For one thing, I don't listen to or read things from "media yahoos". There are media outlets out there (the aforementioned "To The Point" as an example) that actually present multiple viewpoints from credible sources without spin. I'm don't need to slog through every transcript, etc. to create an informed opinion.

They're using their daughter to push and promote religious and political ideology. Nothing more, nothing less.

my two cents
 

(my apologies is some of this has already been said, I only got to page 2 before I decided to just jump to the end and post)

first of all, here is an article that is pretty down to earth in Q & A format:
Myth vs. Reality, which diagnosis is right?

for me, this issue is two pronged: first of all I stand on the side of "death with DIGNITY" and believe that Terri should be allowed to slip away *quietly* although that unfortunately is not going to happen. As a parent, I definitely sympathize with Mr. and Mrs. Schindler, I cant even begin to imagine their pain. But their argument that Terri would improve with treatment is just groundless. Terri has had therapy back in 1990 and it didnt help. Michael even tried a relatively new procedure to try and help her and it didnt help. her Brain Stem is liquid. She is reduced to only reflex actions. There is NO quality of life, there is merely a shell that hasnt stopped breathing yet. While I grieve for the Schindlers, I also deplore their abject failure to acknowledge the utter finality of Terri's condition. She will not get better. She has NOT gotten better in 15 years. If, as they claim, the only thing she needs is therapy, then why didnt it work before? The chances of therapy even being effective diminish as time goes on. This case should not be confused with a coma patient whose brain may still be alive and who may still wake up relatively untouched by the coma experience.

Secondly, I think some members of Congress and Dumbya and Jeb are definitely using this to garner political brownie points with a certain cross section of the electorate, and this is an egregious abuse of power. From what Ive read from Legal analysts, this issue is relatively clearcut from a legal standpoint, these sorts of cases are the domain of STATE courts and the fact that all this legal maneuvering has occurred to try and manipulate an outcome to impress a select few voters makes me SEETHE :mad: I hope this bites congress in the butt come election time. I also resent the effort to tie this poor woman's situation into the whole anti-abortion agenda.

finally, I heard that Michael turned down a cool million to relinquish custody of Terri, so I dont see how anyone can say he is motivated by $$$. I dont know if he is guilty of anything or is covering anything up or has any hidden agenda. I know he is cohabiting with someone else and has two kids by her but that in and of itself doesnt make him an unfit guardian. Yes, it would be simpler on the one hand for him to release custody to Terri's parents, but, maybe he really IS trying to honor her wishes as he says and that is his sole motivation. If so, then I applaud his courage to hang tough.

au contraire
 

as far as I am concerned, with a brain this badly damaged, its as good as dead.
:shrug:

6 years ago there was a similar case with similar machinations by congress and courts, and the outcome was the same, the patient died. Nothing has changed. Congress' Palm Sunday Compromise is nothing more than shameless grandstanding. Hugh Finn (having trouble with the page, if anyone can find a better link, please let me know) thanks!

I think you are mixing apples and oranges here
 

failing kidneys could possibly be replaced if a donor is found. dialysis is a temporary stopgap measure meant to buy a patient time until a donor is found. you cant get a BRAIN transplant so the comparison doesnt hold up.

also, failing kidneys are usually the result of disease, which medical science has always tried to cure or at least alleviate.

Terri has been kept alive in this way for 15 years. No one can say she hasnt been given every opportunity for recovery. In fact, as time went on, her chances of any type of recovery got slimmer and slimmer. her condition can NOT improve. There is no higher good being served her by keeping her connected to a feeding tube. If her wish was to be allowed to die, I for one dont feel anyone else has any right to interfere. Again, we only have autonomy over our OWN bodies.

I understand. I was being extreme in responding to a previous post.

I do find it troubling that she has not had specific testing performed recentely because the husband, as her guardian, has refused to allow the testing, such as a swallow test. I am going to find the specific details and post them.

clarification
 

myself, I would have serious doubts about the onset of this "mental illness". kinda like those jailhouse christians you hear about all the time....
which case are you referring to?

Maybe that is your opinion, but there is a medical difference.

For the record, even though I am very troubled by what is happening to Terri, I do not agree that Congress should have gotten involved. It is not appropriate for them to legislate in an area of state's rights.

Keep reading. The citation is in there.

ok, Ill take a look
 

Ford v. Wainright (1986).....Ill look it up but I think you may have misstated something there. I think it may be key WHEN the mental illness occurs; I cant imagine any court anywhere giving credence to a mental illness that appears after a death sentence has been handed down, and thus staying an execution.

just doesnt hold water...if that were true, death row would be FULL of certifiables...(well, it is but not for that reason!) anyway, off I go to read it.
stay tuned kiddies!

*****
ok, as I read it, the Supreme Court "conclud[ed] that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the State from inflicting the death penalty upon a prisoner who is insane." but the issue was not so much the fact of the prisoner's insanity but whether or not he received due process consideration:

"The first defect in Florida's procedures is the failure to include the prisoner in the truth-seeking process. Any procedure that precludes the prisoner or his counsel from presenting material relevant to his sanity or bars consideration of that material by the factfinder is necessarily inadequate."

so, it looks as though the Supreme Court had more of an issue with Florida's fact finding process which is why it sent the matter back to the trial court.

I would be most interested to know what happened once it was remanded, if Ford's attempt to avoid the death penalty was successful....has anyone shepardized this case?

This is the absolute crux of the entire issue. It's the whole ball of wax. If the parents would just sit back and come to grips with reality, then none of this publicity bull**** would have ever happened.

Which leads to this....
I would say what I really think, but most people don't look upon my opinion without injecting ridiculous sentiment into it. So, I'll just leave Dissy's comment as a more dignified statement.

I actually confirmed this information with the ACLU's own website. I did have a full semester in law school on this very topic of capital punishment, which I found fascinating.

There is an issue of whether a state can force medication in order to make an inmate sane enough to execute. The Supremes did not agree to take the case and left it to the state to determine.

Wow - now it appears that the Schindler's even have an "evil" purpose. :rolleyes:

Personally
 

I dont think the Schindlers are motivated by anything other than love and grief over their daughter's condition and the fact that they arent ready to face reality. I think the true evil purpose was exhibited by the gorillas in suits on capitol hill.

:shocked:

Wonders never cease...