For the moron's who think Terry Schaivo can't recover

[dilloduck]

Just curious, since there are a lot of people dead set against killing common criminals, but yet wish to see this particular plug pulled..

What do you have against allowing her parents to take care of her? Why do you want to see the plug pulled? Even if she never gets better - what's it to you?

and what took her hubby so long to kill her off ?????

 

[MissileMan]

Just curious, since there are a lot of people dead set against killing common criminals, but yet wish to see this particular plug pulled..

What do you have against allowing her parents to take care of her? Why do you want to see the plug pulled? Even if she never gets better - what's it to you?

According to her husband, who I have no reason to doubt, Terry said she didn't want to be maintained in this manner. Is it possible that he's lying? Yeah. Is it possible that her parents are making up the stories about abuse? Yeah. The bottom line is this. I believe Michael is doing what he believes is in Terry's best interest.

 

[dilloduck]

According to her husband, who I have no reason to doubt, Terry said she didn't want to be maintained in this manner. Is it possible that he's lying? Yeah. Is it possible that her parents are making up the stories about abuse? Yeah. The bottom line is this. I believe Michael is doing what he believes is in Terry's best interest.

Why did he wait so long----did he just forget for awhile ???

 

[Shattered]

According to her husband, who I have no reason to doubt, Terry said she didn't want to be maintained in this manner. Is it possible that he's lying? Yeah. Is it possible that her parents are making up the stories about abuse? Yeah. The bottom line is this. I believe Michael is doing what he believes is in Terry's best interest.

He said he didn't *think* she "would want" to be maintained in this matter. That's a far cry different than "don't want".. But again, there's nothing in writing, and there is someone that DOES want to take care of her, at any cost.

Michael is doing what's in HIS best interest...(and perhaps the interest of his girlfriend and/or children of the last 7-ish years).

My theory on why he won't just hand her over to her parents?

Because he did abuse the hell out of her (how does one explain the broken bones of someone completely incapacitated?). For as long as she's alive, there's a slim chance she will recover enough to let things out that he may not exactly want out.

Why else, again, would he keep her family from her? Do you think she told him "I don't want anything to do with my family. Don't let them anywhere near me."? Gimme a break.

 

[dilloduck]

He said he didn't *think* she "would want" to be maintained in this matter. That's a far cry different than "don't want".. But again, there's nothing in writing, and there is someone that DOES want to take care of her, at any cost.

Michael is doing what's in HIS best interest...(and perhaps the interest of his girlfriend and/or children of the last 7-ish years).

My theory on why he won't just hand her over to her parents?

Because he did abuse the hell out of her (how does one explain the broken bones of someone completely incapacitated?). For as long as she's alive, there's a slim chance she will recover enough to let things out that he may not exactly want out.

Why else, again, would he keep her family from her? Do you think she told him "I don't want anything to do with my family. Don't let them anywhere near me."? Gimme a break.

AMEN !!!

 

[MissileMan]

Why did he wait so long----did he just forget for awhile ???

As I said before, I don't know when he came to the conclusion that she wasn't going to get better.

 

[Shattered]

As I said before, I don't know when he came to the conclusion that she wasn't going to get better.

At least 7 years ago when he picked up his new girlfriend!

How's that for a loving, and dedicated husband who only wants what's best for his wife?

 

[dilloduck]

As I said before, I don't know when he came to the conclusion that she wasn't going to get better.

ahhhhhhh so he just let her hang on like she didnt want to until he was "comfortable "with it ???

 

[MissileMan]

He said he didn't *think* she "would want" to be maintained in this matter. That's a far cry different than "don't want".. But again, there's nothing in writing, and there is someone that DOES want to take care of her, at any cost.

Michael is doing what's in HIS best interest...(and perhaps the interest of his girlfriend and/or children of the last 7-ish years).

My theory on why he won't just hand her over to her parents?

Because he did abuse the hell out of her (how does one explain the broken bones of someone completely incapacitated?). For as long as she's alive, there's a slim chance she will recover enough to let things out that he may not exactly want out.

Why else, again, would he keep her family from her? Do you think she told him "I don't want anything to do with my family. Don't let them anywhere near me."? Gimme a break.

Have some links to support these theories?

 

[dilloduck]

Have some links to support these theories?

Why---the DRs. can't prove theirs !!!

 

[Shattered]

Have some links to support these theories?

As I said..they're my theories..My opinions based upon all that I've read..

Can you answer any of the questions posed to you in my post?

 

[Bonnie]

Why---the DRs. can't prove theirs !!!

Apparently Judge Hitler wanted a long line of proven cases or the doctors theory was unfounded.. Also there was a gag order on some of the those doctors anyway so they weren't even allowed to testify. Just like the nurses at the hospital or hospice were unable to testify that they had to take out a restraining order on Mr wonderful becasue he was violent towards them for giving Terri extra care like bathing her, etc. Why this is not relevant to Michael's character and this case I have no idea!!!!

 

[Bonnie]

Transcript: A Doctor Who Has Examined Terri Talks with Hannity & Colmes

Tuesday, March 22, 2005



This is a partial transcript from "Hannity & Colmes," Mar. 21, 2005, that has been edited for clarity.

Watch "Hannity & Colmes" weeknights at 9 p.m. ET!

SEAN HANNITY, CO-HOST: As we continue on "Hannity and Colmes," I'm Sean Hannity. Right now, we're broadcasting live outside the hospice where Terri Schiavo (search) is right now. Of course, her feeding tube has not been reinserted as of this point.

Joining us now is Dr. Bill Hammesfahr. And Dr. Hammesfahr, thanks for being with us.

DR. BILL HAMMESFAHR: Thanks for having me.

HANNITY: You were nominated for a Nobel Prize (search) in medicine?

HAMMESFAHR: Yes.

HANNITY: In 1999? For your work...

HAMMESFAHR: ... in patients like Terri. For brain injury and stroke patients. We discovered how you get these people better, and we did it for 10 years with Medicare. We got evaluated by the state of Florida and we first discovered a technique that works in people like Terri.

HANNITY: This is what I want to talk about. You have spent, unlike Robert Wexler, who was commenting on medical issues this weekend, you spent how many hours with Terri?

HAMMESFAHR: I spent about 10 hours with Terri across three separate occasions, and I spent a lot of time with videotapes, the medical record which is in boxes and boxes and boxes. for about a year. And of course, you know, I spending time interviewing the family and people who actually have seen her. So I've spent a lot of time with her.

HANNITY: Do you believe she is aware, conscious and responsive?

HAMMESFAHR: Terri is completely aware and conscious and responsive. She is like a child with cerebral palsy. We have kids in the Pinellas County school system every day that are much worse than her, that we're educating.

HANNITY: Doctor, wait a minute. I've got to get this straight here.

You were nominated to get a Nobel Peace Prize in this very work. Are you saying that this woman could be rehabilitated?

HAMMESFAHR: Absolutely.

HANNITY: Could she talk one day?

HAMMESFAHR: Yes.

HANNITY: Then how is it possible we're in this position if you have examined her, you were up for a Nobel Prize. I -- this is mind boggling to me.

HAMMESFAHR: I don't understand it myself. You know, this is a -- this is a case of a terrible error that's happened and it's a grievous case.

You know, what struck me about Congress, in the last couple of days is that there we have physicians who examined the videotapes, examined the same evidence I had, examined my records, my evaluation of her, stepped forward and said, this is not a person in a coma. This is not a person in PVS (a persistent vegetative state). We have to stop this.

HANNITY: All right.

HAMMESFAHR: It just goes to show, you do not want your medical care delivered by a judge.

HANNITY: Well, this is what I want to understand. This is your area of expertise that got you nominated for one of the most prestigious awards in medicine, the Nobel Prize.

And you're saying after a thorough examination of 10 hours total with her, and an examination of records and an examination of records and an examination of tapes regarding her, that she could be rehabilitated. What about all of these other people that have said that that's not possible, how can we have disparaging?

HANNITY: It's not all of these other people. There's four people on the other side, who say she can't be rehabilitated. All were paid individuals. Three by George Felos...

HANNITY: ...and you're not paid?

HAMMESFAHR: I was not paid. Now, if you look at the people who are on Terri's side and stepped forward, at last count, two weeks ago, 33 M.D.s, brain injury specialists from around the country, places like UCLA, Tulane, LSU, Boston University --Thirty-three physicians has stepped forward to say that this person can be rehabilitated. She's not in PVS, not in a coma. And the -- Judge Greer ignored this.

ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: Dr. Hammesfahr, it's Alan Colmes in New York. Thank you for being with us.

One of the other doctors who examined her, and by the way, among those doctors there were those who were not paid, who were independent, who were not on either side. --

Dr. Ron Cranford, who'll be on this show tomorrow night. I want to put up what he said:

He said, "She's vegetative. She's flat out vegetative. There's never been a shread of doubt that she's vegetative, and nothing's going to change that."

"This has been a massive propaganda campaign, which has been very successful, because it deludes the public into thinking she's really there."

Explain to me, as a lay person, what I'm supposed to believe, hearing medical authorities saying what you say and saying what Cranford says?

HAMMESFAHR: Well, I think you need to go and look at the videotape of Dr. Cranford. Dr. Cranford's videotape compliments Terri on following commands. At one point he moves a balloon around in front of her and he again compliments that she is able to see it that she can follow commands.

And I also think that you need to look a little closer. Dr. Cranford's work has been attacked by other medical professionals in peer reviewed journals such as "Lancet." So I think that we to look a little bit deeper at Dr. Cranford.

COLMES: Well, he's going to be here tomorrow night. We'll ask him. But Judge Greer also said that you said you've have treated patients worse off than Mrs. Schiavo but have not produced any case histories. Can you tell us of one?

HAMMESFAHR: Oh, that's not true. That's not true.

COLMES: You didn't produce any evidence?

HAMMESFAHR: Well, the specific request was to produce a videotape of a person exactly like Terri Schiavo. No two patients are exactly alike but, in fact, we have videotapes and we're releasing them tomorrow and have released them previously, if you call my office, you'll get informational videotapes of people much worse than Terri who are better, one of them three months into their treatment is talking.

COLMES: All right. We would love to know of a similar case where somebody got cured. Thank you for being with us.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151148,00.html

 

[MissileMan]

As I said..they're my theories..My opinions based upon all that I've read..

Can you answer any of the questions posed to you in my post?

There was only one question in your post about why he is denying visitation of the family. I don't know his motives, and I don't agree with that decision.

I would encourage you to read the entire page here: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

There is a lot of information that the naysayers are leaving out, like:

At first blush, the video of Terry Schiavo appearing to smile and look lovingly at her mother seemed to represent cognition. This was also true for how she followed the Mickey Mouse balloon held by her father. The court has carefully viewed the videotapes as requested by counsel and does find that these actions were neither consistent nor reproducible. For instance, Terry Schiavo appeared to have the same look on her face when Dr. Cranford rubbed her neck. Dr. Greer testified she had a smile during his (non-videoed) examination. Also, Mr. Schindler tried several more times to have her eyes follow the Mickey Mouse balloon but without success. Also, she clearly does not consistently respond to her mother. The court finds that based on the credible evidence, cognitive function would manifest itself in a constant response to stimuli.

 

[Shattered]

There was only one question in your post about why he is denying visitation of the family. I don't know his motives, and I don't agree with that decision.

I would encourage you to read the entire page here: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

There is a lot of information that the naysayers are leaving out, like:

I also asked you how you intend to explain away broken bones of a completely incapacitated woman. I also asked why you're so specifically against allowing her parents to take care of her..

 

[MissileMan]

I also asked you how you intend to explain away broken bones of a completely incapacitated woman. I also asked why you're so specifically against allowing her parents to take care of her..

What I was able to find concerning the broken bones left me asking 2 questions: 1. When were they broken? The way it was worded, the breaks could have happened when she was a kid.
2. Could those breaks be from the pounding she took from CPR administered?

As far as letting her parents take care of her, a court has ruled that would not be what Terry would want. The courts are in place to reach these kinds of decisions. If we aren't prepared to abide by their rulings, we might as well close and lock the doors.

 

[Shattered]

What I was able to find concerning the broken bones left me asking 2 questions: 1. When were they broken? The way it was worded, the breaks could have happened when she was a kid.
2. Could those breaks be from the pounding she took from CPR administered?

As far as letting her parents take care of her, a court has ruled that would not be what Terry would want. The courts are in place to reach these kinds of decisions. If we aren't prepared to abide by their rulings, we might as well close and lock the doors.

Given that there is no written documentation of any kind whatsoever, how did the courts managed to come to such a ruling about what she would, or would not want? Through the word of her husband? Pfft!

We might as well sentence everyone to death based strictly on heresy and assumption.

 

[dilloduck]

What I was able to find concerning the broken bones left me asking 2 questions: 1. When were they broken? The way it was worded, the breaks could have happened when she was a kid.
2. Could those breaks be from the pounding she took from CPR administered?

As far as letting her parents take care of her, a court has ruled that would not be what Terry would want. The courts are in place to reach these kinds of decisions. If we aren't prepared to abide by their rulings, we might as well close and lock the doors.

the courts ARE the govt and need to stay out of personal issues !!!!

 

[MissileMan]

Given that there is no written documentation of any kind whatsoever, how did the courts managed to come to such a ruling about what she would, or would not want? Through the word of her husband? Pfft!

We might as well sentence everyone to death based strictly on heresy and assumption.

Why did Terri’s husband get to make the decision about whether she should live or die?

Michael Schiavo did not make the decision to discontinue life-prolonging measures for Terri.

As Terri's husband, Michael has been her guardian and her surrogate decision-maker. By 1998, though -- eight years after the trauma that produced Terri's situation -- Michael and Terri's parents disagreed over the proper course for her.

Rather than make the decision himself, Michael followed a procedure permitted by Florida courts by which a surrogate such as Michael can petition a court, asking the court to act as the ward's surrogate and determine what the ward would decide to do. Michael did this, and based on statements Terri made to him and others, he took the position that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures. The Schindlers took the position that Terri would continue life-prolonging measures. Under this procedure, the trial court becomes the surrogate decision-maker, and that is what happened in this case.

The trial court in this case held a trial on the dispute. Both sides were given opportunities to present their views and the evidence supporting those views. Afterwards, the trial court determined that, even applying the "clear and convincing evidence" standard -- the highest burden of proof used in civil cases -- the evidence showed that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures.

Explains it pretty well to me.

 

[dilloduck]

Explains it pretty well to me.

What a cop out---he had waited 8 frickin years----did Terri say she wanted to wait 8 years?????