|
 B-NEWS
and Views |
Subscribe, unsubscribe or change your subscription on the
www.bisga.org website or visit
http://listserv.tbinet.org/scripts/wa-tbinet.exe?SUBED1=b-news&A=1
*
Inside This Issue:
|
"Civilization begins with order, grows with
liberty, and dies with chaos." -Will Durant |
Hi Folks,
The 6th century B.C., Greek poet Phocylides wrote "Give
no decision till both sides thou'st heard." It is a reasonable, wise person
who listens to both sides prior to making decisions. In our modern society,
both sides are rarely presented, much less heard.
British philanthropist Thomas R. Dewar is
quoted as having said "Minds are like parachutes - they
only function when open." Our minds are under our own control. We alone, hold
the keys to unlocking our minds to open them.
This edition of B-NEWS is dedicated to enlightening my readers on issues
surrounding Terri Schiavo. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly have life or death consequences
for all persons who sustain traumatic brain injuries. Forgive me if you
believe you already have all of the information that you need regarding this
issue. I believe many of my readers can benefit from receiving what I've
assembled here.
Terri was injured about 15 years ago. The injury to her brain was severe.
Early in her recovery, she received excellent care. After a lawsuit was won
and a settlement paid, her husband remembered that she once commented that she
would not want to be kept alive artificially.
He stopped therapy and all but the absolutely necessary care and nourishment.
Now he is pressing for her source of sustenance to be stopped. He refuses to
let Terri's parents have custody of their daughter. They want to get her
therapies to improve her recovery. And they are fighting to stop the removal
of basic food and liquids from her.
Nurses and others have commented that he could be heard asking when she would
die and if she was ever going to die. In their sworn statements, they repeated
expletives that I've chosen not to publish.
The Florida Department of Children and Families wants to intervene in order to
investigate allegations of abuse and neglect by the woman's husband. And in
Tallahassee, lawmakers have introduced a bill requiring that Schiavo and
others who are incapacitated be provided water and nutrition unless a living
will directs otherwise.
The husband has coupled himself with another woman and sired two children. He's
moved on with his life, but he can't use the settlement money for anything
other than his wife's care and legal fees while she is alive. He has spent
more than a half million on lawyers in an attempt to have his wife's feeding
tube removed and thereby end her life.
Family Feud or Greater Social Issue?
I'm not one to get in the middle of family feuds. However, this debate has far
reaching possibilities. If this one man succeeds in terminating the life of
this one woman the negative implications will immediately flow like a powerful
force against people who experience TBI. The outcome of this debate can
potentially affect the lives of millions of American citizens with
disabilities.
None of us can ever be sure if Terri would want to remain alive. If she were
able to vocalize her wishes, we could know. But even still, if she wanted to
die, who are we to cause the death of another human being by starvation and
dehydration?
Her silence leaves the question of her will in this matter unanswered. However, we can guess that
she would not want to remain married to a guy who has fathered two children
with another woman. But the man who claims to want to honor his wife's wishes
by having her food and liquids withheld ignores that likelihood. And few
others even consider it. Let my readers ponder that thought.
If we think in terms of what any woman would want for herself under the
circumstances, we must ask if she would want to permit the man who
stands to gain financial reward upon her death to make the decision of whether
she should live or die. Would you want to give the power of this decision to
someone who stood to be rewarded financially upon your death?
Why are so many people galvanized in one stand for or against the removal of
food and liquids from this one woman? Because it matters.
Why does it matter?
For some, this is an issue that encompasses the sanctity of human life. For
others it is about the so-called right to die. Some believe it is about the
power to exercise choice. Still others see Terri and others like her as being
devalued by society and vulnerable. They believe our society needs to protect
those who are vulnerable.
For persons with disabilities, this is a very real threat to their healthcare,
safety and longevity. The decision to starve and dehydrate a human being to
death is seen as inhumane, cruel and torturous. The persons arguing in defense
of Terri Schiavo want to save her from this punishment and death.
Those arguing for her death use her husband's remarks as justification. They
ignore the reality of his choices, his use of the money and
his motivations. They argue that this is one isolated case.
In my search for the truth of this matter, I've learned many things that the
mainstream media outlets have not covered, have ignored or have downplayed.
British writer, Aldous Huxley once wrote, "Facts do not cease to exist because
they are ignored. "
Just as I was about to send this newsletter out, I learned of a Los Angeles
attorney Gloria Allred reporting that she planned to hold a news conference
with one of her clients Thursday afternoon to make an announcement regarding
the case of Terri Schiavo.
Allred said the client is a businessman who has deposited $1 million into her
law firm's trust account to offer Terri Schiavo's husband, Michael, if he
agrees to certain conditions to keep his wife alive after the feeding tube is
scheduled to be removed. It will be interesting to see how the husband
responds to such a juicy offer.
I've not presented every piece of information here. I couldn't. This little
newsletter could not handle it all. What I'm presenting in this edition are
pieces of the story that are clearly relevant, yet have not made it big in the
mainstream media, if at all. I've also included some opinions from persons with disabilities,
advocates, attorneys and other parents.
Hopefully, those of you who are fully enlightened regarding the facts
surrounding this debate will forgive me for packing this edition with things
you might already know. I'm equally hopeful, that the rest of you will
at least read the material presented here with an open mind. For it is as Paul
Harvey would say-The rest of the story.
Till next time-
John
Back to Table of contents
|
"The man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it."
-Woodrow Wilson |
by Andrea Williams
The medical profession has long been asked to change the phrase vegetative
state because it ends with people getting called vegetables - of all the
dehumanizing bull that is propagated by the medical profession this is one of
the worst. It is unethical, immoral and it is damn stupid. It wasn't that long
ago people were buried alive because they didn't know how to tell if someone
was breathing or not. and they do it still, because they don't know how to
communicate with someone who is in this state. Breathing isn't enough anymore.
A quick look at the statistics on divorce and brain injury will tell you how
reliable the spouse is in a situation like this. He wants a divorce and that
would be fine. He does not have the right to kill her because he wants to be
let out of his responsibility to her. Unfortunately the attention goes to her
husband because he is still seen as a human being no matter how horrific his
behavior - he talks - so he is still human. Is he really? I read an article
that says she chose him by marriage so she trusted him to make this decision
for her. Lots of us did that and found out that we had misplaced our trust. I
shudder on this one, because I know too well what an angry spouse can and will
do to you when you are unable to defend yourself due to a brain injury. And I
have seen it happen too many times.
An examination of the "science" of vegetative state will show you that we
don't know much about this state of consciousness. Non-responsive coma,
minimally responsive coma, those make sense and can be defended. People under
anesthesia have a similar consciousness and we know they hear and respond to
what is said to them.
When I argued this label was immoral, I got no where. When I argued that it
was unethical, I got no where. Even the argument that it was unscientific got
me minimal response. But when I said, gentleman, it wasn't that long ago that
your profession buried people alive because they could not tell they were
breathing or had a heartbeat. With all the advances in medicine in the last
decade do you want to risk that in 20 years your own profession will be
pointing to you and saying, "Can you imagine they caused people to die because
they did not know how to communicate with them?" That will be your legacy,
that will be the legacy you leave to your grandchildren. - then they began to
budge at the thought of having to bear the brunt of their decision. By then I
was on my feet and I said, "You don't know these people are not communicating,
you only know that you do not know how to listen!
These are people, not vegetables and they know full well the consequences of
referring to them this way, it effects their care, the language that is used
around them and the efforts that are extended to listen. They are guilty; as
guilty as anyone who takes another's life. An M.D. does not give them that
right.
Let us all be warned of the danger of not having an advance directive. It
won't defend you from traditional medicine dehumanizing you, but it will stop
them from killing you. This situation is gut wrenching, it always is, there
are 5.3 million of us out here. Most of us talk, few of us get the assistance
we need. Fewer still are being listened to whether we talk or not. When loving
families make the decision to pull life support, it is a horrible thing for
them. When an unloving family member is allowed to make that decision so they
can "get on with their life" it is simply murder.
Every 21 seconds someone in this country sustains a traumatic brain injury.
Think about that.
Andrea Williams
Back to Table of contents
|
"Each wave of the women's movement has asked the impossible, and in so doing,
galvanized huge numbers of women. Speaking the unspeakable, asking for the
moon, these are what the women's movement did once upon a time. They did it
because women's lives were at stake. Women's lives are still at stake. Terri
Schiavo is a woman, remember? That's all that matters. If denying equal
protection under the law to women with disabilities through right to die laws
isn't "violence against women" just what is?" - Ingrid Tischer, San Francisco |
Representative Dave Weldon (R-FL) a medical doctor, and Senator Mel
Martinez (R-FL) have just introduced the "Incapacitated Persons Legal
Protection Act" (H.R. 1151, S. 539).
If passed into law, this bill would make an immediate impact toward
protecting the lives of people like Terri Schiavo, by providing a final
avenue of review of these cases, insuring that the constitutional rights
of a person with a disability are not trampled, simply because that
person is unable to speak for him- or herself.
The legislation would give Terri and others in similar situations the
same constitutional protection of due process as death row inmates.
Already this week, attorneys for Terri's parents have filed six
different motions to help save their daughter, all of which are now on
appeal.
Dr. Weldon's legislation would allow Terri to have her own counsel who
can argue her case, a right given to any criminal in the United States.
Terri is, of course, not a criminal but a woman fighting for her life.
As Terri's fight intensifies, I cannot be more frank on the fate of this
poor woman if her husband has his way.
If Terri's feeding tubes are removed, she will face a slow death through
starvation, which can take anywhere from 7 to 30 days. Terri's parents,
as do Congressman Weldon and I, truly believe Terri is alive and
deserves to continue living. Please call, e-mail, AND fax your U.S.
representative to support Terri's Law -- truly life-saving legislation.
Time is of the essence.
With time running out for Terri, we must take immediate action to create
a groundswell of support for this legislation. By reaching out to
lawmakers and urging them to support this vital piece of life-affirming
legislation, we can fight for Terri's life.
Here are three ways you can make a powerful difference in the battle to
save Terri:
+ + Action Item #1--Contact Your Senators!
Please call your senators and urge them to stand for those who cannot
speak for themselves by co-sponsoring the "Incapacitated Persons Legal
Protection Act" (S. 539).
Remember, time is of the essence, so call as soon as possible!
+ + Action Item #2-- Contact Your Representative Today!
After contacting each of your senators, take a few extra moments to
contact your state representative, urging him or her to give full
and immediate support to the "Incapacitated Persons Legal Protection
Act" (H.R. 1151). Make certain that your representative understands this
bill will benefit those citizens who simply cannot fight for themselves.
If you don't know who your representative is, call the Capitol
Switchboard, and they will connect you quickly. Here is the number:
202-224-3121
+ + Action Item #3--Thank Rep. Weldon and Sen. Martinez!
Finally, please thank Representative Weldon and Senator Martinez for
taking a courageous and principled stand on this issue! Too often,
elected officials hear only complaints from unhappy constituents. It is
essential that we support and praise our representatives in Washington
for doing the right thing!
Representative Dave Weldon: 202-225-3671
Senator Mel Martinez: 202-224-3041
Back to Table of contents
|
"You have to know one big thing and stick with it. The leaders who
had one very big idea and one very big commitment. This permitted them
to create something. Those are the ones who leave a legacy." -Irving
Kristol |
If possible, make plans now to attend the Center's Rose Rally for Terri,
at 3 p.m., Sunday, March 13, on the steps of the "Old" Florida State
Capitol, in the Capitol Courtyard, Tallahassee.
We are expecting a substantial turnout, and we would love for you or
your church group to attend this prayerful effort to build support for
saving Terri Schiavo's life.
For information on attending, please click here:
http://www.reclaimamerica.org
If you cannot make the trip to Tallahassee in support of Terri, please
consider helping to build congressional
support for the "Incapacitated Persons Legal Protection Act" (H.R. 1151,
S.539) by contacting your federal elected officials.
Thank you in advance for doing your part to help save the life of Terri
Schiavo and numerous other Americans in similar situations.
Back to Table of contents
|
"The whole history of the progress
of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august
claims have been born of earnest struggle. If there is no struggle,
there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet
deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the
ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the
ocean without the awful roar of its many waters." -Frederick Douglass |
http://www.fight4terri.blogspot.com/
http://www.notdeadyet.org/
Florida Governor Jeb Bush (at 850.488.4441 or
jeb.bush@myflorida.com)
Florida Senate President Tom Lee (at 850.487.5072 or
lee.tom.web@flsenate.gov)
Florida House Speaker Allan G. Bense (at 850.488.1450 or
speaker@myfloridahouse.gov.)
Back to Table of contents
|
"I have often asked myself why human beings have any rights at all. I
always come to the conclusion that human rights, human freedoms, and
human dignity have their deepest roots somewhere outside the perceptible
world. These values are as powerful as they are because, under certain
circumstances, people accept them without compulsion and are willing to
die for them." -Vaclav Havel |
*
Eye-Witness Account
on Terri's Current Condition
Monday, January 03, 2005
By Barbara Weller
This past Christmas Eve day, 2004, I went to visit Terri Schiavo with her
parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, her sister, her niece, and Attorney David
Gibbs III. The visit took place at the Woodside Hospice for about 45 minutes
just before noon.
When I knew I was going to visit Terri with her parents, I had no idea what to
expect. I was prepared for the possibility that the Schindlers love their
daughter and sister so much that they might imagine behaviors by Terri that
aren't actually evident to others. The media and Mr. Schiavo clearly give the
impression that Terri is in a coma or comatose state and engages only in
non-purposeful and reflexive movements and responses. I am a mother and a
grandmother, as well as one of the Schindlers’ attorneys, and I could
understand how parents might imagine behavior and purposeful activity that is
not really there. I was prepared to be as objective as I could be during this
visit and not to be disappointed at anything I saw or experienced.
I was truly surprised at what I saw from the moment we entered the little room
where Terri is confined. The room is a little wider than the width of two
single beds and about as long as the average bedroom, with plenty of room for
us to stand at the foot of her bed. Terri is on the first floor and there is a
lovely view to the outside grounds of the facility. The room is entered by a
short hallway, however, and there is no way for Terri to see out into the
hallway or for anyone in the hallway to observe Terri.
From the moment we entered the room, my impression was that Terri was very
purposeful and interactive and she seemed very curious about the presence of
obvious strangers in her room. Terri was not in bed, but was in her chair,
which has a lounge chair appearance and elevates her head at about a 30-degree
angle. She was dressed and washed, her hair combed, and she was covered with a
holiday blanket. There were no tubes of any kind attached to her body. She was
completely free of any restraints that would have indicated any type of
artificial life support. Not even her feeding tube was attached and
functioning when we entered, as she is not fed 24 hours a day.
The thing that surprised me the most about Terri as I took my turn to greet
her by the side of her chair was how beautiful she is. I would have expected
to see someone with a sallow and gray complexion and a sick looking
countenance. Instead, I saw a very pretty woman with a peaches and cream
complexion and a lovely smile, which she even politely extended to me as I
introduced myself to her. I was amazed that someone who had not been outside
for so many years and who received such minimal health care could look so
beautiful. She appeared to have an inner light radiating from her face. I was
truly taken aback by her beauty, particularly under the adverse circumstances
in which she has found herself for so many years.
Terri’s parents, sister, and niece went immediately to greet Terri when we
entered the room and stood in turn directly beside her head, stroking her
face, kissing her and talking quietly with her. When she heard their voices,
and particularly her mother's voice, Terri instantly turned her head towards
them and smiled. Terri established eye contact with her family, particularly
with her mother, who spent the most time with her during our visit. It was
obvious that she recognized the voices in the room with the exception of one.
Although her mother was talking to her at the time, she obviously had heard a
new voice and exhibited a curious demeanor. Attorney Gibbs was having a
conversation near the door with Terri’s sister. His voice is very deep and
resonant and Terri obviously picked it up. Her eyes widened as if to say,
“What’s that new sound I hear?” She scanned the room with her eyes, even
turning her head in his direction, until she found Attorney Gibbs and the
location of the new voice and her eyes rested momentarily in his direction.
She then returned to interacting with her mother.
When her mother was close to her, Terri’s whole face lit up. She smiled. She
looked directly at her mother and she made all sorts of happy sounds. When her
mother talked to her, Terri was quiet and obviously listening. When she
stopped, Terri started vocalizing. The vocalizations seemed to be a pattern,
not merely random or reflexive at all. There is definitely a pattern of Terri
having a conversation with her mother as best she can manage. Initially, she
used the vocalization of “uh’uh” but without seeming to mean it as a way of
saying “no”, just as a repeated speech pattern. She then began to make
purposeful grunts in response to her mother’s conversation. She made the same
sorts of sound with her father and sister, but not to the same extent or as
delightedly as with her mother. She made no verbal response to her niece or to
Attorney Gibbs and myself, but she did appear to pay attention to our words to
her.
The whole experience was rather moving. Terri definitely has a personality.
Her whole demeanor definitely changes when her mother speaks with her. She
lights up and appears to be delighted at the interaction. She has an entirely
different reaction to her father who jokes with her and has several standing
jokes that he uses when he enters and exits her presence. She appears to
merely “tolerate” her father, as a child does when she says “stop” but really
means, “this is fun.” When her father greets her, he always does the same
thing. He says, “here comes the hug” and hugs her. He then says, “you know
what’s coming next---the kiss.” Her father has a scratchy mustache and both
times when he went through this little joke routine with her, she laughed in a
way she did not do with anyone else. When her father is ready to plant the
kiss on her cheek, she immediately makes a face her family calls the “lemon
face.” She puckers her lips, screws up her whole face, and turns away from
him, as if making ready for the scratchy assault on her cheek that she knows
is coming. She did the exact same thing both times that her father initiated
this little routine joke between the two of them.
The interactions with her family and our appearance in her room appeared to
require some effort and exertion from Terri. From time to time, she would
close her eyes as if to rest. This happened primarily when no one was paying
particular attention to her, but we were talking among ourselves. After a few
minutes or when one of the visitors approached her and started to talk
directly to her again, Terri would open her eyes and begin her grunting sounds
again in response to their conversations. Although I approached her, leaned
close and stroked her arms and spoke to her, she did not verbally respond to
me.
Terri’s hands are curled up around little soft cylinders that help her not to
injure herself. I understand that these contractures are likely very painful,
although there was a time when Terri was receiving simple motion therapy when
her hands and arms relaxed and were no longer as constricted. When the therapy
was discontinued by order of her guardian and the court, the contractures
returned. These contractures would apparently be avoidable if Terri were given
the simple range of motion therapy she previously received. It is very sad to
observe firsthand these conditions that make her life more difficult, but that
would be correctable with little effort.
When we were preparing to leave, the interactions with Terri changed. First,
she went through the joke routine with her father and the “lemon face.” When
her niece said goodbye to her, Terri did not react. Nor did she react to me or
to Attorney Gibbs when we said our goodbyes to her. When her sister went to
her to say goodbye, Terri’s verbalizations changed dramatically. Instead of
the happy grunting and “uh uh” sounds she had been making throughout the
visit, her verbalizations at these goodbyes changed to a very low and
different sound that appeared to come from deep in her throat and was almost
like a growl. She first made the sound when her sister said goodbye and then,
amazingly to me, she made exactly the same sound when her mother said goodbye
to her. It seemed Terri was visibly upset that they were leaving. She almost
appeared to be trying to cling to them, although this impression came only
from her changed facial expression and sounds, since her hands cannot move. It
appeared like she did not want to be alone and knew they were leaving. It was
definitely apparent in the short time I was there that her emotions changed—it
was apparent when she was happy and enjoying herself, when she was amused,
when she was resting from her exertion to communicate, and when she was sad at
her guests leaving. It was readily apparent and surprising that her mood
changed so often in a short 45-minute visit.
I was pleasantly surprised to observe Terri’s purposeful and varied behaviors
with the various members of her family and with Attorney Gibbs and myself. I
never imagined Terri would be so active, curious, and purposeful. She watched
people intently, obviously was attempting to communicate with each one in
various ways and with various facial expressions and sounds. She was
definitely not in a coma, not even close. This visit certainly shed more light
for me on why the Schindlers are fighting so hard to protect her, to get her
medical care and rehabilitative assistance, and to spend all they have to
protect her life.
I realize that Terri has good days and bad days. There are obviously days when
she does not interact with her family, as they had previously told us. There
are also apparently days when Terri is even more interactive and responsive to
them than she was on the day I visited. Since this visit I am more convinced
than ever that the Schindlers are not just parents who refuse to let go of
their daughter. There really is a lot going on with their daughter and
potentially, it seemed obvious to me, Terri could improve even more with
appropriate care and 24 hour a day love that can only come from a dedicated
family. As I watched her, my foremost thought was that on the next day,
Christmas, Terri should not have been confined to her small room in a hospice
center, nice as that room was, but that she should have been gathered around
the Christmas dinner table enjoying the holiday with her family.
Source:
http://www.reclaimamerica.org/Pages/News/newspage.asp?story=2327
Back to Table of contents
|
"If you want to be free, there is but one way; it is to guarantee an
equally full measure of liberty to all your neighbors. There is no
other." -Carl Schurz (1829 - 1906) |
What is
"habeas corpus"?
"Habeas Corpus" is the Latin name for a special legal procedure, dating back
to England in the Middle Ages, by which a court can review whether someone is
being unlawfully deprived of liberty. It is considered a fundamental
source of protection of liberty, referred to in the U.S. Constitution.
Under "habeas corpus," how does a federal court review a state court
decision?
When every state court effort has failed, the person denied liberty files a
petition in federal district court, which considers whether federally
protected rights have been violated and which, in appropriate circumstances,
can conduct fact-finding procedures.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Terri's case. Does that
mean lower federal courts can't do so?
No. When the Supreme Court chooses not to hear a particular appeal, that
is not a ruling on the merits and sets no precedent. In fact, most
habeas corpus proceedings in federal district court come after the Supreme
Court has refused to consider a "direct" appeal from the highest state court.
Isn't habeas corpus for people who are in jail?
Habeas corpus began as a means for prisoners to get court review of their
detention, and the law refers to those who are "in custody." However, as
the U.S. Supreme Court noted in a 1968 case, "The use of habeas corpus has not
been restricted to situations in which the applicant is in actual, physical
custody. In the state courts, habeas corpus has been widely used by parents
disputing over which is the fit and proper person to have custody of their
child."
Why does Congress need to act?
It is unclear that the current statutes and legal precedents give Terri
Schiavo or other incapacitated individuals a right to habeas corpus
protection. Congress has frequently expanded, contracted, and modified both
who has a right to habeas corpus and the standards for habeas corpus review.
Congress has the clear constitutional authority to amend the law to make
provision for cases like Terri's.
When a case like Terri's has been considered by the state courts, why
should we add an extra layer of federal court review?
To avoid the danger that an innocent person
might be put to death, those whom state courts have convicted of mass murder
or other capital crimes have long had the recognized right to federal court
habeas corpus review. If we accord that right to someone like John Wayne
Gacy or Ted Bundy, shouldn't we give at least equal protection to someone with
a disability, charged with no crime, who is at risk of being starved and
dehydrated to death?
What does H.R. 1151 do?
The Act simply identifies incapacitated individuals at risk of having their
food and hydration removed due to a dispute as explicitly eligible for habeas
corpus protection.
Why should Congress Act so quickly?
The state court has ordered that no further stays to remove the food and
hydration tubes that nourish Terri Schiavo will be granted. Furthermore,
the court has ordered that those tubes are to be removed at 1:00 PM Friday,
March 18, 2005.
Back to Table of contents
|
"It is curious that physical courage should be so common in the
world and moral courage so rare." -Mark Twain (1835 - 1910) |
*
Silence Must Be Heard (Song
Lyrics)
By ENIGMA
Look into the other's eyes,
Many frustrations
Read between the lines,
No words, just vibrations
Don't ignore hidden desires
Pay attention, you're playing with fire
Silence must be heard, noise should be observed
The time has come to learn, that silence...
Silence must be heard
Or diamonds will burn, friendly cards will turn
Cause silence has the right to be heard
People talk too much for what they have to say
Words without a meaning, just fading away
Silence must be heard, noise should be observed
The time has come to learn, that silence...
Silence must be heard
Or diamonds will burn, friendly cards will turn
Cause silence has the right to be heard
(Editor's note: Lyrics originally published on a CD called The Screen
Behind The Mirror. It is also known as Enigma 4. Originally published by
Virgin Records in 2000.)
Back to Table of contents
|
"The true civilization is where every man gives to every other every
right that he claims for himself." -Robert Ingersoll (1833 - 1899) |
Most Common Questions and Answers
Q -If Terri hasn't recovered after all these years of therapy,
why not let go?
A -Terri hasn't had meaningful therapy since 1991, but many
credible physicians say she can benefit from it.
Q -Why can't Terri just divorce?
A -Terri's husband/guardian speaks for her. She cannot divorce
without his permission
Q -Does Terri have an advanced directive or any wishes about her
healthcare?
A -Terri never signed any directive or living will and there is
no evidence that she foresaw her present situation.
Q -Why do Terri's family fight to keep her alive? Shouldn't they
let her husband decide?
A -Terri's husband has started another family and has gone on
with his life. Terri's family want to provide her therapy and a safe
home.
Q -Is Terri receiving life support?
A -Not in the traditional sense. Terri only receives food and
fluids via a simple tube.
Q -Isn't removing her tube a natural and dignified way to die?
A -No. Dehydration and starvation cause horrific effects and are
anything but peaceful.
Back to Table of contents
|
"We must give lengthy deliberation to what
has to be decided once and for all." -Publilius Syrus |
Needs to be replaced.
by Frank Tetto
Brain Damage is also a term that is often
tossed around and places individuals at risk. The local paper did an
article on my daughter and the headline was brain damaged girl...Damage
in my mind indicates permanency and a need to replacement. Damage is
used primarily in reference to things. When things are damaged they are
all too often discarded. When I speak about my daughter it is always
about her injury. Injury heals and people recover from an injury. Do any
of us say we damaged our hand when we experience an injury.
I have heard even Terri's family describe her as brain damaged. Language
is very powerful and the incorrect language places real people at risk.
The most amazing thing in reference to G-tubes is not only that they
were never considered artificial means of life-support in the most
famous right to life case.
Karen Ann Quinlan was taken off life-support after a long and protracted
court case initiated by her parents.
Karen Ann Quinlan lived another 10 years
after being taken off life support. During this time she received all
her nutrition via a g-tube. It is amazing to me that even if we believe
that Terri Schiavo made an off-hand remark about not wanting to live on
artificial life-support how or why Michael, the courts or anyone could
believe that Terri included a g-tube in her statement. I doubt Terri
even knew that there was such a thing as a G-tube. Until my daughter's
accident, I did not know anything about G-tubes and I used to read at
least 4 newspapers a day.
My daughter, who is now 7 years post injury, has had a g-tube for 7
years. Maria was labeled PVS or brain dead, and we were asked about
organ donation.
Maria has had the opportunity to have access to good medical treatment
and interventions. There is no doubt in my mind that if we had not
fought for Maria to receive the necessary medical treatments and
therapies as well as stayed 24/7 by her side during that first 9 months
post injury that Maria would either be dead or less responsive than
Terri Schiavo.
If Michael Schiavo wants to honor Terri's wishes, he should consider if
Terri would want to continue in a marriage with a man who lives with
another woman and with whom he has fathered two children. It appears
that Mr. Schiavo honors only his wife's wishes when he chooses. It also
appears he honors only the wishes he selectively chooses.
The biggest question in reference to this entire issue and one not
reported in the paper is why it took Michael several years and a million
dollar settlement before he first decided to honor Terri's wishes.
Note-when we were asked about brain death
and my daughter being an organ donor, I just felt the question was
premature. My point is that I am not saying individuals and families
should never be given a choice to make an informed decision in reference
to maintaining someone on life support. I simply believe nutrition no
matter how given does not equal life-support.
Back to Table of contents
|
"Children might or might not be a blessing, but to create them and then
fail them was surely damnation." -Lois McMaster Bujold |
by Diane Coleman,
J.D.
Seventeen national disability rights organizations joined in an amicus brief
in the recent Florida Supreme Court proceedings in the Schiavo case, the third
disability amicus brief filed in support of the Schindler family's efforts to
ensure that their daughter continues to receive food and water.
The main point of the first disability brief was to urge the courts to require
a genuine application of the due process standard that Terri's wishes be
proven by clear and convincing evidence, consistent with the Cruzan standard
set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court. That standard is vital to the
survival of hundreds of thousands of people with severe disabilities in
guardianship because, as numerous studies prove, guardians too often value the
life of their ward far less than the ward values his or her own life.
(See, e.g., Psychiatric News July 16, 2004, Volume 39 Number 14, © 2004
American Psychiatric Association p. 32,
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/39/14/32-a. ) This
is not rocket science - it is social science and, moreover, common sense.
The findings of the lower guardianship court that Terri would have rejected
tube feeding in her present circumstances are so powerfully contradicted that
they cannot meet the Cruzan standard. The following are some of the
reasons why this is so obvious to organization's as prominent as the National
Spinal Cord Injury Association, the National Council on Independent Living and
The Arc of the United States (formerly the Association for Retarded Citizens):
·
Michael Schiavo pursued and won a large malpractice settlement after
testifying that he would use Terri's portion of the proceeds on her
rehabilitation. Only after securing the settlement did he then allege
that Terri would refuse food and water by tube. Over the subsequent
years, he spent over $550,000, the majority, of her rehabilitation funds on
attorneys to secure a court order that would result in her death. If she
had been dehydrated to death when he first requested it, if her family had not
resisted, he would have received $700,000 in Terri's rehabilitation funds.
·
At the time when Terri allegedly stated that she would not want to be kept
alive on life support (before 1990), the widely held public concept of "life
support" was a ventilator. The general public did not think of simple
tube feeding as "life support." So, even assuming for the sake of
discussion that Terri made the alleged comment, she is highly unlikely to have
meant it to include food and water by tube.
·
The original guardian ad litem brought into the case long ago at Michael
Schiavo's request found that the evidence of Terri's wishes was not
sufficiently credible due to Michael's conflict of interest.
·
One friend of Terri's has stated on CNN that they once argued over the Quinlan
case, involving a New Jersey woman in PVS, because Terri objected to the
friend labeling Quinlan the "state vegetable." The legal dispute was
about Quinlan's ventilator, which was ultimately removed, but not her feeding
tube, and she lived for ten more years.
·
The only witnesses to Terri's alleged statement against life support are from
Michael Schiavo's side of the family.
·
The affidavit of a speech pathologist from the Rehabilitation Institute of
Chicago, the number one such facility in the country, asserts that Terri
swallows her own saliva and should, therefore, receive a new swallowing test
and, if indicated, swallowing therapy. Michael Schiavo has opposed all
efforts to attempt this course and wean Terri from the feeding tube.
In short, in our view, Michael Schiavo's conduct does not pass what might be
referred to as "the smell test," and his assertions are not sufficiently
credible to support the lower court rulings in this case. The failure of
the appellate courts to overturn this life-and-death error is deeply
disturbing to people with disabilities. We would compare this case to a
death penalty conviction in which the courts dotted all their "I's" and
crossed all their "T's", but have been proven wrong, as the courts were in
numerous cases here in Illinois. In such cases, the legislative and/or
executive branches should step in to protect the individual's life. In
the context of the death penalty, you obviously agree. In a press
release yesterday, the ACLU of Florida "asked the Governor to suspend further
executions during the commission's review of Florida's death penalty."
That was the point of the third disability brief filed in the Schiavo case -
the legislature and Governor needed to correct the errors of the judicial
branch. We were deeply disappointed that you not only failed to defend
Terri's due process right to be protected from a wrongful decision by a
surrogate and the courts, but actually supported the surrogate trying to kill
her.
In addition to the insufficiency of the evidence to prove what a legally
competent Terri Schiavo would have wanted in her present circumstances, people
with disabilities would urge you to reconsider the wishes of the disabled
Terri Schiavo. On two or three occasions, we have seen video of Terri
and Michael taken in the early years after her injury, when they were pursuing
the malpractice case. She was up in a wheelchair, wore make up, and was
clearly alert and attempting to speak. Since deciding that his wife
should die, Michael Schiavo has deprived her of the basic stimulation of life
that anyone needs, especially someone who has had a brain injury.
Reportedly, she has not been permitted out of her room in three years; she has
not been allowed TV; and Michael has required care-giving staff to "do their
business and leave the room." As a direct result of this horrible
neglect of her basic human needs, it is not surprising that Terri's condition
has deteriorated. What is surprising is that Michael Schiavo has been
permitted to use the increasing listlessness resulting from years of this
crushing neglect to substantiate the assertion that Terri is in PVS, which is
arguably a statutory prerequisite to a Florida guardian removing a feeding
tube. Why is he allowed to legally profit from this grotesque
wrongdoing?
People with disabilities look at Terri Schiavo and see a severely disabled
woman with a powerful will to live. Competency is not an all-or-nothing
thing. That's why the law provides for limited guardianship, which seeks
to respect the choices of people who may not be fully independent in
decision-making. The early videos clearly show a disabled Terri,
choosing to live. The Terri of today, and all people in guardianship, deserve
protection of their rights not to be deprived of life without due process by a
guardian who feels that their ward is as good as dead, better off dead, or
that the guardian himself or herself would be better off without the ward.
(Excerpted from a letter to the American Civil Liberties Union written by
Diane Coleman,
J.D. President, Not Dead Yet.
http://www.notdeadyet.org/ )
Back to Table of contents
|
"Underlying the whole scheme of civilization is the confidence men have in
each other, confidence in their integrity, confidence in their honesty,
confidence in their future." -Bourke Cockran |
B y
Walter M. Weber
The case involving Terri Schiavo continues to be
litigated in the Florida courts as Terri faces a March 18th date when
the court said her feeding tube can be removed. The ACLJ has offered
assistance to the Florida attorneys representing Mary and Robert
Schindler, the parents of Terri Schiavo. The ACLJ continues to urge
Florida Governor Jeb Bush and the state legislature to intervene in
Terri's case.
As you may remember, the first attempt by the Governor and legislature
to help Terri resulted in the passage of "Terri's Law" -- a Florida
law that ordered feeding and hydration tubes to be restored to Terri
after a state court ordered them removed. "Terri's Law" was declared
unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court. The ACLJ, which
represented the Schindlers in the matter, filed a brief at the Supreme
Court of the United States in support of Governor Bush's request for
the high court to take the case. The Supreme Court refused and now
Terri's life is once again in the hands of the Florida courts.
ACLJ Senior Litigation Counsel, Walter Weber, who worked on the
Schiavo case, wrote this commentary about the damaging and faulty
decision reached by the Florida Supreme Court last fall.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of Florida unveiled its unanimous decision last fall
striking down Terri's Law, the Florida statute that authorized
Governor Jeb Bush to save Terri Schiavo's life.
Observers have criticized the decision as a frustration of the will of
the people, as an exercise in judicial arrogance, and most
disturbingly as a green light for the adulterous Michael Schiavo to
seek yet another court order terminating the tube feeding of his
brain-injured wife.
All true. Yet the decision is something else as well: an
embarrassingly bad legal decision.
The seven supreme court justices hinged their ruling on two
constitutional doctrines that supposedly doomed Terri's Law:
separation of powers and unlawful delegation of authority.
Separation of powers, of course, is a familiar concept. The basic
notion is that the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of
government should not usurp each other's functions.
In the Schiavo case, the state courts had previously ruled that
Michael Schiavo, as Terri's guardian, should withdraw the tube that
provided food and fluids to Terri. Because Terri's Law "allows the
executive branch" (Governor Bush) "to interfere with the final
judicial determination" in Terri's case (i.e., to order the tube
replaced), the state supreme court declared, "it is without question
an invasion of the authority of the judicial branch" and thus
unconstitutional.
Nonsense.
Every time a governor pardons someone convicted of a crime, he
"overturns" a judicial determination of guilt and imposition of
sentence. So what? The courts gave their opinion, but the governor
decided, for whatever reason (perhaps new DNA evidence of innocence),
respectfully to differ.
Or suppose a court has awarded custody of a child to someone (for
example, in divorce proceedings or through an adoption). Does
"separation of powers" mean the state child protection agency -- an
executive branch entity -- may not intervene if it has strong evidence
that the custodian is abusing the child?
If I win a court fight with a rival claimant over title to some
property, does that mean I can raise a "separation of powers"
objection when the local government condemns that same property for a
new highway?
Must police ignore threatening behavior by individuals recently
released from mental institutions because courts have concluded they
are "not dangerous to others"?
The fact is, the legislature and the governor "interfere" all the time
with matters the courts have previously sorted out. If that were
unconstitutional, law enforcement and legislation would be practically
impossible. The two non-judicial branches would have to spend all
their time tiptoeing around every case a court had decided on
anything.
The state supreme court's second rationale for overturning Terri's Law
is similarly flawed.
In Florida, the courts have adopted (made up?) a rule that says it is
unconstitutional for the legislature to give the governor "too much"
discretion in carrying out a program, as that would be an "unlawful
delegation" of legislative power to decide law and policy. How much
discretion is "too much"? The courts will let you know, thanks.
(Curiously, there is apparently no corresponding ban on courts
assuming too much power over decisions of law and policy.)
Obviously, there are some fundamental problems with this judge-made
doctrine of unlawful delegation. But even accepting the doctrine as
legitimate, the state supreme court's invocation of it against Terri's
Law is screwy at best.
The Florida Supreme Court has already ruled that a fluid standard like
"the public interest" is sufficient to defeat a claim of "too much"
discretion. The governor's power to pardon criminals, of course, is
quintessentially discretionary. And a host of other laws authorizing
the governor to act -- in emergencies, in the transfer of state land
for federal projects like lighthouses and parks, in staying the
execution of insane persons -- employ such subjective standards as the
governor's "opinion" or what the governor "deems proper," if they
specify any standard at all.
Terri's Law carefully cabins the scope of the governor's authority to
spare from death certain vulnerable disabled people, while leaving the
ultimate fact-based judgment calls to the governor. That limited grant
of executive discretion easily passes muster under the state supreme
court's "unlawful delegation" test. (And if it doesn't, someone had
better let Governor Bush know his far broader discretion to respond to
the emergencies caused by the recent wave of hurricanes is probably
unconstitutional!)
The Supreme Court of Florida made no effort to reconcile its decision
in Bush v. Schiavo with the pardon power, the governor's emergency
powers, and so forth. Instead, the court's opinion reads like a
conclusion in search of a justification.
Maybe that's what it was.
(Walter M. Weber, Senior Litigation Counsel with the American Center
for Law and Justice, is one of the attorneys who represented Terri
Schiavo's parents, Mary and Robert Schindler, in Bush v. Schiavo.)
Back to Table of contents
|
"The enemy is anybody who's going to get you
killed, no matter which side he's on." -Joseph Heller (1923 - ),
Catch 22 |
by John Pistorius
According to the BIA website, The
mission of the BIA is "Creating a better future through brain injury
prevention, research, education and advocacy."
The Vision of the BIA is
"A world where all preventable brain injuries are prevented, all
unpreventable brain injuries are minimized and all individuals who have
experienced brain injury maximize their quality of life."
I wrote to the BIA USA March 8,
2005. After reading the response I received, I wondered; "Who are they
advocating for and who's future will be better?" (Notice that the vision is
about Quality of life not Quantity.)
In my letter, I asked: "Has your
organization taken a position in the matters regarding the Terri Schiavo
case? If not, I'd like to urge you to do so. The outcome of this case can
positively or adversely affect individuals who experience TBI."
In response to my written request for
clarification, Susan Connors, President and CEO of the BIA USA wrote the
following:
"The
Brain Injury Association of America has not taken a position on the Terri
Schiavo case. We do not take positions or comment on individual cases -- we
believe these are private decisions best made by and between individuals,
family members and their physicians. The Association has a policy statement
on individuals with impaired consciousness. You may obtain a copy from our
website at www.biausa.org, click Government Relations, scroll to position
statements.
Thank you for your interest in the Brain Injury Association of America."
Susan Connors
President and CEO
I replied with the following:
"Thank you for your prompt reply Ms.
Connors.
I fully understand the position of the BIAUSA in this matter. One thing that
I would like to add is that while on the surface, this case appears to be an
isolated, individual case, below the surface is a far reaching undercurrent
that could potentially affect many of the people that the BIAUSA claims to
represent or serve.
By not taking a position, the BIA is taking a position in opposition to its
constituents."
After receiving Ms. Connors reply and
sending my response, I read the BIA of America's policy statement. One
sentence stood out to me. "In the event that an individual has not executed
an advance directive, the Brain Injury Association of America supports the
notion that all decisions of a surrogate decision maker should be consistent
with the best interests and expressed wishes of the individual with the
disability."
In the absence of written
documentation, how can the word of a surrogate be used to validate the
"expressed wishes" of the person with the disability? It cannot. All
opinions and facts aside, how can we say that Terri Schiavo's death would be
in her best interest?
I believe the BIA of America has
dropped a very serious ball. How can the BIA leadership express its vision of
a world where "all individuals who have experienced brain injury maximize
their quality of life" yet not respond to the attempted killing of a woman
who has experienced brain injury? Does death equal maximized quality of
life?
I wrote to every state affiliate of the
BIA also. Two responded. Neither offered support for the positive outcome of
this issue. Both said they had not given it any thought, yet.
Martin Luther King Jr. said it best
when he commented, "In the end, we will remember not the words of our
enemies, but the silence of our friends."
Back to Table of contents
|
"We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal;
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights;
that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." -US
Declaration of Independence |
MYTH: Terri is PVS (Persistent vegetative state)
FACT: The definition of PVS in
Florida Statue 765.101:
Persistent vegetative state means a permanent and irreversible condition
of unconsciousness in which there is:
(a) The
absence of voluntary action or cognitive behavior of ANY kind.
(b) An inability to communicate or interact purposefully with the
environment.
Terri's
behavior does not meet the medical or statutory definition of persistent
vegetative state. Terri responds to stimuli, tries to communicate
verbally, follows limited commands, laughs or cries in interaction with
loved ones, physically distances herself from irritating or painful
stimulation and watches loved ones as they move around her. None of
these behaviors are simple reflexes and are, instead, voluntary and
cognitive. Though Terri has limitations, she does interact purposefully
with her environment.
MYTH: Terri does not need rehabilitation
FACT:
Florida Statute 744.3215 Rights of
persons determined incapacitated:
(1) A
person who has been determined to be incapacitated retains the right
(i) To receive necessary services and rehabilitation.
This is
a retained right that a guardian cannot take away.
Additionally, it does not make exception for PVS patients. Terri has
illegally been denied rehabilitation - as many nurses have sworn in
affidavits.
MYTH: Removal of food was both legal and court-ordered.
FACT: The courts had only allowed removal of Terri's feeding tube, not
regular food and water. Terri's husband illegally ordered this. The law
only allows the removal of "life-prolonging procedures," not regular
food and water:
Florida Statute 765.309 Mercy
killing or euthanasia not authorized; suicide distinguished. Nothing in
this chapter shall be construed to condone, authorize, or approve mercy
killing or euthanasia, or to permit any affirmative or deliberate act
or omission to end life other than to permit the natural process of
dying.
MYTH: Many doctors have said that there
is no hope for her.
FACT: Dr. Victor Gambone testified that he visits Terri 3 times a year.
His visits last for approximately 10 minutes. He also testified, after
viewing the court videotapes at Terri’s recent trial, that he was
surprised to see Terri’s level of awareness. This doctor is part of a
team hand-picked by her husband, Michael Schiavo, shortly before he
filed to have Terri’s feeding removed. Contrary to Schiavo’s team, 14
independent medical professionals (6 of them neurologists) have given
either statements or testimony that Terri is NOT in a Persistent
Vegetative State. Additionally, there has never been any medical dispute
of Terri’s ability to swallow. Even with this compelling evidence,
Terri’s husband, Michael Schiavo, has denied any form of therapy for her
for over 10 years.
Dr.
Melvin Greer, appointed by Schiavo, testified that a doctor need not
examine a patient to know the appropriate medical treatment. He spent
approximately 45 minutes with Terri.
Dr. Peter Bambakidis, appointed by Judge Greer,
spent approximately 30 minutes with Terri. Dr. Ronald Cranford, also
appointed by Schiavo and who has publicly labeled himself “Dr. Death”,
spent less than 45 minutes examining and interacting with Terri.
MYTH: This is just a family battle over
money.
FACT: In 1992, Terri was awarded nearly one million dollars by a
malpractice jury and an out-of-court malpractice settlement which
was designated for future medical expenses.
Of these funds, less than $50,000 remains today. The financial records
revealing how Terri’s medical fund money is managed are SEALED from
inspection. Court records, however, show that Judge Greer has approved
the spending down of Terri’s medical fund on Schiavo’s attorney’s fees -
though it was expressly awarded to Terri for her medical care. Schiavo’s
primary attorney, George Felos, has received upwards of $400,000 dollars
since Schiavo hired him. This same attorney, at the expense of Terri’s
medical fund, publicly likened Terri to a “houseplant” and has used
Terri’s case on national television to promote his newly published book.
MYTH: Michael Schiavo volunteered to
donate the balance of the inheritance to charity.
FACT: In October, 1998, Schiavo’s attorney proposed that, if Terri’s
parents would
agree to her death by starvation, Schiavo would
donate his inheritance to charity. The proposal came after a
court-appointed Guardian Ad Litem cited Schiavo’s conflict of interest
since he stood to inherit the balance of Terri’s medical fund upon her
death. This one and only offer stated “if the proposal is not fully
accepted within 10 days, it shall automatically be withdrawn”.
Naturally, Terri’s parents immediately rejected the offer.
MYTH: Terri's Medical Trust fund has been used to care for her.
FACT: The following expenditures have been paid directly from Terri's
Medical Trust fund, with the approval of Judge George Greer:
|
Summary of expenses paid from Terri’s
1.2 Million Dollar medical trust fund (jury awarded 1992) |
|
NOTE: In
his November 1993 Petition Schiavo alleges the 1993 guardianship
asset balance as $761,507.50
|
Atty Gwyneth Stanley
Atty Deborah Bushnell
Atty Steve Nilson
Atty Pacarek
Atty Richard Pearse (GAL)
Atty George Felos |
$10,668.05
$65,607.00
$7,404.95
$1,500.00
$4,511.95
$397,249.99 |
|
Other |
|
1st Union/South
Trust Bank |
$55,459.85 |
|
Michael Schiavo |
$10,929.95 |
|
Total
$545,852.34 |
|
You figure it out.
Back to Table of contents
|
"Lust fades, so you'd better be with someone who can stand you." -The Story of
Us |
*
Days Go By (song lyrics)
by Dirty Vegas
You are still a whisper on my lips
A feeling at my fingertips
That's pulling at my skin
You leave me when I'm at my worst
Feeling as if I've been cursed
Bitter cold within
Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
Without you
You are still a whisper on my lips
A feeling at my fingertips
That's pulling at my skin
Days go by and still I think of you
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
Days go by and still I think of you, yeah
Days when I couldn't live my life without you
you!
Back to Table of contents
|
"Civilization is a method of living, an attitude of equal respect for all
men." -Jane Addams |
by John Pistorius
Social engineering is a powerful movement in modern society. It began as a
figment of the imagination and has emerged as a way of life through the aid of
medical science, law, and popular media. It is moving into our reality at a
rapid pace. To succeed, it has developed its own set of rules and terminology.
Touted as the ultimate tool for improving the standard of living for humans,
it has become a weapon used to end life. Instead of improving social
conditions, it offers to remove human beings that fall below its quality
standards. In this way, it alters the "quality of life" social curve and
purports to be improving the human condition. Our society has done more to
"cull" humans from this planet than any other in all of history. To God we
shall answer.
We live with a "new and improved" mentality where everything is disposable.
Bruised plant matter is routinely thrown into dumpsters and replaced with the
fresh, more beautiful stuff that comes in. Can we really get to the core of
the problem? Can we insist on non-demeaning language within the medical
community, news media, government and the entertainment industry? I'm tired of
human beings being depicted as worthless damaged plant matter. This type of
'Reality TV' is how persons with disabilities are being paraded as second
class citizens, no, as less than citizens at all. They want us to be planted
in the garden or buried in some compost pile where we can be recycled into a
newer, better, more functional unit.
Let us go about advocating for and demanding a change in language. The social
engineers cry foul when we point to their use of terms like "vegetative" when
speaking of humans. They argue for ways to devalue humans with word choices
and the order in which those words are used. After all, we have freedom of
speech, right? Any language used wrongly to refer to human beings is
demeaning, debilitating and creates barriers in the minds of others.
If a person becomes less than whatever it is that we believe they should be,
we cannot scrap, junk or kill them. However, if they can be labeled vegetative
and considered to be vegetable matter, then that makes it easier for society
to run them through the in-sink disposal when they become non responsive or
comatose. This is the social engineer's high privilege. Instead of adding to
the relative comforts of one life, that life is sacrificed on the alter of
greed and complacency. The sacrifice is made in the name of the greater good
to end suffering. If we sleep on this one, soon, it will be our children who
terminate our lives for their own good and profit. That will give new
meaning to the phrase, "Do it for the children."
Will it stop there? I think not. Will we discard people who are non responsive
before giving treatment? Perhaps, if the insurance industry latches onto this
one. Let us consider that. Half of the people whom I’ve met through the peer
support movement would be in graves right now under those circumstances. It is
easier to discard a depleted or damaged vegetable. Let us learn to use
person-first language. All of us are unique individual human beings and not to
be confused with a carrot, stalk of celery or head of lettuce.
Why call Terri vegetative and kill her? I can tell you a possible answer. The
social engineers want the message to be clear-just like that fella Adolph did
so many years ago-useless eaters must be eliminated in their opinion. If we
keep Terri alive, we elevate her above "vegetable" status. And
that would not suit the social engineers at all.
The humane thing that we do with people is to ease their suffering, not grind
them up in the sink disposal or plant them in the garden as compost. It is a
very basic thing. The social engineers want life to be decided by people
instead of God. If they succeed in killing Terri, we all stand a chance of
becoming food for the worms in the compost pile when we lose our
function-ability.
The first step in dehumanizing people with disabilities and objectifying them
is to label them as vegetables. That is why I strongly oppose that term and
others like Persistent Vegetative State and PVS. The fight must start with
language changes. Quit calling your loved ones vegetables. They are HUMAN
BEINGS!
Then maybe we can get some support for the value of human life. Terri deserves
to live. She is entitled to the rights guaranteed to all of us by the
Constitution of this nation. The greatest nation in the world is allowing
human rights to be trampled for the cause of the right to die and the right to
choose and we need to get it or they will get us too.
Sooner or later, if we live long enough, we will know someone personally or
ourselves who lose enough function to be devalued by society. And that my
friends, that is why the opposition is fighting so aggressively to kill Terri.
Its not about her. Its about life and death and who gets to make the decision
to end life and bring about death.
John Pistorius
Back to Table of contents
|
"The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins,
it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the
fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles." -Ayn
Rand (1905 - 1982) |
Free Help for
anyone Starting or Running Peer Groups
The Ten Insider Tips manual is ready for release. Anyone interested in
receiving a copy of the manual and tools can visit
http://www.bisga.org/tools.html or write to John Pistorius at
jp@pabia.org or call (412) 481-0443 to receive a free CD with the
support group tools created so far.
Back to Table of contents
|
"It is our choices...that show what we truly
are, far more than our abilities." -J. K. Rowling |
Please visit
http://www.pabia.org for a complete
listing of Pittsburgh Area Peer Support group meetings. Please mark your
2005 calendar for each month in advance as an ongoing reminder.
We do not have any control
over the people who are responsible for directing these meetings.
Therefore, if you are interested in attending any of the meetings,
please contact the person listed for that meeting to confirm the date,
meeting place and time.
For more complete information please visit the directory of meetings at
http://www.pabia.org/Support%20Groups/Support%20Groups.htm
For a list of State Brain
Injury Associations and the groups in those states, please visit:
http://www.biausa.org/Pages/state_contacts.html
We have two email support
groups you can join. One is through Denise Patterson. Contact Denise at
deenomad@aol.com
to be added.
The other is through Yahoo
Groups. You can join at
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Brainstormers101/
Back to Table of contents
|
"Fear is the main source of superstition, and
one of the main sources of cruelty. To conquer fear is the beginning
of wisdom." -Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970) |
B-NEWS Contributors-
|
