge
                    greer, has forbidden any such examination repeatedly.
                    Terri has not had any neurological tests since those
                    cat scans, period.
                    \_ AFAIK, the judge's orders barring tests were in
                       response to motions to compel the tests. If the
                       parents moved for a motion to compel the tests
                       and the husband did not oppose, then the motion
                       would have to be granted. Refusal to grant an
                       unopposed motion can be immediately appealable.