How ironic that as we fight for gay couples to have spousal rights

[mondo joe]

there are people on DU so adamantly opposed to ANYONE having spousal rights.

There are so many gay partners who have been put through hell because a death or health issue put them at the mercy of a homophobic parent.

And now just as gays are getting the first glimmers of legal recognition as spouses, we have a congress AND EVEN DU POSTERS demanding that spouses have no right to make medical choices for each other if they are incapacitated.

[babylonsister]

1. Right on, mj! It's getting way out of hand, me thinks. nt

[mondo joe]

2. We spent a god damn lot of money to get durable power of attorney

because we can't be legally married.

Now by the time I get married we still won't be able to decide for each other.

Fortunately I don't have to worry about my parents being creeps.

[Warpy]

29. While the durable power of attorney will protect you for

healthcare decisions, it won't get you visitation rights in an ICU if a homophobic parent shows up, not unless you get a nurse like me who enforces visiting hours for the parents and encourages you to visit outside regular hours (thus risking my job). Also, if the worst happens, claiming your partner's body and planning his funeral can be problematic. You're again at the mercy of a homophobic parent.

This is why that even with lawyers tying everything together through the contract law we now have, there are still a few things that remain stubbornly outside it.

It's why we need to extend the marriage contract, which appoints the life partner of ANY sex as one's closest relative and superseding all blood relatives, to everyone who wants it.

[kbm8170]

6. I completely agree. . .

These people are unfortunately getting the first little taste of what life is like for gay couples who have to be legally considered 'single".

Still, it is almost ironic to watch the religious right rally to this case, which they've been doing for a couple of years now, and how easily they manufacture stories to justify destroying the sanctity of anyone's marriage.

If they'd destroy the Schaivo's vows, they'll have no problem destroying anyone else's too.

[hollywood926]

14. Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

This guy has wanted her dead for years. He wants to re-marry but refuses a divorce. (He's not religious, no...he wants her life insurance money) He's a scumbag. Don't equate him with the life partner you love. And don't equate the parents with the (possibly) homophobic parents you hate.

[ruggerson]

15. Bull

He has turned down offers ranging from 1 million to 10 million. Her life insurance money is pittance compared to that.

[sonicx]

17. He doesn't want her dead. He tried to rehab her for 8 years...

[hollywood926]

38. He has started another family, for God's sake!!!!!

But he doesn't want a divorce...noooo!

He tried to "rehab" her? For what? So she and his new lover could have a catfight?

He clearly is taking his vows seriously. It's perfectly fine to cheat on your wife, as long as she's incapacitated.

He's a great guy. So is Scott Peterson! Keep defending them both, Democrats! It's going to be a loooong time in the White House for the Republicans!

[not systems]

39. The shame!!!

Moral outrage over a person living their life and
caring for the wishes of another is funny to behold.

Comparing this guy to Scott Peterson only shows how
moral askew your argument is.

[mondo joe]

40. I'd want my spouse to do the very same thing.

I'd want my spouse to carry out this final obligation to me.

And I'd want my spouse to tend to his own happiness and future.

Good thing you're not getting married -- you don't have the right constitution for it.

[sonicx]

42. "Democrats" are not doing a thing. Why do you keep repeating this?

i would want my wife to move on in this situation, btw.

[mondo joe]

43. Selfish people shouldn't get married. It takes too much

willingness to think about the needs of one's partner.

And believe me when I tell you you're not up to it.

[RetroLounge]

82. Wow, your outrage is almost funny

almost...

RL

[gollygee]

88. Are you serious?

Really? It's been, what, 15 years? And you're outraged he's moved on with his life?

How dare he continue living! /sarcasm

[madeline_con]

72. I read...

that as soon as he got money in the malpractice settlement, he discontinued her therapy

that she had pneumonia at one time, and he ordered that she be given no meds

that he's so in love with her, he's got another broad he lives with and they have a kid (or 2)

[mondo joe]

74. He ordered no meds after the decision to let her go.

This is pretty standard in situations like this. My mother inlaw opted for it for herself while she still could.

[sonicx]

85. incorrect...

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder02-00.pdf

read page 3.

[SidDithers]

96. I read...

that you've got no idea what the truth actually is.

And neither do I, for that matter.

So we should all just stay the fuck out of it.

Sid

[madeline_con]

116. we?

I AM staying out of it, the whole thing's going on within a short drive from my house, and you won't see me there. But surely discussing won't hurt any of us.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cuban_Liberal]

59. Don't call somene a liar. n/t

[Warpy]

31. Excuse me?

The husband is doing the loving thing, finally letting her go. There is no life insurance money. The settlement money is long gone. He's turned down first a million dollars and then ten million dollars in order to do the right thing.

The scumbags are the parents who have allowed themselves to be used by Randall Terry, who said even if they had to chop off all her extremities, they'd want her kept alive, that they didn't care what she wanted because THEY wanted her body kept alive.

[hollywood926]

41. Who cares what Randall Terry says?

My opinion has nothing to do with him. I've been following this case for years. Terri's husband is the scum of the earth. His first request to have her killed was TWO WEEKS after she collapsed. He refused a divorce, but went on fucking another woman nonetheless.

He has REFUSED to approve any therapy for her in the last TEN YEARS. There are many doctors who believe it would help.

Don't forget - she is not in a coma. She isn't even on life support. She's merely being fed through a tube. This isn't Julia Roberts in Steel Magnolias.

Believe me, I'm not opposed to pulling the plug on life support in certain circumstances, but in this case - at the very least - the camera-loving, cheating, money-grubbing scumbag she's married to should be shown the door.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FreedomAngel82]

109. He's cameraloving?

How many interviews has he done by the way? The only people who are camera loving are Bill Frist and Tom DeLay and Jeb Bush. They are using this as a political tool for 2008. That's all this is about. They don't give a damn about her. If they did give a care about this type of case why aren't they helping the Texas man who's going through the same thing? It's all about her location pal.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

3. Causes me serious concern

as to weather or not the average actually understands what rights are.

[sonicx]

4. I know. I don't get it...

[Walt Starr]

5. Well said

I am ashamed at a good portion of DU and the Democratic Senators.

[karlrschneider]

8. Same here, Walt.

This FUBAR situation has poisoned the DU atmosphere.
:eyes:

[Walt Starr]

10. I can honestly say that there are some DUers I will never view in the

same way again.

[atreides1]

26. Same Here

Especially one who stated that the left just wanted to kill those like Mrs. Schiavo.

[ruggerson]

12. Me too

This issue has me smokin' angry

[hollywood926]

7. That's not true. Pay attention.

I said *I* wouldn't get married. And I recommend - if you do - that you make your wishes very clear, because your partner will have the right to end your life while your parents sit helpless.

Now if you hate your parents, just get married.

[mondo joe]

11. Hey if you're not ready to be a grown up DON'T get married

But don't deprive those of us who want it of the rights associated with it.

[hollywood926]

16. Ummm...I'm not. n/t

[mondo joe]

20. But Terri was. And so are many others. Please stop trying to deny

adults the right to choose their own legal guardian.

[hollywood926]

30. So you aren't a "grown up" until you are married?

Yikes. That could have come right out of the mouth of Billy Graham or anyone in the Republican Party.

BTW, I haven't used the term "grown up" since I was a child. "Adult" is what you were going for, I think.

[mondo joe]

36. If you need your parents to make your choices, don't get married

Marriage is a contract between adults forming a partnership.

If you're not ready for that, don't do it.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hollywood926]

44. I think you missed a post

He said many gay people have homophobic parents and hate them (or have no relationship with them at all) and I said, "If you hate your parents, get married." Your parents will have no rights, anymore.

Read the whole thread. And don't worry about how old I am. How old are you? Do you have children? Can you imagine yourself standing there watching your daughter die while her husband (and the woman he's fucking) do the media rounds to get their faces on television?

Can imagine that? How old are you???????????????????

[ultraist]

67. Yes, I have children

And I accept the fact that when she marries, we will no longer be next of kin.

16 courts have heard this case and not one terminated his legal guardianship.

What do you propose should happen here knowing that her legal guardian is not willing to give up his rights?

[mondo joe]

68. When my children are adults they will make their own choices,

and I will do my best to respect their choices.

Unlike Terri's parents.

[gollygee]

22. On the other hand

Your parents could have the right to force your body to remain in a perpetual state of being (not really life) even if your husband knows you wouldn't want that.

Have you ever been married? Most adults who are in long-term relationships get to know each other better than their parents know them.

[hollywood926]

45. Five years?

Maybe I am getting old, but 5 years isn't a long-term relationship in my book.

In any case, if she made that clear to him, they both should have known to put in writing. The other thing is, how do you even know what you would want in that situation?

If you ask me now, I might say, "pull the plug." But once I am in that situation, maybe I don't want to starve slowly to death. Maybe I would rather lie there and hear the voices of the people I love, the sounds of birds singing, music...maybe I would change my mind.

[mondo joe]

47. It's the choice that matters, not the number of years

It's Terri's choice, not yours.

You know nothing about her relationship with her parents or anyone else.

All we KNOW is that she granted Michael Schiavo the right and the power to speak on her behalf when she could not.

[hollywood926]

54. I think your desire to marry is clouding your reason...

Not every spouse is a good person, just because they are your spouse. And if you are so pro-marriage, then why is infidelity OK with you? (Oh...I know..."My wife told me before her accident that she would have wanted me to have sex with other women!")

He was given the opportunity to divorce her. He did not. Why? Maybe because he was desperately in love with her and couldn't imagine breaking his wedding vows. That's admirable! Except that he's fucking another woman. So it can't really be true, can it? There must be another reason he doesn't want a divorce. Hmmm. What it could be?

I am saying anything else on this subject. But you really should research it a little further. This isn't new news to me. I've been following it for years and I can assure you that you are defending the wrong side.

Good luck with your marriage, though.

[sonicx]

55. You are getting way too many of the facts wrong for me to believe you have

been covering it. I bet you will be back.

[gollygee]

58. I don't see this as infidelity

she has been unable to communicate with him for ages. If I were in Terry's position I would understand if my husband had a new relationship and in fact would be glad that he'd found someone else he loved. Well, assuming of course I was able to think, which Terry isn't.

He can still love Terry and want what's best for her, but have found someone else. It is completely understandable that he has found someone else.

[mondo joe]

107. Agreed. Marriage isn't for wimps, and if you really love

your partner you're going to want them to have some love and support when you're gone.

[sonicx]

49. she has no cerebral cortex. she can't feel or love.

[gollygee]

50. 5 years is a long-term relationship

And people don't generally think about something like this happening. My husband and I (almost 7 years) have just started seriously talking about this because of this case. Luckily my parents aren't psychos and wouldn't fight him to keep me in that state. If this is what Terry would want, she shouldn't be punished for not thinking ahead that something terrible like this would happen.

We are just now finally getting a will together. And we have a child.

As for your last sentence, it could go either way. Right now, someone might say, "keep me alive at any cost." But if that person were in the position maybe he/she would change his/her mind. Michael went through a process described in other threads to try to best determine what Terry would want. He is doing what he believes is best for her. Courts have ruled agreeing with him. Someone has to try to figure out what is best, and he is the next of kin so it's him.

[mondo joe]

51. And it doesn't matter if it was 5 decades or 5 minutes.

It's a legally binding and important contract.

People who don't want that contract shouldn't agree to it in the first place.

[gollygee]

52. Agreed

And this is a contract people go into because they love each other and want to spend forever together. Because they *want* the other person to make these kinds of decisions for them.

[FreedomAngel82]

110. I agree

It even says so in the Bible. The republicans love to quote the Bible so let's see what they have to say about that. They're not honoring their marriage vows even if he has gone on with his life. Maybe he didn't get a divorce with her because he knew how her parents would be and he believes he knows what's best and wants the final decision. The parents are too emotionally involved to deal with the situation. She has been in this state for fifteen years so of course the husband is going to move on but I think he didn't divorce her so he can handle the situation and not the parents. Just my opinion.

[MissB]

95. Of course your partner will have the right to end your life

if that means making medical decisions that result in your death. :shrug: That is what Next Of Kin laws are all about. Your next of kin gets to make decisions for you when you are incapable of doing so.

Without the NOK laws, who is going to make the decisions for your care? The State? The hospital? The insurance company? Yeah, they all have your best interests at heart. Whereas the person that you hypothetically married doesn't have your best interests at heart. Yeah, that is it.

[mondo joe]

119. The republican party and any irrate religious types of course.

It's like Bush's idea of state's rights: the state has the right to decide as long as they decide the way he wants them to.

[ruggerson]

9. Dude

maybe that's why this hits home for me. I hadn't thought of that. Thanks. The analogy is apt.

[bigwillq]

13. Mondo Joe, you make a very good point!

Thanks for the insight!

[H2O Man]

21. It's very hard

for people to understand what it is like to deal with having a family member in this type of circumsance. My oldest sibling has been in a coma and in & out of a vegative state recently. As I've said on previous threads, I do not believe there is a single "correct" answer. Weeks ago, the doctors and most nurses said that my sisters were wrong when they said my brother was communicating with his eyes.

Yesterday, one of the polite nurses asked my older sister how she was doing? My sister said she was okay, and mentioned her son was getting married today. My brother, in ICU and in what some call a coma, said loud enough for everyone in the room to hear, "Is he crazy?"

Again, I don't have an answer for anyone but myself. But I can say that it is much harder to try to reach one when the situation is real, than when it is someone who you don't know, far from your life, a fleeting image on a screen.

[mondo joe]

27. I don't think there's one answer. I think it's up to the individual

and their chosen guardian.

There isn't a RIGHT choice - just a personal one.

[blogbear]

33. amen!

[H2O Man]

34. I like this thread.

I like what you have to say on here .... and several other people on here, too. It has been very hard for me to read some of the threads o this subject, not because I don't appreciate that people can and should have a variety of opinions .... but because until it happens to someone close to you, you can't imagine.

There is a minister who roams the hospital where my brother is. He has started coming in my brother's room, uninvited. He is a kind of aggressive person, pushing his values on some of the women in my family. My brother is/was an atheist. While the minister's expressed opinions are fairly close to my own, I resent that he butts in when no one asked him to. I will make clear this week that he does not want to step into my brother's room again.

Again, people should think about this issue, and put their wishes in writing. If you are ever as unlucky as my brother or others like him who never considered there to be any chance they could meet this fate, you want your wishes known. It will be helpful to your family.

[mondo joe]

37. Thanks H2O. Sorry to hear about your own trials with

these issues.

[madeline_con]

77. visitor's list

Do you have any say in who can and cannot wander in and out of your brother's room?

Isn't this a security issue, too, not just an obnoxious visitor one?

[FreedomAngel82]

111. I'm sorry about your brother

:hug: I'm glad he's not quite as bad as Mrs. Schivao. I think it's important to always put things in writing. I definietly will learn something from this lesson on life. Defineitly. I think it's so rude of that minister to come in and force his views onto your family members. It's fine for a prayer or something but your family isn't there for a Bible lesson or sermon.

[ultraist]

23. Supposed Democrats advocating for State sanctioned forced med care

Mind boggling. Are these same people willing to turn over their bodies to the State?

I've seen this same inconsistency with anti choice "Dems." They wouldn't give the State control over their body, but they think the State should have control over women's bodies. Ridiculous.

[chicagojoe]

24. The spouse should ALWAYS have legal rights

BEFORE the parents. PERIOD.

[madeline_con]

78. gray area

This raises the issue of estranged spouses with animosity taking advantage of an incapacitated spouse, and a whole new can of worms, IMO.

[chicagojoe]

84. How is Terri's husband(estranged spouse) taking

advantage of this situation?

[madeline_con]

104. Not him, necessarily

I can't be sure that he is, though I do have my own opinions about him starting a new family while he's so concerned about his wife.

What I'm saying is, if the spouse automatically has power of attorney, some estranged spouses might take advantage of this type of situation to rid themselves of someone they feel is in the way.

For instance, a mom fighting for custody conveniently falls into a coma after an accident. How long does the husband have to wait before pulling the plug? What if she would have come out of it in 6 months? What if, what if... :shrug:

[mondo joe]

87. He's not estranged. He is involved in her care and has done an exemplary

job of it, as verified by every report, including the one commissioned by Jeb Bush.

[madeline_con]

105. She's well cared for...

but that would be thanks to the staff. I'll assume he doesn't run in every day at shower time.

This seems to indicate that the staff at the hospice see her as worthy of as much diginity and consideration as they can give.

Which, in turn, makes me think that some food and water isn't too much to ask, regardless of the results of her brain scan. Even an f'ed up human is still human.

[mondo joe]

106. To the contrary. If you look at the record you will see that HE was

responsible for coordinating her care and providing much of it. He learned nursing skills, he was even considered a pain in the butt at the hospital for always advocating for Terri. In all the years since her collapse she hasn't had even one bed sore, which is amazing.

By every account he has personally been remarkable.

As far as food and water are concerned, there are many terminal patients who stop taking either to hasten their own deaths. You seem to think it is some gruesome torture, but it's not at all.

[madeline_con]

114. Maybe not torture

for the patient, but it's freaking a lot of us out.

I know it happens every day, but that doesn't make me o.k. with it. It's just food and water.

You know, I've been running around from thread to thread, and I'm worn out. I can't decide how I feel. I guess I'll know by my reaction whe she finally dies, however that may be.

[mondo joe]

115. It's freaking people out because they don't know what it is.

Only food and water? How about keeping people on respirators - it's only air.

What's NOT okay with me is the state forcing someone to be preserved in suspended death like a zombie, regardless of her wishes or the choices of her chosen representative.

[mondo joe]

117. By the way I hope I didn't sound cranky with you in the above post

I didn't mean to but after it was posted thought it might have sounded that way.

Sorry.

[merh]

28. Damn, looked like a missed something! What did I miss?

Though I do believe you are voicing valid concerns in your OP. You know what I don't get, why do these folks think that we are supposed to live forever anyway?

I mean if extraordinary measures have to be used to keep a person in a vegatative state alive, doesn't that mean that science is interferring with the will of god?

Your DPOA has more power than the woman's spoken words to her husband or parents. I am glad you have one. :hug: Don't let the crazies get to you.

[Pithlet]

32. It's crazy, isn't it?

If a spouse's word isn't enough, then what is the point of the marriage contract? What is the point of anyone fighting for it?

[mordarlar]

48. I will say again if a spouse has HARMED their partner, all rights are

forfeit.

Terri's bone scan.


Testimony of the DR. who reviewed these results.


Q I realize you can't assign a cause to

20 these injuries that you picked up in this report.

21 But typically in your experience, what would be the

22 causes of this pattern of abnormality?

23 A In somebody her age, an auto accident is

24 by far the most typical cause.

25 Q Assume that she was not in an auto



1 accident but that she had suffered an anoxic or

2 hypoxic encephalopathy type of injury from a cardiac

3 arrest and had been bedridden for a year at this

4 point. What might account for these abnormalities?

5 A In my knowledge, that type of injury

6 would not account for this pattern of abnormalities.<<<

A I can only say that if they were

24 traumatic that they probably occurred within 18

25 months.



1 Q Is it possible that the abnormalities

2 that you noted on the right femoral diaphysis and

3 metaphysis could have occurred if the patient was

4 standing and suffered a cardiac arrest and fell to

5 the floor?

6 A Probably not. That wouldn't be a typical

7 mechanism of injury that would cause a periosteal

8 bruise. Typically you need a direct blow of some

9 kind. I suppose one could speculate that she fell

10 on a piece of furniture, that that could produce

11 that injury. But just typically falling on the

12 floor would not do that.<<<<

(Michael claims he found her lying face down in the hallway)





http://www.zimp.org/stuff/03%20-%20WalkerDepositionDepo...


http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/MotProtOrderWalker...

On Nov. 19 Michael Schiavo filed for a protective order to block the discoveries of the bone scan.

[mondo joe]

53. Since Michael has NEVER been found to have harmed Terri that's a non issue

But it won't stop you from spreading smears.

[mordarlar]

57. As i mentioned in your other thread. The judge stated....

"The court concludes that while it might be interesting to pursue the issue of trauma as it may have occurred almost 12 years ago, that has nothing to do with Theresa Marie Schiavo in 2002,"

Yet testimony of medical professionals suggests the injuries are possibly related to the date of her collapse. They also testify that it was unlikely to have occurred from a fall. Most likely very near the event which led to her current state.

Rather than ordering a further investigation Judge Greer dismissed the evidence.

12 years before 2002 would take us to 1990 which is when she collapsed. Yet apparently from the Judges quote he did not feel issues surrounding her collapse RELEVANT.

[mondo joe]

63. You should learn more about bulimia and bone fractures

http://orthopedics.about.com/cs/otherfractures/a/stressfracture.htm

And the fracturs were irrelevant to determining her wishes, which was what Greer was charged with.

[crispini]

56. There is some good commentary on that here:

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

Scroll down to Questions and Answers.

snippet:
"The significance of the medical malpractice lawsuit can be seen in a few ways. A jury agreed that bulimia caused Terri's collapse. The defendants were her doctors -- one might think that they, of all people, would have been able to show that Terri had been beaten or strangled if that was what had occurred. Also, to believe that Michael caused Terri's collapse by beating her is to believe that Michael initiated a lawsuit against someone else for causing her collapse, opening the whole matter to serious inquiry and greatly increasing the risk that someone would discover his role.

Finally, I am not aware that anyone -- not the paramedics, doctors, nurses, family members, friends, or anyone else -- who saw Terri in the hours, weeks, and months after her collapse ever suggested at the time that Terri had been beaten or strangled.

As I said above, I am not commenting on whether any abuse actually occurred. I don't know."

[mordarlar]

60. Agreed, i do not know either. But it is relevant IMO

I have no issue with her dying. Either religious or political. But i do think Michael's motives are potentially suspicious. Which would put into question his rights IMO.

[sonicx]

62. Here's a great article...

bookmark it...

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/columnists/orl-locmiket25022505feb25.story

Has Michael withheld treatment?

Wolfson's report states that in the four years after her collapse, Michael "had insistently held to the premise that Theresa could recover and the evidence is incontrovertible that he gave his heart and soul to her treatment and care . . . In late autumn of 1990, following months of therapy and testing and formal diagnoses of persistent vegetative state with no evidence of improvement, Michael took Theresa to California, where she received an experimental thalamic stimulator implant in her brain. Michael remained in California caring for Theresa during a period of several months."

Says Wolfson now: "Michael was adoring of her. One nursing home complained he was hostile and abusive of the staff in championing her care. She was immaculately kept. In 13 years, she never had one bedsore."

Is Michael after her insurance settlement?

Wolfson's report says that early on, Michael "formally offered to divest himself entirely of his financial interests in the guardianship estate."

Why doesn't Michael simply turn Terri over to her family?

From the report: "Testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive . . . at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it."

[mordarlar]

65. I myself have been involved with a decision to terminate life support and

DO NOT REGRET IT. To me the issue is regardless of people's feelings, the scans show SERIOUS damage. According to some credible testimony this is not consistent with her fall in the hallway. If not this than how?

I am not even saying i believe Michael guilty. But i do think rather than a dismissal of these concerns a "legitimate" investigation should have been done.

[mondo joe]

66. Maybe the Schindlers should be investigated for possible sexual abuse

leading to Terri's bulimia (which, incidentally, is associated with bones fractures).

[mordarlar]

69. If there is suspicion of this type of abuse, i agree it would be wise

to investigate it before giving them authority over her well being.

[mondo joe]

71. Then I suggest you start rallying for it, since she was

bulimic and this is often rooted in family of origin issues including sexual abuse.

[mordarlar]

75. UNLIKE in this case i have not seen the evidence to support that

possibility.

It seems you are the one pressing for her husband's unquestioned rights to her care. Perhaps YOU should begin to rally. I have already brought up the points I FELT MOST CONCERNING.

[mondo joe]

80. Funny - in the Schiavo case multiple radiologists saw no indication

of injury!

[mordarlar]

86. Could you provide a link to their testimony please?

[mondo joe]

90. You said you read up on the case. How astonishing that you

don't have any of this on hand.

I guess you only have what you're fed by the Schindler ghouls.

http://www.hospicepatients.org/dr-walker-t-schiavo-bone-scan-deposition.txt

[mordarlar]

91. Well i am assuming you realize one can be informed without reading

EVERY site listed for Terri. There are 759,000 on google alone.



Your maturity on the issue is impressive though.

[mondo joe]

97. Of course you can be informed by reading agenda driven material.

You just won't be WELL informed.

[mordarlar]

100. LOL Yes i suppose you are the authority on how well informed i am.

or the "legitimacy" of the sources i read. Heh heh.

[mondo joe]

101. Since you've only cited partial info fed to you by Schindler ghouls

your authority - or lack thereof - is self evident.

[mordarlar]

102. I provided a bone scan document, a portion of a court testimony,

a quote from the judge, and a portion of a deposition by Michael's ex girlfriend.

Are you suggesting that these items are suspect?

[mondo joe]

103. Like I said, you had partial evidence provided by Schindler ghouls

And you never looked beyond it.

When you get the rest of the pieces together let me know.

[mordarlar]

92. This is Walker's testimony. You suggested...

"in the Schiavo case multiple radiologists saw no indication of injury!"

I asked if you could link to THEIR testimony.

[mondo joe]

94. They did not testify. Their statements were entered into evidence.

And those statements reflected the consistent lack of finding of injury.

And for that matter even Walker didn't say she was injured.

[FreedomAngel82]

112. So what exactly

would you say Tom DeLay, Bill Frist and Jeb Bush's motos are? Do you honestly think they care at all about this woman and what happens to her? If you do.... :silly:

[ultraist]

70. One expert testimony doesn't make it fact, what did the other doctors say?

What did the Judge decide based on ALL of the testimonies?

[mondo joe]

76. And it's worth noting that the radiologisty himself said:

23 A We don't attempt to be exhaustive because
24 there is a list of probably 30 or 40 things that
25 could cause abnormal bone scans of this wide nature.
? 30
1 And because the body is very variable, nothing is
2 ever classic, which is why attorneys make such a
3 good living at malpractice, because nothing is ever
4 typical.


His own admission is thay nothing is ever typical. And one would hardly expect typical findings in someone with severe bulimia (with a known association with bone fractures) who had CPR and aggressive therapy.

[mordarlar]

79. As you know court documentation is vast in this case.

I have not seen any other court testimony relating to the injuries, from a medical professional. As far as i know this testimony and that of Michael's attorney was all that was offered in court prior to Greer's decision to dismiss. If there is further court testimony (medical relating to these scanned injuries) i would like to see it.

[mondo joe]

83. REALLY? You should consider reading the rest of the transcript!

4 Q Dr. Walker, have you ever seen the x-ray
5 report that has been marked as Deposition Exhibit 3?
6 A Not to my knowledge.
7 Q Do you know Dr. Donald Durrance?
8 A Yes, I do.
9 Q Do you know what kind of a physician he
10 is?
11 A He's a diagnostic radiologist with a
12 specialty in neuroradiology.
13 Q His report indicates there that his
14 impression is "no evidence of fracture"?
15 A That would be what it says, yes.
16 Q What do you understand that to mean?
17 A It means he didn't see an alteration of
18 the radiographic anatomy that would suggest that
19 there was a broken bone there.
20 Q Okay. Do you know when that report was
21 written or when the x-ray was taken? Can you tell
22 from the report?
23 A Well, it's a pretty bad copy. I see a
24 date of 6/24/91 at 7:11 a.m. underneath the
25 signature line. Whether that was the date the
? 43
1 examination was taken or whether that was the date
2 it was transcribed or dictated, I can't be sure.
3 But one would speculate within some two or three
4 days of the time that the x-ray was taken would be
5 that date.
6 Q Okay. So the report is dated June of
7 1991 --
8 A Correct.
9 Q -- as far as we can tell? And your
10 report is dated March of 1991. Correct?
11 A Correct.
12 Q And your report indicates that a
13 compression fracture at L1 was noted on the
14 radiographs, and Dr. Durrance's report shows no
15 evidence of fracture.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

4 Q Now, Deposition Exhibit 4 is an x-ray
5 report which indicated Steven Ricciardello.
6 A Ricciardello.
7 Q Are you familiar with Dr. Ricciardello?
8 A I am.
9 Q What kind of a physician is he?
10 A He's also a diagnostic radiologist with a
11 specialty in neuroradiology.
12 Q And his report indicates, as far as the
13 left knee conclusion, "no acute injury," and right
14 knee conclusion, "no acute injury."

[mordarlar]

89. Again could you provide a link?

Edited to add... I stated that to my knowledge Walker was the one who testified and i did not know of another. You brought forth MORE of Walker's testimony. Are you suggesting by it that another Dr. testified? And if so could you provide a link to their court testimony as well?

[mondo joe]

93. Here's the link again

http://www.hospicepatients.org/dr-walker-t-schiavo-bone-scan-deposition.txt

Dr Walker testified. He was presented with evidence from multiple radiologists who found no evidence of injury.

He furthermore said NO ONE is typical.

[mordarlar]

98. Well this is getting rather old. I responded to a post...

stating..."As far as i know this testimony and that of Michael's attorney was all that was offered in court prior to Greer's decision to dismiss."
Indicating that i did not know of any other medical professionals testifying in court on the injuries.

This was responding to a question other medical professionals testimony's and how they may have influenced Judge Greer.

You then suggested i should read Walker's testimony further.

We KNOW Walker testified. The subject was if others testified before Judge Greer.

[mondo joe]

99. Then you've confused two posters, because I wasn't talking about

that.

But you can also find out more about how testimony from multiple physicians influenced the case here: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

[ohio_liberal]

73. This is a brilliant post

Well done! :thumbsup:

[RetroLounge]

81. "AND EVEN DU POSTERS "

I think this part is just as disgusting as the Repugs...

RL

[Toucano]

108. That's not been lost on me.

The Repubs and fundies are attacking the institution of marriage.

[mondo joe]

113. Isn't it something? Just my luck, I'll finally be able to get married

and it won't mean shit any more.

[mondo joe]

118. Anyone who thinks Terri shouldn't have the power to choose a legal

guardian to make her medical choices when she can't neccessarily opposes MY right to make MY choice as well.

And I say FUCK THAT.