Tears for Terri Schiavo and Jessica Lunsford: March 2005

Today at 9 am 2005 Terri went to be with god her beloved mother and father and family were not at her side her husband michael was

Terri Schiavo, Medical Patient

* Born: 3 December 1963
* Birthplace:
* Best Known As: The Florida woman at the center of the Schiavo legal case

Name at birth: Theresa Marie Schindler

On 25 February 1990, 26-year-old Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain damage when her heart stopped for five minutes. Schiavo spent the following years in rehabilitation centers and nursing homes but remained in a coma without regaining higher brain function. In 1998 her husband, Michael Schiavo, filed a legal petition to have Schiavo's feeding tube removed, saying that his wife had told him before her medical crisis that she would not want to be artificially kept alive in such a situation. Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, fought this request. Florida judge George W. Greer ruled in 2000 that Schiavo was "beyond all doubt" in a persistent vegetative state and that her husband could discontinue life support. But as legal appeals in the case continued, the case became widely known as some religious groups and pro-life activists began to insist that Schiavo should be kept alive. Schiavo's feeding tube was removed in 2003, but reinserted six days later when the Florida legislature passed "Terri's Law," which allowed the state's governor to issue a stay in such cases. The law was later ruled invalid by the courts. In March of 2005 Schiavo's feeding tube was again removed, and the case became a greater public sensation when the U.S. Congress was called into special emergency session to pass a bill allowing federal courts to review the case, with President George W. Bush flying from Texas to Washington especially to sign the bill into law. However, federal judges and the U.S. Supreme Court have so far refused to intervene, and as of this writing Schiavo is not receiving food or water.

The cause of Schiavo's cardiac arrest was believed to be a potassium imbalance, possibly created by an eating disorder... Schiavo's case has long been considered to have political implications, as Florida governor Jeb Bush and his brother, U.S. president George W. Bush, both have the vigorous support of pro-life conservatives... Terri and Michael Schiavo were married on 10 November 1984.

Terri dies at 9:05 am

Family Feud Continues Michael Schiavo was at his wife's bedside when she died a "calm, peaceful and gentle" death, says his attorney, George Felos. The brain damaged woman's family complains they were denied access. I hope and pray they are not lying but only god and terri knows tonight how she felt at death Never again terri never again i pledge to help your parents in anyway i can to change this law that took your life

Breaking News John Evander Couey, 46 has admitted to the FBI and Investigators that he has abducted Jessica Lunsford and has taken her life. OUR CONDOLENCES TO THE LUNSFORD FAMILY

Jessica disappeared out of her bedroom in the middle of the night wearing only a pink nightgown with white shorts. She has not been seen since. Authorities were notified this morning that a 9-year-old Homosassa girl was not in her bed when her father checked on her earlier this morning. Jessica Marie Lunsford was last seen wearing a pink silk nightgown and white silk shorts when she went to sleep at 10 p.m. on Wednesday night at her home at 7266 S. Sonata Avenue, off Cardinal Street. The young girl is described as a white female, 4 feet 10 inches tall, weighing 70 pounds, with light brown shoulder-length hair and brown eyes. Jessica lives with her dad and grandparents at the Sonata Avenue home. There appears to be no evidence of forced entry into the residence. The Sheriffs Office responded with its air unit and K-9 units to search the area. Neighborhoods were canvassed. Additional K-9 units, plus bloodhounds from surrounding counties, will be joining the search. In addition, dispatchers issued a CodeRED, or reverse 911, to homes nearby to notify residents about the missing girl. The girl was entered as missing into the state and national databases. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement issued a missing child alert, similar to an Amber Alert but with fewer criteria requirements. We will always remember you Jessica. EVERYONE

The Jessica Lunsford tragedy
Jessica Lunsford memorial begins at 1 p.m. today
By Times Staff Writer
Published March 26, 2005

LECANTO - The memorial service for Jessica Lunsford will begin at 1 p.m. today at Seven Rivers Presbyterian Church, 4221 Gulf to Lake Highway (State Road 44).
BayNews 9 has announced plans to air the service in its entirety. A memorial fund has been established, the proceeds of which will go toward promoting stricter laws on sexual offenders. Donations should be made to the Jessica Marie Lunsford Fund, SunTrust Bank, Mail Code Fl Homosassa-0111, PO Box 156, Brooksville, FL 34605. The family has asked that instead of flowers, donations be made to the Laura Recovery Center, 307 South Friendswood Drive, Suite B-1, Friendswood, Texas 77546 or through the Web site: www.lrcfoundation.org
[Last modified March 26, 2005, 01:08:17]

The Terri Schiavo Case
Medicine, money and Terri Schiavo
By LISA GREENE, Times Staff Writer
Published March 26, 2005

If doctors put Terri Schiavo's feeding tube back in, will she have suffered permanent harm?
It's possible to reinsert a feeding tube at any time with no permanent damage to a patient, said Dr. Ronald Schonwetter, executive vice president and chief medical officer at LifePath Hospice and Palliative Care in Tampa. Schonwetter said he could not speak specifically about Schiavo's condition.
But while the tube is removed, the person might suffer permanent kidney damage, or brain damage because blood pressure drops so much that not enough oxygen gets to the brain.
How long before that might happen?
There's no time frame on when a person might sustain such damage, Schonwetter said. It could take as little as a few days, or as long as three weeks for the person to die after the tube is removed.
Do patients get pain medication when a feeding tube is removed?
Dying patients generally don't need pain medication for dehydration, Schonwetter said. As a patient's kidneys shut down, toxins build up in the body. Those chemicals make the patient sleepier and eventually comatose. Most patients who need pain medications during this time usually suffer pain because of cancer or some other disease, Schonwetter said. Paul O'Donnell, a Franciscan friar who has been by the Schindler family's side in recent days, said Friday that Schiavo had been prescribed morphine, but he did not know if she was receiving it.
What else happens to a person whose feeding tube is removed?
Patients' mouths and lips often become dry, and caregivers generally give ice chips, moist washcloths or swabs to make them comfortable. The circulation system would start to slow, and the person's hands and feet might look blue as blood was diverted to vital organs. Near the end, the person's breathing might become erratic before it finally stops.
Who else uses feeding tubes?
Some people with feeding tubes are in comas or coma-like states, and some have terminal diseases. One study found that about 40 percent of Florida nursing home patients with dementia use feeding tubes. Also, some people use them temporarily while recovering from surgeries or other conditions, and some people who have survived cancer or certain digestive problems use them permanently.
How can I make clear whether I would want a feeding tube inserted under certain circumstances?
Fill out a living will form, or an advance directive, that says what you want. You can find more information about living wills at www.agingwithdignity.org or www.p-grace.org Once you've filled out a form, make sure family members know about it.
Who is paying for Schiavo's care?
The Hospice of the Florida Suncoast has been paying for most of Schiavo's care for about two years, said Deborah Bushnell, one of Michael Schiavo's lawyers. Terri Schiavo also is enrolled in the state Medicaid medically needy program, which pays roughly $200 a month in medication costs, Bushnell said. Two years ago, lawyers set up a Medicaid disability trust fund with about $50,000, the remaining money from Schiavo's malpractice judgment, Bushnell said. It pays for certain medical expenses and legal costs, not including lawyers' fees, and will pay for funeral bills and any other medical expenses after she dies.
"I cannot imagine, in my wildest dreams, that there will be anything left" after those expenses are paid, Bushnell said.
The Hospice of the Florida Suncoast spent more than $9-million last year for all unreimbursed care, said spokesman Mike Bell.
[Last modified March 26, 2005, 01:09:10]

The Terri Schiavo Case
Parents endure, cling to hope
Like Terri Schiavo, Lisa Watson collapsed in her home. But their stories have differed since.
By MELANIE AVE, Times Staff Writer
Published March 26, 2005

[Times photos: Melissa Lyttle]
"Come on now, give me a smile," says Michael Brocato to his daughter Lisa Watson, 37, as she lies in her bed at her parent's home in Lakeland Friday.

Lisa Watson receives a 1400-calorie nutritional liquified meal called Jevity through a feeding tube Friday.

[Special to the Times]
Lisa Watson and ex-husband Matt Watson pose on their wedding day.
LAKELAND - The lives of the two women are eerily similar.
They look alike, with their short, dark brown hair and rigid arms and legs. Both were in their 20s when their hearts gave out, and they suffered brain-damage. Neither woman left a written living will. Their families met when both women were in the same Bradenton rehabilitation center.
But their paths have diverged sharply.
Terri Schiavo's husband continues to fight efforts by her parents to overturn a court order that removed her feeding tube on March 18. Michael Schiavo said he is carrying out his wife's wishes, that she would not want to live in a persistent vegetative state.
Lisa Watson's husband, Matt, divorced his wife and gave custody of her to her parents about two years after she became incapacitated in 1991. A heart problem following childbirth caused brain damage.
Dorothy Brocato, 74, and her husband Michael, 78, care for their daughter, with the help of nurses, around the clock in their home on a golf course a few miles north of Interstate 4.
"I had a lot of people who helped me think through things," Matt Watson told WTSP-Ch. 10 in an interview. "Mostly, you have a sense of guilt that goes with the difficult decision you have to make, it can cause self-doubt."
"It hurt at first," said Dorothy Brocato. "But then I thought, he's a young guy. He had a new baby. He couldn't take care of her, too."
Matt Watson has since remarried and lives in Atlanta. He brings the couple's son, a teenager now, to visit Lisa and the Brocatos several times a year.
"I would counsel anybody dealing with this, discuss these things and handle the legal things earlier and ahead of time, so then you don't have to deal with them when you're in a situation like this," Watson told WTSP.
The Brocatos have great respect for their former son-in-law for allowing them to keep Lisa, who is fed through a tube in her stomach as Terri Schiavo was before it was removed. They can't help but wonder why Michael Schiavo couldn't do the same for Bob and Mary Schindler.
The Brocatos got so upset about the dwindling legal options the Schindlers face to restore the feeding tube, they decided to speak out in the hope that Michael Schiavo would be moved by their story.
Dorothy Brocato stares at her 37-year-old daughter, her fourth child, her baby.
"Can you smile Lisa? Come on," coos her mother. "Come on."
Lisa watches from a wheelchair. No smile emerges but something flickers in her intense green eyes that makes her mother tear up. "She's aware of everything. She laughs. She smiles. We just don't know how much she knows."
Doctors say Lisa Watson should have a normal life span.
"She's healthy," said Brocato, her stepfather. "You don't starve to death a living, breathing human being. If you starved a dog, you'd go to jail."
Lisa Watson's problems began at age 22. Married for four years, she gave birth to a 9-pound, 15-ounce son, Trevor, by Caesarean section after a difficult labor. Eight days after he was born, she collapsed in her Lakeland home of what was later diagnosed as cardiomyopathy, an enlarged heart.
Her husband attempted CPR and called an ambulance, but her heart stopped three times. She was in a coma when her parents arrived at the hospital. They were told she would not survive.
But after a year-long hospital stay, Lisa was transferred to the rehabilitation complex. She was released a year later because her condition stagnated.
That's when Mrs. Brocato decided to bring her daughter home, and her son-in-law agreed. She believes that decision, coupled with regular physical therapy and vitamins improved Lisa's awareness and quality of life. Her mother also believes oxygen treatments in a hyperbaric chamber sparked something in Lisa's brain.
At first, "She was just like Terri," Mrs. Brocato said. "Her head hung down. She just stared at nothing. She drooled."
When asked about Lisa Watson's specific diagnosis, and whether she was in a persistent vegetative state as Terri Schiavo's doctors say she is, Mrs. Brocato could not be specific.
Lisa has a room at the back of the house with tile floors and wide doors for her wheelchair. Nurses give her almost-daily physical therapy and strap her to a table to stand up. The radio and television buzz constantly for stimulation.
"Sometimes when we're asleep, we hear her back there laughing," Mrs. Brocato said. "She feels pain. Sometimes when I break down and cry because my heart is broken, she reacts. She goes ah, ah, ah."
The Brocatos sit Lisa up during the day. In the evenings, the family watches television together. They can't imagine life without her.
The Brocatos said they understand why the Schindlers hang onto the belief that Terri could possibly improve if allowed to live. It's their wish for Lisa as well that rehabilitation and maybe medical technology will return her to normal someday.
"Never give up," Mrs. Brocato says. "I will continue to take care of her as long as I live. I really feel that God had a plan for her life or else he would have taken her."
Says her husband: "There's always hope."
Melanie Ave can be reached at 727 892-2273 or melanie@sptimes.com
[Last modified March 26, 2005, 01:08:17]

The Terri Schiavo Case
She's the other woman in Michael Schiavo's heart
By JAMIE THOMPSON
Published March 26, 2005

They met by chance at a dentist's office.
Neither was searching for love, friends say.
She had been through a divorce.
His wife lived in a nursing home.
The years had left him heartbroken and lonely, friends say.
He bonded with the new woman over dinners and long talks. It was complicated, but they fell in love, friends say.
Still, Michael Schiavo has always made it very clear:
"He has one wife, and her name is Terri," said a family friend, Gloria Centonze. "He does not refer to anyone else as his wife, and never has."
How, then, to explain Jodi?
* * *
Jodi Centonze, 40, is Michael Schiavo's live-in girlfriend, mother of their two children, 1 and 21/2 years old.
Centonze occupies a peculiar role in the national debate over Terri Schiavo - in the middle of it, but never a public part of it.
"She wants to stay out of it," said her brother, John Centonze. "She says this is not about her, it's about Terri."
Yet she has been anathematized, her name invoked as a key reason why Schiavo, 41, should not control his wife's fate. Outside Terri's hospice, protesters hold signs that say, "Michael don't plan the wedding yet, we still have hope!" and "Arrest Mike for bigamy."
Schiavo has moved on, his opponents say, and should give Terri back to her parents. "Remaining married to him is an embarrassment," said David Gibbs III, the lawyer for Terri's parents. He tried unsuccessfully to get Terri a divorce last month, accusing Schiavo of "open adultery."
Schiavo's opponents have directed much vitriol toward Jodi Centonze, threatening her life and her two children. In dozens of letters mailed to the couple's Countryside home, some critics have called her a whore and her children bastards, relatives say.
Through it all, Centonze has remained quietly by Schiavo's side. She was there long before the television cameras, before Terri's condition became a national obsession.
Jodi Centonze has visited Terri, shopped for her, washed her clothes, relatives say. She has accepted her role as the other woman, and believes Michael Schiavo has enough room in his heart for both, relatives say.
"She knows she was not his first choice," said one of Schiavo's friends, Russ Hyden of Gainesville. "But we don't always get to choose."
After all, he wasn't her first choice, either.
* * *
Jodi Centonze met the man she would later marry during her senior year at Pinellas Park High.
She was 18, making all As, working part-time at an insurance company.
She lived in Clearwater with her father, an auto mechanic, and her mother, a clerk for the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office. She has three brothers.
Her father, Joseph Centonze, was strict with his only daughter, always an early curfew, no outings on school nights. He rarely approved of the boys she brought home. He was gruff and private, not a man to be sassed, Centonze said in court records.
(Jodi Centonze could not be reached and has declined all interview requests, her brother said. Details of her life come from interviews with friends, relatives and civil lawsuits filed in the 1980s.)
Centonze met Scott Blough in her senior year. He was a year and a half younger.
They continued dating after Centonze graduated in 1983. She worked full-time for an insurance company and bought her own condominium in Clearwater.
"She's a real go-getter, very independent" her brother said.
Blough mowed lawns before he got a job maintaining private planes at St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport. Later, he became an insurance agent.
The couple married on Oct. 18, 1986. They stayed at a hotel on the beach on their wedding night, then took a short weekend cruise.
The couple was happy at first. Friends came over for card games and barbecues. They spent sunny weekends on the gulf in their 1989 Wellcraft boat.
They talked of starting a family.
But then Jodi Centonze's life took a dramatic turn.
* * *
Tall and slim, Centonze had always been healthy.
But a car crash in December of 1987 left her with chronic pain in her neck and shoulders. As she was recovering eight months later, another car slammed into her during a hit-and-run accident on Belcher Road, according to court records.
She was constantly seeing doctors and going to therapy. She had to wear a neck brace, had trouble carrying groceries, couldn't walk, sit or bend without pain. She couldn't go out on the boat, didn't feel well enough to spend time with friends.
She sued both drivers to pay for her medical expenses. The first case settled with undisclosed terms. The outcome of the second case was unclear in court records.
Around the same time, Centonze's father was hurt when a car crossed a median on an interstate and slammed into his vehicle, Centonze said. He died three weeks later at 54 years old.
The strain took a toll on Centonze and her marriage, she said in court records.
"I just kind of flipped out," she said. ". . . I just was all within myself. I didn't talk to anybody. I didn't have anybody. I just wanted to be alone."
Her husband, Blough, was supportive, urging her to see a therapist, doing all the housework.
But Centonze wanted a divorce.
"I can't explain it," she said. "I just snapped. I just lost control of everything."
He begged her to reconsider. They stayed together while relatives visited for Christmas in 1988, but separated after the New Year, Centonze said.
Blough went to stay with a friend in Georgia. He sent a card on her birthday.
Centonze enjoyed the freedom of single life for about a month. A girlfriend who had recently been divorced moved in and they spent evenings at bars and concerts. Then, Centonze withdrew. She had anxiety attacks, was scared to drive and spent nights alone by herself.
With therapy and medicine, she improved over time. She joined a Wednesday night church group. She worked a cash register at Publix.
She still saw doctors, though. Including her dentist. She had occasionally gotten cavities, but after the car accidents, she got 19 in roughly a year.
She kept seeing her dentist, trying to figure out what was wrong.
* * *
Jodi Centonze met Michael Schiavo at a dentist's office, her brother said.
"Neither one of them was looking to meet anyone," John Centonze said. "And it wasn't something they just did. They weren't really together for a couple of years after they met."
Michael Schiavo had been an "emotional wreck" after his wife collapsed, he said in a 2000 trial.
Terri, the woman who had charmed him on first meeting, could no longer walk, eat or talk. She lay listless in a hospital bed, turned every two hours to avoid bedsores.
Schiavo was there for more than 130 doctor visits, through Terri's urinary tract infections, for the amputation of her left little toe, the removal of her gall bladder. He had been, a state judge noted, her most regular visitor.
Terri's parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, agreed he was a devoted husband and encouraged him to date other women, according to court records and relatives.
"It was only a couple of weeks before Bob Schindler was saying Mike needed to get on with his life," said Schiavo's brother, Scott. "That was the farthest thing from Mike's mind."
But as months turned into years, Schiavo lost hope.
He decided to date about three years after Terri collapsed, Schiavo's lawyer said during the 2000 trial.
"It took Michael a long time to consider the prospect of getting on with his life - something he was actively encouraged to do by the Schindlers, long before enmity tore them apart," Jay Wolfson, a former guardian of Terri, wrote in a 2003 report to Gov. Jeb Bush.
"He was even encouraged by the Schindlers to date, and introduced his in-law family to women he was dating," Wolfson wrote.
That was all before the Schiavos received about a $1-million malpractice verdict, stemming from the potassium imbalance that led to her current state. The award began a long-running feud with his in-laws over money and Terri's care.
The Schindlers began accusing their son-in-law of trying to kill Terri so he could keep the settlement money and marry his new girlfriend.
Schiavo said he didn't care about the money and offered to donate it to charity.
* * *
Jodi Centonze was conflicted about whether to date Michael Schiavo, her brother said.
She wanted her oldest brother's opinion, and asked him to meet Schiavo for dinner at an Italian restaurant in Feather Sound. That was about 10 years ago, before most anyone knew of Terri Schiavo.
"I grilled Mike," John Centonze recalled. "I asked him all these questions: What's up, you're married? Why do you want to see my sister?"
Schiavo explained his wife was in a nursing home, and that she wouldn't want to live like that, John Centonze said. Schiavo said he had money from a lawsuit and was doing everything he could for Terri.
"I could see he was very uneasy, very scared," John Centonze said. "He had spent four to five years by himself. He seemed lonely and heartbroken."
Schiavo always made it clear he was still in love with Terri, relatives say.
"Mike still has a lot of emotions for Terri," John Centonze said. "People make him out to be this mean guy, and he's nothing like that at all."
Jodi Centonze knew what she was getting into, her brother said.
"From the beginning she knew the situation," her brother said. "He told her, if you have a problem with this, this is what I'm going to do. I'm going to fulfill her wishes, and carry it out until the end.
"She's there for him 100 percent," Centonze's brother said.
Family members get angry when people accuse Schiavo of physically abusing Terri.
"If he was that way, my sister would have kicked him to the curb," John Centonze said. "She doesn't take crap from anyone. ... If Mike was that way, he could never be with my sister. She don't play."
It has been complicated, relatives say, but the family accepts and supports their relationship.
"Sometimes I feel as if it's almost a spiritual thing, like Terri sent Jodi to him," said Schiavo's brother, Scott.
Some relatives compare Michael Schiavo to a man who has lost his wife to Alzheimer's disease. He is devoted, but wants a companion.
"Life is lonely," said Gloria Centonze, Jodi's sister-in-law. "People need a reason to get up in the morning."
* * *
Michael Schiavo's opponents have surrounded his home in recent weeks. They call him an adulterer. They say he promised to love his wife - in sickness and in health - and has betrayed her with another woman.
"Husband - Protect Your Wife," read a sign held by a 28-year-old Idaho woman as she lingered outside his home last week. A dozen police officers stood guard out front as another officer and a police dog patrolled adjoining back yards.
The couple has installed a hightech infrared security system to keep watch over their ranch-style home, relatives say. They constantly worry about safety, and John Centonze stays with his sister when Schiavo has to leave.
Schiavo has called Jodi Centonze his "fiancee" for at least five years. It is not clear whether they will marry after Terri dies, relatives say. The couple does not talk openly about their future, relatives say.
But no one will be celebrating after Terri's death, they say.
"This is going to be crushing on all of us," Scott Schiavo said. "It's like losing that wonderful beautiful person all over again.
"Still," he said. "It's what she wanted."
Times researchers Carolyn Edds and Cathy Wos contributed to this report. Jamie Thompson can be reached at 727 893-8455. Send e-mail to jthompson@sptimes.com
[Last modified March 26, 2005, 01:09:10]

The recent history of the Schiavo case
A complete timeline of the Schiavo case is maintained by the University of Miami. For purposes of this column, I will simply provide the recent facts relating to the current controversy:
On March 18, 2005, Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed, in compliance with a court order by Pinellas County, Florida Circuit Judge George Greer handed down on February 25, 2005. (This was not the first time it had been removed -- it was actually the third time.)
The federal courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta and the U.S. Supreme Court (on March 17, 2005), followed the U.S. District Court and refused to intervene.
So on March 18, the same day the feeding tube was ordered to be removed, Terri's parents petitioned the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa Division) -- which I will refer to as "the Florida federal court" -- to order that the feeding tube be re-inserted.
The petition claimed that Terri's right to life is being violated on several grounds, among them her religion and disability. It likened Judge Greer's order to a death sentence, and argued that like a death row inmate, Terri should have federal court recourse. (The petition was in the nature of a habeas corpus petition, which is utilized by death row inmates when execution is imminent and all state and federal appeals have been exhausted.)
On March 16 and 17, as it became apparent that the Schindlers' efforts were not going to be rewarded by the federal courts, the U.S. Senate and House each began crafting different pieces of legislation designed to thwart the order of the state and federal courts.
Initially, the legislation was broadly conceived, and written to cover all incapacitated persons who did not have "living wills" and "advance medical directives" (instruments directing a medical surrogate to make health-care decisions when one is unable to do so and also stating what type of artificial life-sustaining measures one would or would not want to have employed).
But when the broader legislation got bogged down in details and arguments over the impact it would have on state laws governing living wills and medical directives, in effect ordering a federal remedy that could supplant state procedures, both houses began crafting legislation specifically for Terri Schiavo and no one else.

The 'Palm Sunday Compromise'
Mary Schindler wipes her tears after speaking to the media outside daughter Terri Schiavo's hospice.
Image:
VIDEO
A look at the latest appeal filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. PLAY VIDEO Gov. Bush says new information suggests Schiavo may retain some consciousness. PLAY VIDEO Passions are running high in the Terri Schiavo case. PLAY VIDEO
RELATED
Timeline: Schiavo case On the Scene: Mental states More people get living wills Interactive: The feeding tube FindLaw: Latest ruling
QUICKVOTE
Top of Form 1 Who should decide Terri Schiavo's fate?
Politicians
Judges
Her parents
Her husband
VIEW RESULTS
Bottom of Form 1
On March 21, Congress passed U.S Senate Compromise Bill 686, "For the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo." In the early morning hours of March 22, President Bush signed the bill into law.
Procedurally, the law specifically designates the Florida federal court at which Schiavo's parents filed their petition as having jurisdiction over the matter. (Previously, the court held it lacked jurisdiction.) In addition, the law orders the Florida federal court not to be bound by any prior state court actions concerning Terri.
In particular, the law granted this particular federal court jurisdiction to review "alleged violations" of Terri Schiavo's rights "under the Constitution or laws of the United States." It also authorizes the Florida federal court to "issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life."
However, it also says that "[n]othing in this Act shall be construed to create substantive rights not otherwise secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States or of the several States."

The Florida district court proceeding
On March 22, the Schindlers' petition -- the one that had been dismissed by the federal courts days earlier -- was refiled on the docket pursuant to the special law. With it was filed a petition for injunction and a demand that Terri be transported from the hospice where she is being cared for to a hospital for re-insertion of the feeding tube.
The law authorized the federal court to hear claims respecting violations of Terri's constitutional rights, but was silent as to what those rights were. The parents' petition, however, specifically alleged that Terri's constitutional rights had been violated in several respects.
They argued that (1) Terri had not been granted a fair "trial," inasmuch as it was alleged that her husband and guardian, Michael, did not have her best interests at heart and also that Judge Greer acted against Terri's interest and contrary to law in making rulings about her health care; (2) the unfair trials effectively denied her life without due process of law; (3) Terri had been denied equal protection of the laws because of the way the Florida state court had allowed the medical decision to be made for her; and (4) her right to exercise her religion had been violated because of the pronouncement of Pope John Paul II that the removal of her feeding tube would be a "sin" and effectively "damn" Terri's soul.
On March 22, the Florida federal court ruled that the feeding tube should not be replaced. In a 13-page opinion, Judge James Whittemore denied the petition for injunction, finding that there was no reasonable likelihood that Terri's parents would succeed on the merits of their claims--the four constitutional grounds described above.
In so holding, Judge Whittemore was applying longstanding principles as to the burden plaintiffs have when seeking injunctive relief prior to a ruling on the merits of the claims: They must show likelihood of success on the merits. Instead, Judge Whittemore found virtually no support for the Schindlers' claims, so his refusal to grant the injunction was not even a close call.
In their appeal to the Eleventh Circuit, Terri's parents lambasted Judge Whittemore, saying he ignored the mandate of the law -- which, they argued, required the court to order the feeding tube reinserted and then conduct a full hearing on their claims.

The impact of the Schiavo law
Congress's law may seem complex, but its direct effect -- at least -- is simple: Rather than respecting prior state court orders and rulings, Congress decided to give Schiavo's parents another chance, in federal court, on a blank slate. In doing so, it chose to nullify prior state court rulings because -- for religious reasons -- it did not agree with them. Yet the federal court, it turned out, did not choose to contravene the prior state court order.
In fact, Judge Whittemore began his opinion stating that S. 686 may be found unconstitutional, but for the purposes of the petition for preliminary injunction he would assume its constitutionality. Nevertheless, he opined, "Even under these difficult and time strained circumstances, and notwithstanding Congress' express interest in the welfare of Theresa Schiavo, this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it."
By a 2-1 decision handed down in the early morning hours of March 23, the appeals court agreed with Judge Whittemore. Said the majority decision, "We all have our own family, our own loved ones, and our own children. However, we are called upon to make a collective, objective decision concerning a question of law."
Applying the age-old standard for reviewing a lower court's denial of injunctive relief, the majority found that Judge Whittemore had not abused his discretion. They referred to his "careful" order, which they attached to their decision.
Their opinion confronts head on the Schindlers' insistence in their appeal that the law required the court to order that the feeding tube be reinserted. The decision quotes from an exchange between Senators Levin and Frist about whether or not the Congress was ordering the federal courts to so do. Frist assured Levin that this was not the case, although he assumed, wrongly, that the courts would so order.
Later in the day on March 23, the Schindlers' petition for the entire panel of Eleventh Circuit judges to rehear the case was denied.
As of this writing, the Schindlers are planning to appeal to the Supreme Court, which has twice refused to hear the case, most recently on March 17.
What might be the long-term impact of what some have called the "Palm Sunday Compromise?"
It is a fundamental principle that Congress cannot simply overrule court decisions it does not like -- except in the very limited case in which it can amend federal statutes in a case that turns on statutory interpretation. But here, Congress tried to rewrite--or rather, invalidate--prior judicial rulings that were the law of Terri's case, violating the bedrock principle of the separation of powers among three co-equal branches of government.
Ironically, in so doing, Republicans in Congress also betrayed two of their own fundamental beliefs: The belief in federalism or "states' rights" (remember, it was a state court that issued the order Congress nullified), and the belief in the sanctity of marriage (state statutes had made Michael, as Terri's husband, her presumptive legal guardian).
But did the law try to do more than to give the Schindlers an opportunity to go to court to try keep their daughter alive under existing law? Did it also purport to interpret the constitution to set forth a new right to life that applied in this case?
Some legal commentators have said so. But prior precedent indicates that the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes no such right. In The Matter of Nancy Cruzan -- another PVS patient kept alive by feeding and hydration tubes -- Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the majority that a patient has the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment if that would have been her wish. And because this is a matter of constitutional -- not statutory -- interpretation, it is a matter on which the Court -- not Congress -- has the last word.
(In Cruzan, the Court also ruled that the State of Missouri did not have to accept Cruzan's parents as surrogate decision makers for their daughter. Florida law, however, repeatedly has recognized Michael Schiavo as the appropriate surrogate decision maker for his wife.)

A secular -- not a religious -- issue
The separation of powers issue is an important one in this case, but an equally pressing issue is raised by Congress's decision to act with primarily -- if not exclusively -- religious justification. As Michael Dorf has explained in a prior column for this site, such decisions are constitutionally suspect.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin) began and ended his speech during House debates Sunday with references to Holy Week. "As millions of Americans observe the beginning of Holy Week this Palm Sunday," he noted, "\we are reminded that every life has purpose, and none is without meaning."
Politicians referred to the pope's pronouncement against the state court order and even referred to the "passion of Terri," equating her state with the suffering of Jesus on the cross. More than this, they noted the passing of Palm Sunday as their efforts became law- as if a kind of resurrection might be in the offing for Terri.
The Congress was dead wrong to bring religion to bear on this issue of secular law.
For twelve years, and still today, Florida's state and federal courts have been painstakingly applying that law to Terri's case, as Republicans usually want them to do. In this instance, however, it was the "activist" Congress that overstepped its authority.
But the federal district and appeals courts--soon to be joined, it is hoped, by the Supreme Court--have said "thanks, but no thanks," to Congress' order that it assert its will over that of state courts. To quote once again from the Eleventh Circuit opinion, "In the end, and no matter how much we wish Mrs. Schiavo had never suffered such a horrible accident, we are a nation of laws, and if we are to continue to be so, the pre-existing and well-established federal law . . . must be applied to her case."
For now, separation of powers and federalism are safe.

Elaine Cassel, a FindLaw columnist, practices law in Virginia and the District of Columbia and teaches law and psychology. She is the author of a textbook on criminal psychology, "Criminal Behavior", and "The War on Civil Liberties: How Bush and Ashcroft Dismantled the Bill of Rights." She maintains a Web site devoted to civil liberties issues, Civil Liberties Watch.

Story Tools Click Here to try 4 Free Trial Issues of Time!

Judges deny Schiavo parents again Schindlers implore Jeb Bush: 'Do something'
FBI details Gotti's crooked goodbye Yahoo asks for ruling on censorship abroad Cheating wife gets millions in divorce Taiwan protests new Chinese law Amber Alert nets suspect, body Colombia police find cocaine sub

Top of Form 2

LAST NAME:
FIRST NAME:

Bottom of Form 2

one would wonder why so much is being done to save terri and no one but his mother tried to save sunny hudson the same goverment that is tryign to save terri killed sunny

March 24, 2005
Legal Options Almost Gone for Schiavo
by Pete Winn, associate editor
The U.S. Supreme Court refuses to act on disabled Florida woman's case; intervention of Gov. Bush also seems unlikely.
The U.S. Supreme Court turned down an appeal from Terri Schiavo's parents today, declining to intervene to keep the disabled woman alive.
The move leaves few legal options left in the battle to stop the court-imposed medical execution of Schiavo, who has been without food or water since her feeding tube was removed last Friday.
The high court's rejection made without comment came after Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy polled the other eight members of the court.
Later in the day, another avenue of hope for Schiavo's parents -- Bob and Mary Schindler -- ended in familiar fashion: at the Pinellas County court bench of Judge George W. Greer, who has ordered Terri's feeding tube removed three times in the last several years. He denied a request by the Florida Department of Children and Families to take custody of Schiavo pending an investigation of whether she may have been misdiagnosed and abused.
Ken Connor, attorney for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, said the Schindlers' request was a reasonable one.
"They were asking the court to take into account Dr. William Cheshire's assessment that Terri appears to have been misdiagnosed, and is not actually in a persistent vegetative state, but is in a minimally conscious state," Connor said. "Judge Greer seems to be of a mind 'Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's made up.'
"He thumbed his nose at the U.S. Congress when they asked him to delay the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration even though they indicated that Terri was both the subject and object of their investigation.
Later this afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge James Whittemore will be asked to overrule Greer and issue a temporary restraining order as a prelude to a full hearing on Cheshire's assessment. It was Whittemore, a Clinton appointee, who on Tuesday refused to reopen Schiavo's case in the wake of a law passed by Congress giving the federal courts jurisdiction over the matter.
Schiavo's husband Michael, who argues his wife would not want to live in her current state, countered the Schindlers' appeal to the Supreme Court with one of his own, urging justices not to intervene because her case has been in the courts for several years.
Without food and water, Schiavo, now in her seventh day of starvation and dehydration, could die at any time.
"It's tragic that the Supreme Court's 'evolving standards of decency' haven't evolved enough to protect Terri Schiavo," said Jan LaRue, chief counsel for Concerned Women for America. "You'd think that a Court that prohibits states from executing retarded, convicted murderers would prohibit the state-ordered death of an innocent woman when there's so little evidence of her wishes.
"You couldn't establish probable cause for a search warrant based on the stale and highly suspect hearsay statements in this case. How could any court find it clear and convincing evidence sufficient to order a woman's death by starvation? If this satisfies constitutional due process, God help us."
There is plenty of proof, LaRue added, that this seems to be a legal system bent on killing this woman.
"Even if we knew that's what Terri wanted," she said, "Florida law makes aiding and abetting a suicide a felony, and there's no black-robed exemption."
You

How much is Terri Schiavo's life worth?
Doug Bandow ()
April 12, 2004 | Print | Send

WASHINGTON - The world has moved on since the case of Terri Schiavo, whose husband sought to remove the feeding tube that kept her alive, briefly grabbed public attention last fall. But Terri's life remains at risk.
Michael Schiavo, her parents, the state of Florida, and advocacy groups continue to fight over her future. Alas, she keeps losing where it matters most, in court.
Terri collapsed in 1990, leaving her profoundly cognitively disabled. Her husband won a $1.3 million malpractice judgment that included money for her medical care, but subsequently refused to fund rehabilitative treatment for her.
Along the way he moved in with a woman he describes as his fiance and with whom he has had two children. Six years ago he petitioned the court to remove Terri's feeding tube.
In October 2003, Michael won approval to let her die. Florida's legislature quickly empowered Gov. Jeb Bush to order the tube re-inserted, which he did. Michael is seeking to invalidate that legislation.
Killing Terri - or, more delicately, allowing her to die - should be permitted only if that is what she wants, or would have wanted. But we don't know that.
Michael claims that she said she desired "no tubes." Her family never heard her talk in such terms. And Michael apparently told a girlfriend that he and Terri never discussed the issue.
In any case, such comments by Terri, even if true, hardly offer the certainty necessary to let her die. A number of doctors and other experts have argued that rehabilitative therapy, barred by Michael, could improve her condition, wean her off of the feeding tube, and help her to speak.
More fundamentally, Michael's own credibility is in doubt. Questions go back to her initial injury. Noted pathologist Dr. Michael Baden discounted the diagnosis of a heart attack; he says the report of a bone scan after her collapse revealed that Terri had "a history of trauma."
Of course, this does not prove that Michael is responsible for her condition. But nurses report hearing him make such comments as "When is that bitch going to die." The circumstances raise important questions, now being investigated by Florida's Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities.
In any case, Michael clearly would benefit from Terri's death. Not only is he the legal guardian of the trust fund holding what remains of the malpractice judgment, but he cannot wed his fiance so long as Terri lives.
He's done nothing to dispel suspicion about his behavior. For instance, he has flaunted a 1996 court order requiring him to furnish Robert and Mary Schindler with annual guardianship reports and notify Terri's caregivers that they could answer questions from the Schindlers. Terri's parents say they were not even aware of two episodes of vomiting, which could have led to her death, in February.
The frustrated Schindlers filed suit to hold Michael in contempt of court. But in late March, Florida Judge George W. Greer rejected their motion.
Court-appointed guardian Jay Wolfson recently recommended giving Terri a swallowing test - and maintaining the tube if she passed. But another judge rejected Wolfson's recommendation and failed to renew Wolfson's guardianship.
Now Judge W. Douglas Baird is preparing to rule on the constitutionality of the law that enabled Gov. Bush to intervene. If the statute is voided, it is hard to imagine any other court intervening to save her.
Although the most important immediate concern is Terri's life, much more is at stake. Ominously, belief in a "duty to die" seems to be increasing in the United States, as well as Europe.
Village Voice columnist Nat Hentoff warns of a "growing conviction among American doctors, bioethicists, and hospital ethics committees that it is 'futile' to try to treat certain patients, and therefore, medical professionals should have the power to decide - even against the wishes of the family - when to allow these valueless lives to end."
It is easy to look at Terri Schiavo and ask, who wants to live like that? But David Jayne, who survives only through use of a ventilator, says that "I'm very passionate about the Terri Schindler-Schiavo issue, because I live it."
He explains that before contracting amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig's disease, he couldn't have imagined living under such circumstances, but that I "still find meaning in life." He warns: "It is incredibly wrong for society to decide who lives or dies based on their opinions of what level of quality of life is worth living."
What is Terri's opinion? We may never know.
But we do know that we don't know enough to assume that she would prefer to be dead. We must treat life as sacred and worth preserving. Nothing has been presented in Terri's case to overcome that presumption of life.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute , a Townhall.com member group.

Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube
Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care
By LEIGH HOPPER
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips.
"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive." Wanda Hudson , mother of Sun Hudson
Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.
"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months. ... They made a terrible mistake."
Sun's death marks the first time a U.S. judge has allowed a hospital to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts. A similar case involving a 68-year-old man in a vegetative state at another Houston hospital is before a court now.
"It's sad this thing dragged on for so long. We all feel it's unfair, that a child doesn't have a chance to develop and thrive," said William Winslade, a bioethicist and lawyer who is a professor at the Institute for the Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Paraphrasing the late Catholic theologian and ethicist Richard McCormick, Winslade added, "This isn't murder. It's mercy, and it's appropriate to be merciful in that way. It's not killing, it's stopping pointless treatment."
The hospital's description of Sun that he was motionless and sedated for comfort has differed sharply from the mother's. Since February, the hospital has blocked the media from Hudson's invitation to see the baby, citing privacy concerns.
"I wanted y'all to see my son for yourself," Hudson told reporters. "So you could see he was actually moving around. He was conscious."
On Feb. 16, Harris County Probate Court Judge William C. McCulloch made the landmark decision to lift restrictions preventing Texas Children's from discontinuing care. However, an appeal by Hudson's attorney, Mario Caballero, and a procedural error on McCulloch's part prevented the hospital from acting for four weeks.
Texas law allows hospitals to discontinue life-sustaining care, even if a patient's family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.
Texas Children's said it contacted 40 facilities with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun. Without legal delays, Sun's care would have ended Nov. 28.
Sun was born with a fatal form of dwarfism characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs too tiny, doctors said. Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth, genetic counselors say.
Sun was delivered full term at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, but Hudson, 33, said she had no prenatal care during which his condition might have been discovered.
He was put on a ventilator while doctors figured out what was wrong with him, and Hudson refused when doctors recommended withdrawing treatment.
Texas Children's contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator.
Another case involving a patient on life support a 68-year-old man in a chronic vegetative state whose family wants to stop St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital from turning off his ventilator was scheduled to be heard Tuesday by the Houston-based 1st Court of Appeals. But the case was transferred to the 14th Court of Appeals, which promptly issued a temporary injunction ordering St. Luke's not to remove the man's life support. No hearing date has been set.

Chronicle reporter Todd Ackerman contributed to this report.
leigh.hopper@chron.com

March 20, 2005

Schiavo, Hudson, and Nikolouzos
Sun Hudson, a six-month-old boy with a fatal congenital disease, died Thursday after a Texas hospital, over his mother's objections, withdrew his feeding tube. The child was apparently certain to die, but was conscious. [Or perhaps not: see third update below.] The hospital simply decided that it had better things to do than keeping the child alive, and the Texas courts upheld that decision after the penniless mother failed, during the 10-day window provided for by Texas law, to find another institution willing to take the child .
Where, I would ask, is the outrage? In particular, where is the outrage from those like Tom DeLay, who referred to the withdrawal of Terry Schiavo's life support as "murder" ? If it's appropriate to Federalize the Schiavo case, what about the people being terminated simply because their cases are hopeless and their bank accounts empty?
Sun Hudson is dead, but 68-year-old Spiro Nikolouzos is still alive , thanks to an emergency appeals court order issued yesterday. However, his life support could be cut off at any moment. A nursing home is willing to take him if his family can show that he will be covered by Medicaid after his Medicare runs out. Otherwise, the hospital gets to pull the plug.
The Texas cases contrast with the Schiavo case in two ways:
1. Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state, but isn't terminal. The two Texas patients were terminal but not vegetative. [Or perhaps they were in fact vegetative: see third update below.] It seems to me that the distinction between a patient who is aware and a patient who isn't aware is the morally relevant one, while the disctinction between a death that is sure to occur soon and a death that is sure to occur eventually is morally irrelevant. (Try pleading as a defense to a murder charge that the victim had a terminal ailment.)
2. Terry Schiavo's husband has decided that she would have wanted to die, and the courts have upheld his view against the view of her parents. The mother of Sun Hudson wanted her child to live, and the wife and children of Spiro Nikolouzos want him to live. So while the Schiavo case is an intra-family dispute, the two Texas cases pit the families against health-care institutions motivated at least in part by financial considerations .
I'm not a fan of futile care, and my sense -- based on what limited facts I can glean from the media -- is that if the decision were mine I would have wanted to pull the plug in all three cases. (Certainly, if I'm ever in Spiro Nikolouzos's condition I hope someone puts me out of it quickly.) But it doesn't seem to me that my view, or your view, or the hospital's view, or the judge's view, should be controlling here.
In a country rich enough so that giving expensive medical care to someone doesn't mean starving someone else, the decision about whether to prolong life, I would assert, properly belongs first to the person whose life is involved. If that person is unable to decide and communicate that decision, and has left no explicit directive, then the decision ought to be made by someone likely to choose what the person whose life is at stake would have chosen.
(The law that makes the spouse, rather than the parents, the default decision-maker seems to me a reasonable one, and I'm not sure I see a good argument for favoring whichever surrogate chooses survival. I don't pretend to know the facts of the Schiavo case well enough to judge whether, in that particular instance, there was reason to think that the parents would have been the better choice, but surely there's a strong case for a having a clear rule about which relatives get to decide rather than making a case-by-case adjudication.)
But the notion of letting the health-care providers decide, after doing a careful biopsy of the patient's wallet, strikes me as pretty damned outrageous. And it seems to me that the Right-to-Lifers ought to agree, though apparently anti-abortion groups had no problem with it when Gov. George W. Bush signed the Texas Futile Care Law .
No doubt an argument of some sort could be made for the Texas law, based on some combination of cost and the possibility that an impersonal institution will sometimes avoid mistaks that an emotionally-involved relative would make, and I have no reason to doubt the good faith of those who make that argument.
What I can't figure out is how someone could be genuinely outraged about the Schiavo case but not about the Hudson and Nikolouzos cases. Perhaps Mr. Bush, who says he thinks there should be a "presumption in favor of life," can explain that to us.
Updates
1. Thanks to Atrios , the Hudson and Nikolouzos cases are now all over the left blogosphere, but so far the "real" media continue to ignore them . This will be an interesting case of whether blogging can force a story into the larger discourse. In the absence of a partisan divide, I'd bet against it.
2. Matt Yglesias and Barbara O'Brien of Mahablog make a point I'd missed: voting for the Schiavo bill and voting at the same time for Medicaid cuts -- which, under laws like the Texas law, means that people will have their plugs pulled not because their families want them to die sooner but because their health-care providers don't want to run up a bill for unpaid care -- is pretty damned outrageous.
[Hat tip, twice, to Kevin Drum.]
3. Query: Is there a copy of the outrageous Senate Republican talking points around somewhere? I've seen references and quotes, but no link to the full text. For some reason, this doesn't seem to have become part of the main narrative.
Second update: Spiro Nikolouzos's family found another facility willing to take him , so he is no longer threatened with having life support withdrawn. But the family plans to fight for changes in the law. Hat tip: HealthLawProf .
Sun Hudson, at last report, was still dead.
Third update: Kevin Keith at Lean Left has a long and thoughtful defense of "futile care" laws, and a critique of the analysis here , based in part on what seems to be a more accurate account of the facts. It appears that Sun Hudson was, and Spiro Nilolouzos is, persistently vegetative. That reinforces my conviction that pulling the plug is the right thing to do, but it doesn't much weaken my belief that the call should be made by the families, not by the health-care providers.
Thanks to a reader, I've finally managed to make sense out the distinction being made by the save-Terri forces between her case and the Texas cases. She is able to breathe on her own, but can't swallow and therefore needs to be fed through a tube. Lots of people, and some of the major religious traditions, regard assisted breathing, but not tube-feeding, as extraordinary measures, so that taking away her feeding tube counts as killing while taking away Sun Hudson's breathing tube didn't. That distinction seems utterly arbitrary to me, but I suppose it might seem valid to someone else, who could then have at least a subjective good-faith reason to want to keep Schiavo alive while allowing Hudson and Nikolouzos to die.

Dr Wolfsons observations

Dr wolfsons observations

said it was tough two or three times a day with music for you to see if you would react to get to know you guided by you for purposeful reconition he searched for meanful interactions watching videos focusing on you most of you is gone he says its hard to say difficult to discern purposeful repetive inactions what does that mean in the order of things he said he never saw it. your parents say you can be rehablitied

who cares if you can be rehabilited what if you will be like this forever it does not matter you dont starve some one to death you dont kill just because no one can reach you you are in a space by yourself

your life is in the hands of a judge please lord give this judge insite to you into what god wants not everyone else.

for terri and Jessica

picture speaks for itself

Jesus Prays Take this cup away lord

Sitting here wondering

Here I sit wondering how your doing terri, whose with you today as you suffer, Are you hurting ? who will protect you.

I sit here and ponder quality of life issues, my sons life is so presious i would not even flinch at the taking care of him no matter what his age, over the weekend i asked my girls what would you want done. HOw cruel of us not to see terri's value maybe hitler had it right maybe we should starve all the children and adults that are like terri think of the money we would save I mean what can they contribute to socitey lets base our socitey on those that can do something.

Thats why jesus is crying he looks down on our world and see's the cruelty of what we have become we mame and kill we starve helpless persons just because they in our eyes have no worth what have we become we are warped in our minds when we say would you want to live like terri how stupid is that question no one would want to be like her but then does that mean we kill all those who are like her i can see helping a person who is dying of cancer have an easy death but we dont starve those people to death We jail parents and persons who fail to take care of children but if that child is disabled then its ok what is that its ok to kill those who we feel are not worthy of our time and effort and we comfort our selfs by sayign Its ok she would not want to live like that well who would look at terri's world a dark room and a lonely hosptial void of contact with the world safe in their eyes safe from our eyes we can no see her suffering we can not see her tears.

But what a world she could have safe at home with loving arms to take care of her but no one not her parents or her so called husband want to take terri home to live to take terri to the beach or to the store or bush gardens or what ever no thats too much trouble after all in their eyes shes a vegtable unble to contribute to society unble to fit in unable to be a part of us.

what a world what a world we have become lets kill all the children adults that dont fit our perception of what a persons worth is ok then when those are out of our way we start with killing the ugly people oh then if we rid the world of ugly then we go after poor people hell lets just kill all the people who offend our senses.

dont get me wrong i fully belive in death with dignty a person should be made comfortable when natural death has come knocking what i am offended by is death by convience. terri's life just is an inconvience to those who 1 want her money 2 want to be free of her 3 are offended by her for just being her 4 dont want to be like her after all who would want to walk in Terri's shoes?

my kids at bush gardens enjoying life after all what is life with out joy, Does terri feel joy i wonder how's her quality of life, why does no one take her in a wheel chair out in the sun let god make her better

My heart breaks tonight

My heart breaks tonight for the familys of Terri Schiavo and Jessica Lunsford. The most defensless are under attack while some see the drama of terri as a fight for her right to die one questions the motives behind the main charcter yes i have read of her plight and know of her stuggles and how she suffers but my heart griefs for those affected by her and her plight. Tonight she lies alone while while she is surrounded she is alone in her pain and suffering her lips crack alone her fingers and toes cramp from want of fluids her stomach groans for food. NO one can feel her pain but her she is alone. Dear Sweet Jessica she was alone too what monster could do to an innocent defenseless child what was done to this sweet child. I pray her soul is at peace safe in the arms of jesus her savior when no savior could be found while saviors surrounded her home looking for her to save her she died alone and in pain only jesus at her side.

These tears jesus sheds tonight are for the plight of the innocent the defenseless and weak and small those who need our protection and those who are denied it by the hands of the wicked.

Tonight we share jesus's tears for Jessica lunsford and Terri Shiavo two lives that were cut off too young by the hands of others

Tears for Terri Schiavo and Jessica Lunsford

Thursday, March 31, 2005

Terri dies at 9:05 am

Saturday, March 26, 2005

Friday, March 25, 2005

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

Monday, March 21, 2005

Dr Wolfsons observations

Sitting here wondering

Saturday, March 19, 2005

My heart breaks tonight

About Me

Links

Previous Posts

Archives