NationStates Jolt Archive

Quite long in coming, the result of the Mrs Schiavo's autopsy prove beyond a doubt that she suffered from irreperable brain damage and the supposed video evidence and claims by her mother were false and misleading.

Also, Senator Bill Frist's video-diagnosis of her was incorrect, and his politically-driven medical incompetence calls his fundemental integrity and honesty into serious question.

A certain forumite promised an apology to Mrs Schiavo and her husband and their supporters if this turned out to be the case.

The autopsy conclusively ruled out physical abuse or poison as cause of her illness.

"And despite a widely televised video that appeared to show Ms. Schiavo responding to voices and other movement in her room, the autopsy said that Ms. Schiavo was blind in her final days. The medical examiner said she would not have been able to eat or drink had she been fed by mouth, as her parents had requested. The autopsy found no evidence that she suffered a heart attack, or that she had been given harmful drugs that may have accelerated her death.
"

The national disgrace and display of bad character in the accusations surrounding her loving husband, who dedicated himself unceasingly to the honoring of her wishes was a particularly dark chapter in recent american history, and those responsible should be extremely ashamed.

Link?

Link?


I've never considered it necessary to link to front page stories on the Times, but id you'd like:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/15/national/15cnd-schiavo.html?hp&ex=1118894400&en=34ad0c54c12b4b1b&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Well, sorry, some of us don't read the New York god-damn Times.

Well, sorry, some of us don't read the New York god-damn Times.

Ah, from the UK or something?


In any case, the fact is demonstrated that her parents and their supporters in the radical right-wing were completely and entirely wrong in the schiavo case.

It's on the front page of everywhere.

I think it is funny that her parents are now looking into more legal action.

No, I'm from New Mexico, but I get all my news from the BBC World Service.

What is this all about?

the autopsy says


Brain weight is an important index of its pathologic state. Brain weight is correlated with height, weight, age, and sex. The decedent's brain was grossly abnormal and weighed only 615 grams (1.35lbs.). That weight is less than half of the expected tabular weight for a decedent of her adult age of 41 years 3 months 28 days. By way of comparison, the brain of Karen Ann Quinlan weighed 835 grams at the time of her death, after 10 years in a similar persistant vegetative state.

(any typos are mine, i took it from a photographic pdf. )

meaning that the doctors were right about her brain being replaced by spinal fluid. meaning she had no conscious mind left.

Also, Senator Bill Frist's video-diagnosis of her was incorrect, and his politically-driven medical incompetence calls his fundemental integrity and honesty into serious question.


A reputable Doctor would not make an off the cuff analysis from a tape like he did.

His vision on the needs of the country is kind out of alignment to the average American. They talk about gas, the economy, and jobs. He talks about Terri and judges.

Ah well. I will be voting against him in the future. Big whoop I know. :)

His vision on the needs of the country is kind out of alignment to the average American. They talk about gas, the economy, and jobs. He talks about Terri and judges.

In all fairness though - the questions if one has a right to end his/her own life (and who may speak on your behalf in such a case), if the state has a moral right to nullify your own wish in this regard (which encompasses both the death penalty and laws surrounding euthanasia) or that it "should be up to God, even if you are not religious" are quite important.

Of course, there are ways to actually discuss those, and there are ways to make an ass of yourself. Guess in what category some politicians who shall remain nameless belong..

"Doctor" Bill Frist told us that, based on his expert medical opinion, "[Terry] certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

Truly amazing, considering she was totally blind, "Doctor" Frist.

Yank that man's degree, license, and anything else that might in some way imply that he is a medical doctor.

Oh, and to all the "she could get better" nay-sayers...I FREAKING TOLD YOU SO.

"Doctor" Bill Frist told us that, based on his expert medical opinion, "[Terry] certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

Truly amazing, considering she was totally blind, "Doctor" Frist.

Yank that man's degree, license, and anything else that might in some way imply that he is a medical doctor.

Oh, and to all the "she could get better" nay-sayers...I FREAKING TOLD YOU SO.

In all fairness (why, oh why did this ever reach the national news??), It could be argued that one should not pursue a non-reversible procedure unless and until all possible avenues have been exhausted.

So far as I'm aware, the "T-Virus" from Resident Evil, Herbert West's reanimation work, and Dr. Frankenstein are all fictional, and death is still quite irreversible at this time.


Could Stem-Cell therapy have helped her? Unknown, now, she's dead. It's interesting that the same people who wanted to keep her alive, are opposed to Stem-Cell research, but Dr. Frist may have been acting in what he believed to be her interests-there are doctors who will keep a warm corpse alive for decades-this doesnn't make them bad doctors, it makes them overwhelmed with hope.

Of course, for a Doctor to turn Politician is probably an indicator of incompetence, since Politics has ever been the chosen profession of people who want power and can't balance a chequebook...

"Doctor" Bill Frist told us that, based on his expert medical opinion, "[Terry] certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

Truly amazing, considering she was totally blind, "Doctor" Frist.

he was also confused by the question of whether hiv could be transmitted through kissing and tears. truly, he is a great medical expert.

http://www.minimumsecurity.net/toons2005/5034.jpg

I made myself feel bad while watching the report - I laughed when they declared her blind, this being because 1 major point of the pro-shiavo people was that she followed people across the room with her eyes

Response to stimuli has nothing to do with being alive, and neither does moving. It's a completely different part of the brain. A friend of my dad's was hit by a truck, went into a coma, and died about a year ago. He was on life support for a while, but eventually his family decided to take it off (how come he didn't get marches and protests, huh?).

My dad went down to see him, and held his hand and said "They're talking about taking the life support off. If you want them to do this, squeeze my hand". He squeezed his hand. So he wanted to die, right? Well, not exactly. My dad then said "If you want them to keep the life support on, squeeze my hand".

You guessed it, he squeezed his hand again :rolleyes:

The point is, these people have no idea what they're talking about. Just because your neurons are firing doesn't mean they're making sense of anything. It's like being a newborn baby, but a baby is constantly making sense of the world around it. People like this stay that way.

Hopefully this will finally shut up the people complaining about how "cruel" her husband is.

Well, sorry, some of us don't read the New York god-damn Times.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/06/15/schiavo.autopsy/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5076585,00.html

(and Google's list (http://news.google.com/news?lr=&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&tab=nn&ie=UTF-8&ned=us&ncl=http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_166162806.html&hl=en) of 1,024 related stories)

EDIT: Here is a link to the pdf of the actual autopsy report (http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/schiavo/61305autopsyrpt.pdf).

(and Google's list (http://news.google.com/news?lr=&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&tab=nn&ie=UTF-8&ned=us&ncl=http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_166162806.html&hl=en) of 1,024 related stories)

:rolleyes:

Ahhh bloody fucking hell!!! I thought I had heard the last of that mother fucking name... BUT NO! We needed one more fucking thread. Ya just one more fucking thread! :mad: :headbang: :upyours:

http://www.livejournal.com/userpic/7892370/1419156

Ahhh bloody fucking hell!!! I thought I had heard the last of that mother fucking name... BUT NO! We needed one more fucking thread. Ya just one more fucking thread! :mad: :headbang: :upyours:

http://www.livejournal.com/userpic/7892370/1419156

Get over it. Ya didn't have to read the thread or even open it!

There are several on these forums that made scurrilous attacks on Mr. Schiavo and his treatment of his wife. They also refused to concede basic facts in the face of all evidence, reason, and law.

They claimed in desperation that the autopsy would be the final word.

Some pledged a public retraction and apology -- even a letter of apology to Mr. Schiavo -- if the autopsy showed they were wrong.

They were wrong. So far they have been silent.

Some of us remember ... and we are waiting ...

Shuffle off to a different thread rather than spam this one.

Well, sorry, some of us don't read the New York god-damn Times.

It's been all over every news outlet. And several notable fictional media outlets like your television namesake FOX news.

Ihatevacations']I made myself feel bad while watching the report - I laughed when they declared her blind, this being because 1 major point of the pro-shiavo people was that she followed people across the room with her eyes

Well you have to understand that conservatives would have felt a great deal of kinship with this woman. Her brain was mostly liquified and she was completly incapable of recieving coherent information from the outside world. They made a point of telling us that she could smile, but the conveniently left out that it was while FOX news was on. To a conservative when you say that such a life is not worth living, they take it personally.

I'm not gunna say 'I told you so', nope, not gunna do it. :p

I cannot believe the pride and absolute glee you people are showing that a woman has had to suffer and die to prove you right. No one will ever call you people "bleeding hearts". Do you realize that you are slavering and howling like a pack of jackals? Please try to use some simple human decorum.

I don't know who you all think owes apologies all around on the autopsy results. I guess whoever made that promise will deal with it. If they are from North America and have something like a "job" or "school" you might be civil enough to wait for them to have time to check this forum.

Now, for the autopsy results and the struggle for her life waged by "conservatives"...

Aside from the right to life granted by our Declaration of Independence and the value of every life, there were arguments not only concerning the severity of her handicap and the possibility it was caused by spousal abuse, but also the right of an individual to commit government and/or physician assisted suicide, the legal weight of a single comment made in a social setting, the possible dishonorable motives of her husband, the choice between parents and husband for guardianship, the responsibilities of our government and its impact on our courts, the responsibilites of our courts and the effect their rulings could have on our own lives without our input or consent, the doctrine of her faith...and several more social, political and moral issues that this case encompassed. Pleas and interventions were made in almost every way possible to not kill this woman until all of these issues could be explored and reconciled.

As it turns out, she was feeling no pain and thinking no deep thoughts so if she had lived another week or another 10 years would have made no difference to her. What if research had led to a drug that could have caused tissue regeneration? What if her physicians had observed previously undocumented characteristics of her condition that could have led to advancements? What if she served no function other than to be a comfort for her parents and siblings? But, no, she deserved to die. She didn't kill anyone, or molest any children, or plot to overthrow a government...the people who do these things have civil rights and execution violates their rights. She was just a poor, sick, mentally handicapped woman. Almost all of her funds to pay for her medical care were gone...used to fight for her death.

I know it is useless trying to get most of you to understand the absolute "wrongness" of almost step taken leading to this woman's death. But, in my eyes, brain damaged, paralyzed, blind...she had the right to live.

Well you have to understand that conservatives would have felt a great deal of kinship with this woman. Her brain was mostly liquified and she was completly incapable of recieving coherent information from the outside world.

I guess you could say I am conservative. But I would be willing to bet that I have learned more, accomplished more, and contributed more than you have...and maybe ever will.

Ihatevacations']I made myself feel bad while watching the report - I laughed when they declared her blind, this being because 1 major point of the pro-shiavo people was that she followed people across the room with her eyes

That is sick. I bet you get the grins from fatality accidents, too.

I cannot believe the pride and absolute glee you people are showing that a woman has had to suffer and die to prove you right. No one will ever call you people "bleeding hearts". Do you realize that you are slavering and howling like a pack of jackals? Please try to use some simple human decorum.

Do I have to dig up the post where you advocated for an autopsy and said it would answer the "lingering questions"?

Some of us argued that there were no such lingering questions and your need for the autopsy results was disgusting.

Now the autopsy results prove all your innuendo and rumor-mongering about abuse and your claims about the state of Ms. Schiavo's brain were patently false.

So we are digusting for pointing out how the autopsy you demanded proves you wrong. :rolleyes:

I don't know who you all think owes apologies all around on the autopsy results. I guess whoever made that promise will deal with it. If they are from North America and have something like a "job" or "school" you might be civil enough to wait for them to have time to check this forum.

Do you want me to name them?

I was going to give them time to do the honorable thing. They should have been honorable in the first place and not made slanderous attacks.

You were one that fed the rumor mill and raised "questions" about abuse by Mr. Schiavo.

Aren't you glad you were wrong?

Now, for the autopsy results and the struggle for her life waged by "conservatives"...

Aside from the right to life granted by our Declaration of Independence and the value of every life, there were arguments not only concerning the severity of her handicap and the possibility it was caused by spousal abuse, but also the right of an individual to commit government and/or physician assisted suicide, the legal weight of a single comment made in a social setting, the possible dishonorable motives of her husband, the choice between parents and husband for guardianship, the responsibilities of our government and its impact on our courts, the responsibilites of our courts and the effect their rulings could have on our own lives without our input or consent, the doctrine of her faith...and several more social, political and moral issues that this case encompassed. Pleas and interventions were made in almost every way possible to not kill this woman until all of these issues could be explored and reconciled.

Your main arguments have been conclusively proven wrong.

You are now repeating some of the other slanderous and/or false statements you made before which were disproven. She was not abused. Her husband's motives were honorable. The parents specifically agreed to Mr. Schiavo being
appointed guardian. She was not allowed to die because of the wishes of her guardian, but because of what was proven by clear and convincing evidence to be her wishes. It was not a single comment. There were multiple statements witnessed by multiple witnesses.

The Declaration of Independence does not grant anyone any rights. It is not a current legal document. The Constitution is. Under the Constitution, Ms. Schiavo had a right not to be forcibly kept alive against her expressed will.

The case was governed by a long standing Florida statute. Nothing about allowing Ms. Schiavo to die was precedent-setting -- except the extraordinary intervention by the executive branch and the exceptional amount of review her case received from the judiciary.

As it turns out, she was feeling no pain and thinking no deep thoughts so if she had lived another week or another 10 years would have made no difference to her. What if research had led to a drug that could have caused tissue regeneration? What if her physicians had observed previously undocumented characteristics of her condition that could have led to advancements? What if she served no function other than to be a comfort for her parents and siblings? But, no, she deserved to die. She didn't kill anyone, or molest any children, or plot to overthrow a government...the people who do these things have civil rights and execution violates their rights. She was just a poor, sick, mentally handicapped woman. Almost all of her funds to pay for her medical care were gone...used to fight for her death.

The absence of a brain is categorically different than a mere mentally handicap.

You are the one that would deny her rights recognized by the US Supreme Court and by the laws of Florida on the grounds of her mental state at the time she was allowed to die.

She had a right not to forcibly kept alive against her expressed wishes. That right was honored.

You throw up strawmen regarding why she was allowed to die and a shotgun of fantastical excuses for why she should be forcibly kept alive. Her wealth or lack of it had nor relevance. She had already been kept alive long beyond the point of any hope of recovery. She was dying regardless. You clearly have not even looked at the autopsy report regarding the extent to which her brain was gone and her body was failing.

You seriously advocate keeping someone alive through forcible medical intervention against their will for the purposes of medical experiments or the sentimentality of some family members? Have you no regard for human liberty or dignity?

I know it is useless trying to get most of you to understand the absolute "wrongness" of almost step taken leading to this woman's death. But, in my eyes, brain damaged, paralyzed, blind...she had the right to live.

Again, not just brain-damaged. You are either utterly ignorant of her medical condition or you are being deliberately deceptive.

Her right to life was not violated. She had a right to refuse forcible medical treatment. Her right was honored.

I guess you could say I am conservative. But I would be willing to bet that I have learned more, accomplished more, and contributed more than you have...and maybe ever will.

Nice ad hominem attack on everyone that may disagree with you.

Your claim is unverifiable. But it is nice to know that you think you are superior to everyone else on these forums. Your arrogance is astounding.

Pride is a sin, isn't it?

That is sick. I bet you get the grins from fatality accidents, too.

You were among those that argued the videotapes showed Ms. Schiavo responding to visual stimuli.

Those claims were, as [NS]Ihatevacations notes, laughable. We now know for certain that Ms. Schiavo was incapable of seeing thing like those balloons.

[NS]Ihatevacations said he/she felt bad about laughing.

But what is really sick?

Claiming that someone that was blind responded to being shown balloons because it furthers your agenda?

Keeping someone that is essentially brain dead alive against their wishes?

Spreading false rumors that Ms. Schiavo's condition was caused by her husband?

Spreading other false rumors about Mr. Schiavo?

Remove the plank from thine own eye.

I know it is useless trying to get most of you to understand the absolute "wrongness" of almost step taken leading to this woman's death. But, in my eyes, brain damaged, paralyzed, blind...she had the right to live.
But in OUR eyes, or many of us at least, it doesn't come down to whether she has a right to live. It's whether or not she has a right to die. We went through the same bull with my aunt, who had expressed to our family many times over she'd want to be let go if such a thing happened, and her family went through so much to keep that from happening.

I doubt anybody's going to come forward and say that Schiavo should've died much earlier simply out of spite, but more out of pity. I think it's sick what her family put her husband through out of pure selfish desire.

oh my god i cant believe you stupid dick-heads. its amazing how everyone is all of a sudden a medical professional. then your all religious gurus too! when everyone overlooks one simple fact. terri schiavo was a devout roman catholic. everything that her "devoted" husband was fighting for and claiming she would have wanted goes directly against her beliefs as a roman catholic. and so does cremation. and how is her husband so devoted that he goes off fucking his other g/f and now has children with her? devotion? if thats what you pussyshit liberals consider devotion... id hate to be related to any of you. god damn whats next murdering people in their sleep then claiming they asked you to do it before? oh and by the way. right-to-die is contradictory. death is something that all people fear by their human nature. we are all born in the same way. nobody has the right to take that life away from us. right-to-die. i can see you people voting for the death penatly for attempted suicide. you are the downfall of our nation.

oh my god i cant believe you stupid dick-heads. its amazing how everyone is all of a sudden a medical professional. then your all religious gurus too! when everyone overlooks one simple fact. terri schiavo was a devout roman catholic. everything that her "devoted" husband was fighting for and claiming she would have wanted goes directly against her beliefs as a roman catholic. and so does cremation. and how is her husband so devoted that he goes off fucking his other g/f and now has children with her? devotion? if thats what you pussyshit liberals consider devotion... id hate to be related to any of you. god damn whats next murdering people in their sleep then claiming they asked you to do it before? oh and by the way. right-to-die is contradictory. death is something that all people fear by their human nature. we are all born in the same way. nobody has the right to take that life away from us. right-to-die. i can see you people voting for the death penatly for attempted suicide. you are the downfall of our nation.

Are you a puppet created to troll on this issue?

Regardless, you are sadly misinformed.

1. Ms. Schiavo was not a practicing Catholic at the time of her heart attack.

2. You must not realize that Florida's statute that was applied here to allow the removal of artificial life support, including artificial nutrition, in terminal and vegetative state conditions is within the guidelines of end of life care enunciated by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Those guidelines actually played an express part in the writing of such statutes.

3. There were multiple witnesses, including an uncle and Ms. Schiavo's best friend, to multiple statements concerning her wishes. It was not just the claims of her husband.

4. Ms. Schiavo's parents, the Schindlers, urged Mr. Schiavo to begin dating and even introduced him to women to date -- starting in about 1993.

5. Again, it was proven several times to several different courts by clear and convincing evidence that Ms. Schiavo wished to refuse forcible medical treatment and did not wish to be forcibly kept alive.

6. Your ranting about the right to die and the right to refuse forcible medical treatment is simply too ridiculous to merit much response. These are fundamental liberties.

EDIT: And, yes, fighting to carry out your wife's wishes despite being publicly villified and threatened is devotion. Refusing to sell-out despite being offered large sums of money is devotion. Leave the man alone.

oh my god i cant believe you stupid dick-heads. its amazing how everyone is all of a sudden a medical professional. then your all religious gurus too! when everyone overlooks one simple fact. terri schiavo was a devout roman catholic. everything that her "devoted" husband was fighting for and claiming she would have wanted goes directly against her beliefs as a roman catholic. and so does cremation. and how is her husband so devoted that he goes off fucking his other g/f and now has children with her? devotion? if thats what you pussyshit liberals consider devotion... id hate to be related to any of you. god damn whats next murdering people in their sleep then claiming they asked you to do it before? oh and by the way. right-to-die is contradictory. death is something that all people fear by their human nature. we are all born in the same way. nobody has the right to take that life away from us. right-to-die. i can see you people voting for the death penatly for attempted suicide. you are the downfall of our nation.
Hey. Guess what. I'm a Roman Catholic too, but it's been stated, on legal record, that I wish to be let go in such a situation. I don't know what Church officials YOU talk to, but I personally don't know too many Catholics that would push AGAINST the right to die in that situation, especially once they consider what they'd personally want. Think of it this way: in such a situation where you'd die without interference, it seems it would've been GOD'S WILL for you to die, and now the MEDICAL COMMUNITY is artificially keeping you alive. And about her husband and his girlfriend, Jesus Christ, it's not like he was hopping into that woman's bed the next day. Terry Schiavo was like that for an extremely long period of time, and Catholic or not, I don't think I'd hold it against anybody for finding somebody else in that time. However, the fact that he didn't just divorce her (which he could've done, with Durable Powers of Attorney) and marry this other woman, in my opinion, proves that he still wanted what was best for her.

And who are you to speak of the "downfall of our nation"? Maybe it's people like you, with such closed minds and the seeming inability to look at BOTH sides of the problem, that are the ultimate problem. Personally, I don't fear death. I don't worry about it one little bit. Are you suggesting that I've somehow overcome human nature? That's not the case; I simply am able to accept things as they are inevitably going to be.

It's really not right to push YOUR fears and so-called "nature" onto others. Are you even a Christian? If not, you have no place arguing the religious side of Schiavo's case. If so, I'd bet you're a pretty damn shoddy one, the kind that gives us level-headed Christians with OPEN MINDS a bad name.

*snip*
I don't know who you all think owes apologies all around on the autopsy results. I guess whoever made that promise will deal with it. If they are from North America and have something like a "job" or "school" you might be civil enough to wait for them to have time to check this forum.

*snip*

BTW, although several people owe Mr. Schiavo an apology and apology to others on this forum regarding this topic, I decided to check on the person who promised an apology.

He has posted over 100 times today -- from at least 8:25am this morning to within the last few minutes.
Funny how he hasn't touched any of the Schiavo threads today (unless he used a puppet).

Don't hold your breath waiting for apologies. I've personally met several people who are like certain members of this board, who I will not name but should be apparent. Very close minded and utterly convinced of their superiority over everyone else. An apology is an actual acceptance that you were wrong. I very much doubt that we would see humility like that.

And if I am wrong. Then fine. I am wrong. But I don't think I'll be getting proof of that very soon.

They released Teri Schaivo's autopsy results today. They confirmed what we all expected: The chick is still dead.

When they cracked her braincase, they found her dead soul and a polaroid of Jesus, weeping.

The issue is not difficult to understand, legally. I read through Florida law and it clearly states that when there's no living will and there's a dispute between the parents and the spouse, the spouse holds great authority. It makes more sense, because spouses are generally in closer contact before death (especially if it's sudden) and know what the person's wishes actually were. That's why the courts made the same decision over and over. They didn't "hate" Christianity or want Terri to suffer. That was the politicians' and the medias' bullshit.

As for the religious part...

2 Timothy 2:23
But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels.
If Christians, and people in general, had just stayed out of it, it would've saved the family a lot of stress and a decision (whether to keep her alive or give her a morphine drip) would've been reached a lot quicker. But that didn't happen. We had foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels. And Terri suffered because of it. Though she was pretty much brain-dead, I don't doubt that, to some extent, she felt the pain from starving.

Matthew 8:21-22
Another of the disciples said to Him, "Lord, permit me first to go and bury my father." But Jesus said to him, "Follow Me, and allow the dead to bury their own dead."
Cermonies aren't important, because the body is just the shell for the soul.

Psalms 23:4
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.
Death should not be feared.

Matthew 16:28
"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom."

John 5:24
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life."

Romans 6:23
"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."
No true Christian ever "dies."

Romans 8:5-6
For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace.
Those who worry about death, are concerned on material, earthly matters, and don't realize the eternal life that God has given them. Those who worry about spiritual matters know that God has a place reserved for them in Heaven and though they walk through the valley in the shadow of death, they fear no evil.


Hebrews 2:14-15
Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him R75 who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear R76 of death were subject to slavery all their lives.

[quote]
Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, [Jesus] Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.
Jesus came to end death, and those who fear death, are slaves to Satan.

Jesus also made this abundantly clear when he raised Lazarus from the dead.

Wonderfully said, President Shrub.

As for the issue....

I am glad that there was no proof of abuse or mistreatment by Mr. Schiavo. That makes things much more ... clearer.

Some people take an unalterable stance on something based on something else. They equate forced euthanasia with right-to-die. This is the sort of simple-minded 'lump unlike with like' that the far-right loves to engage in.

Oddly enough, though, God used this tragic woman's case to show us all something. If you don't have your living will in order, please do so. For while the soul goes on no matter what happens to your mortal shell, no family should have to endure what this one did. I feel sorry for both Mr. Schaivo and the woman's parents.

Most of all, I feel sorry for the hateful and blind people who attack someone merely for the sake of attacking someone and don't even have the common decency to admit they are wrong. I, for one, thought that before this that perhaps she was not brain dead. I can freely admit that I am wrong and in absentia apologize for casting aspersions on Mr. Schaivo.

Then again, I'm a Christian, not a hypocrite.

You won't get any apologies. The whole debate was never about that poor woman, or her family or her husband. Congressional aides brought it forward to embarrass the Democratic Party (and that made plenty of headlines so I won't bother to post the links to the numerous stories... if you didn't see it, well its easy to find).

The right wing of the GOP chose to make the matter political debate because they saw the whole issue as an easy attack on the Democrats and on judges they don't like because those judges (most of whom were appointed by Reagan or either Bush) act independently, as the judiciary in this nation is supposed to. Liberal judges my ass, the GOP appointed them for Christ sake.

At least the knowledge from the autopsy will hopefully bring some peace to the husband, who can now rest easier with the knowledge that he and the doctors were right when they realized that Terry died long ago. Only the shell remained, a shell that should have been allowed to pass away long before. I pity her parents, who must face the fact that they didn't act in the best interest of their daughter. Even though they surely meant to do so. If only they would let the matter drop so they can move on.

Sometimes people can't though, and that apparently is what we have in this case. A tragedy that continues.

Nice ad hominem attack on everyone that may disagree with you.

Your claim is unverifiable. But it is nice to know that you think you are superior to everyone else on these forums. Your arrogance is astounding.

Pride is a sin, isn't it?

I agree with everything else you said, but you do know that the comment you're responding to here is directly in reply to a single poster that compared Terri Schiavos condition to the normal condition of anyone who is a conservative. Zooke was justified in annoyed by Dimici's comment.

How much of her brain is gone because of starvation?

How much of her brain is gone because of starvation?

If it had been a factor it would have been mentioned. Starvation usually kills the body by weakening the heart, not the brain, as the brain gets the priority of blood flow, and thus is the last organ to be affected by any problem like exposure or starvation or similar issues. Eventually the heart weakens to the point that it stops functioning. Only then is the brain starved of oxygen.

Her brain was destroyed long before that point and was the root cause of her death. She, her personality and everything she was, except for the body, died long before. Only the shell of her remained. I as a Christian choose to believe she went to heaven long ago. Others may not agree, but the fact is that she, the PERSON that was Terry, was gone long before she died.

How much of her brain is gone because of starvation?

out of curiosity, have you ever raised this question about the millions of AIDS-stricken children in africa who are slowly dying of disease, with no one bothering to nourish them or even try to sustain their lives?

nope, didn't think so.

oh wait, terry schiavo's white; naturally she taks priority.

How much of her brain is gone because of starvation?

Read the post mortem. Cause of death was dehydration not starvation.

BTW, although several people owe Mr. Schiavo an apology and apology to others on this forum regarding this topic, I decided to check on the person who promised an apology.

He has posted over 100 times today -- from at least 8:25am this morning to within the last few minutes.
Funny how he hasn't touched any of the Schiavo threads today (unless he used a puppet).


Altough I am not the 'he' mentioned above, I would not like to apologize for the actions of the past, but commit well-wishes to the futures of Mr. Schiavo, Mrs. Schiavo's parents, & all other immediate family members that may still be grieving (or have had healing wounds re-opened) during this time.

I agree with everything else you said, but you do know that the comment you're responding to here is directly in reply to a single poster that compared Terri Schiavos condition to the normal condition of anyone who is a conservative. Zooke was justified in annoyed by Dimici's comment.

I was well aware of to what Zooke was responding. Domici's comment was intended to be humorous and not directed at anyone in particular. There are whole threads same similar or worse about liberals and liberalism.

Zooke's were directly insulting to Domici and/or anyone that disagreed with her.

You think taking them as a direct flame against Domici makes the comments more justified?

How much of her brain is gone because of starvation?

:rolleyes:

BTW, although several people owe Mr. Schiavo an apology and apology to others on this forum regarding this topic, I decided to check on the person who promised an apology.

He has posted over 100 times today -- from at least 8:25am this morning to within the last few minutes.
Funny how he hasn't touched any of the Schiavo threads today (unless he used a puppet).
Go ahead and call him out--name a name, so he can be vilified the way he deserves.

I was well aware of to what Zooke was responding. Domici's comment was intended to be humorous and not directed at anyone in particular. There are whole threads same similar or worse about liberals and liberalism.

Zooke's were directly insulting to Domici and/or anyone that disagreed with her.

You think taking them as a direct flame against Domici makes the comments more justified?

The rules here about flamebaiting, trolling or flaming have nothing to do with being justified. Yes, I think that since she considers herself to be a part of a group that Dimici insulted that she is justified in suggesting that even with the proposed handicap (as you said actually much more than a handicap) she has managed to accomplish more things than Dimici(according to Zooke, herself) It seemed very clear that she was only talking to Dimici and only in reply to the accusations made by Dimici. You expanded them to refer to everyone that disagrees with Zooke, which she fairly clearly didn't intend to say or actually say.

EDIT: Isn't funny that Ph33r would claim that you and I are pretty much of one mind? Oh, and for the record, I can see that you feel strongly about this issue (you should) and that somewhere along the way Zooke was insulting to the people involved in this case and you found it offensive. The rest of your responses were reasonable and logical. I pointed out the last part because it contrasted the rest of it. Can you guess why?

the autopsy says



(any typos are mine, i took it from a photographic pdf. )

meaning that the doctors were right about her brain being replaced by spinal fluid. meaning she had no conscious mind left.


Pretty much the only thing left somewhat intact was the cerebral cortex(I do believe), which only control the very basic of motor function and senses. Basically, think of it as someone leaving the lights on in their house when they leave. The lights still work, but nobody is home. SOME of her motor functions(the heart beating and breathing) were still working, but that does not mean the person is alive, or will ever be alive. Her mind was gone. She was in a complete comatose, and would remain so, forever. She was, for lack of a better word, a living corpse. She would never have anything resembling any kind of thought, sentient or instinctual. She was, quite frankly, already dead.

I'm sure I may be in a minority here, but I find what her parents did was completely and utterly disgraceful to their daughter. By turning her into a poltical figure, they pretty much destroyed any respect they could have had for her wishes, or what was quite frankly best for her(Don't give me the bull aobut "How is killing her best for her?"-she was dead).

Also, I know this is an attack on their faith, which I intend it to be, but if they are so-called Christians, would it not be best to let her go to heaven? Her time in this world is done, why try and drag it out? If they really were firm in their beliefs, they would have let her go, not turn her into a political figure.

It was completely disgusting. If I ever meet them, I will have a hard time suppressing some very strong words to them.

Terry got Schiavowned

Hmmm, another interesting autopsy tidbit regarding the part where people claimed she could eat orally.


"In fact, the records and findings are such that oral feedings in quantities sufficient to sustain life would have certainly resulted in aspiration. Swallowing evaluations and speech pathology evaluations repeatedly record that Mrs Schiavo was a high risk for aspiration and not a candidate for oral nutrition/hydration.

Claims from caregivers of past oral feedings are remarkable, and, based on autopsy findings and medical records, these feedings were potentially harmful or, at least extremely dangerous to Mrs. Schiavo's health and welfare.

out of curiosity, have you ever raised this question about the millions of AIDS-stricken children in africa who are slowly dying of disease, with no one bothering to nourish them or even try to sustain their lives?

nope, didn't think so.

oh wait, terry schiavo's white; naturally she taks priority.
Some Christians have told me, "If you can't save their souls, why save their lives?"

Of course, I'd argue those people aren't Christians at all, but just ignorant, sheepfucking country bumpkins that WOULDN'T KNOW JESUS IF THEY SAW HIM DRIVING A CAB.

Of course, I'd argue those people aren't Christians at all, but just ignorant, sheepfucking country bumpkins that WOULDN'T KNOW JESUS IF THEY SAW HIM DRIVING A CAB.

And put you on a flaming cross hiding their faces with white garments when you dare mention Jesus was an Arab Jew ;) ?

Too many patients are kept "alive" (I call it existing) by their families to satisfy the familie's own wishes to lessen the guilt that the family may have after their beloved has ceased bodily functions.
I have seen an 86yo woman kept "alive" on a ventilator and other means, with no hope of recovery, because her younger sister of 84years didn't want her to go. She wanted 'everything that can be done for her'. The woman existed for about 6 months before she finally died.
When you are asked what you want done for your kin (who are on existing via artificial means) by the doctor, just remember to ask him/her what that entails. It's alot more than you think and most bodies can be kept fairly viable for a long time. Take into consideration what that person wants for him or herself and ask yourself "do they really want to exist this way?"
Even a so-called 'living will' can be overturned by a court if the family doesn't want to go along with the patient's wishes.
It's a cruel way to look at it, but at least it's humane to the patient. We are better to our animals than we are to ourselves.

Go ahead and call him out--name a name, so he can be vilified the way he deserves.

I gave him further opportunity to respond to my TG yesterday and to the threads on here.

He is active again today.

So: Corneliu is one who promised to apologize if the autopsy reports came back as they did.

To be clear, at least Corneliu had the decency to say he would apologize. There were others who made made defamatory and despicable accusations and should apologize, but refused to say they would. Corneliu should be given credit for at least saying he would be honorable. Now, he should live up to his word.

Here are some of the posts in which the promise of an apology was made:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8576855&postcount=185
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8577139&postcount=197
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8578063&postcount=1005
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8578082&postcount=1006

While I am at it, here is some of the evidence I was speaking of regarding Zooke's hypocrisy.

She calls people here sick for discussing the autopsy results. But, when Ms. Schiavo died, Zooke created a whole thread called: What if Terri Schiavo's autopsy proves she was not in a vegetative state? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=409050&page=1&pp=15&highlight=autopsy)

The brain has regenerative properties in some cases. What if her autopsy shows that she was aware and would have improved with rehabilitation? What if it also shows that her brain damage was caused by trauma and not from coronary arrest?

She also engaged in lots of speculation about what the autopsy "might" show and repeated some the worst allegations against Mr. Schiavo (although at times she claimed this rumor-mongering and innuendo was just "hypothetical):
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8574083&postcount=25
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8574753&postcount=67
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8575218&postcount=109
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8577734&postcount=248

Zooke slavered for the results of the autopsy. Now they prove she was wrong about practically everything regarding the case. She claimed before their were "unanswered questions" (those "questions" being scurrilous accusations without foundation). Well, we have the answers she demanded. But we are sick for discussing the answers.

Ever hear the tale of the Fox and the Grapes ...

Observe: http://www.terrisfight.org/
Disgusting. Truly disgusting.

And the fun part: when you try to leave a comment, you get this after submitting:

Document not found
The requested document was not found on this server. This could be for a variety of reasons, including:
You followed a broken or out-of-date link.
You entered the URL incorrectly.
The file no longer exists.
If you followed a broken link, please inform the owner of the referring document.
If you have any queries about this error, please e-mail phenn@zimp.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to www.terrisfight.org homepage

he was also confused by the question of whether hiv could be transmitted through kissing and tears. truly, he is a great medical expert.

Oh my god. I have minimal knowledge on the subject and I can answer that. You can't get it through tears and you could only get it through kissing if it was open-mouthed and one of the parties had a break in the skin on the inside of their mouth. Still highly unlikely.

They released Teri Schaivo's autopsy results today. They confirmed what we all expected: The chick is still dead.

When they cracked her braincase, they found her dead soul and a polaroid of Jesus, weeping.

This is mortist liberal propaganda. Where there is tissue there is hope. This woman is as organic as you or I. If we sow her back up and staple her skull back together, then pray hard enough, she may very well get better. After all, Bill Frist said she had a chance of recovery and he's a doctor. Are any of you liberals doctors?

I was well aware of to what Zooke was responding. Domici's comment was intended to be humorous and not directed at anyone in particular. There are whole threads same similar or worse about liberals and liberalism.

Zooke's were directly insulting to Domici and/or anyone that disagreed with her.

You think taking them as a direct flame against Domici makes the comments more justified?

Well, I didn't find it that insulting. But then again I tend to think that the insults of a self proclaimed conservative is the sincerest form of flattery. Especially when there's nothing to back it up but wishful thinking. She not only had nothing to back up her boast of accomplishment, but didn't even have anything to back up her boast of being conservative. After all, how conservative is it to think that the government was right to intervene in family quarrels to the point of making up new laws for individual people?

Observe: http://www.terrisfight.org/
Disgusting. Truly disgusting.

*snip*

These people have no decency. No deceny whatsoever.

They repeatedly flat-out lie about what the report says -- sometimes claiming things that are simply the opposite of the report. :rolleyes:

These people be sipping whatever PETA brought to the party

I gave him further opportunity to respond to my TG yesterday and to the threads on here.

He is active again today.

So: Corneliu is one who promised to apologize if the autopsy reports came back as they did.

To be clear, at least Corneliu had the decency to say he would apologize. There were others who made made defamatory and despicable accusations and should apologize, but refused to say they would. Corneliu should be given credit for at least saying he would be honorable. Now, he should live up to his word.

Here are some of the posts in which the promise of an apology was made:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8576855&postcount=185
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8577139&postcount=197
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8578063&postcount=1005
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8578082&postcount=1006

While I am at it, here is some of the evidence I was speaking of regarding Zooke's hypocrisy.

She calls people here sick for discussing the autopsy results. But, when Ms. Schiavo died, Zooke created a whole thread called: What if Terri Schiavo's autopsy proves she was not in a vegetative state? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=409050&page=1&pp=15&highlight=autopsy)



She also engaged in lots of speculation about what the autopsy "might" show and repeated some the worst allegations against Mr. Schiavo (although at times she claimed this rumor-mongering and innuendo was just "hypothetical):
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8574083&postcount=25
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8574753&postcount=67
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8575218&postcount=109
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8577734&postcount=248

Zooke slavered for the results of the autopsy. Now they prove she was wrong about practically everything regarding the case. She claimed before their were "unanswered questions" (those "questions" being scurrilous accusations without foundation). Well, we have the answers she demanded. But we are sick for discussing the answers.

Ever hear the tale of the Fox and the Grapes ...
I can't say I'm surprised that Corneliu hasn't manned up and apologized--it's pretty typical of his behavior. As for Zooke, I can't say that I've run into her that often, but you certainly seem to have the goods on her, and she's pretty scarce on this thread, so...

The autopsy conclusively ruled out physical abuse or poison as cause of her illness.

Didn't actually read the autopsy report did you?


it said, and I quote

"Autopsy examination of her neck structures 15 years after her initial collapse did not detect any signs of remote trauma, but, with such a delay, the exam was unlikely to show any residual neck findings."

The only thing known is that it was caused by lack of oxygen to the brain, however her heart showed no signs of having had a major heart attack which leaves signs that any competent medical examiner could point out. Therefore we know something caused her to lose the ability to breathe for longer than 2-3 minutes, which is about the time it takes for the body to consume residual oxygen and for major brain cell die-off to start. And of course the end of the report said this

It is the policy of this office that no case is ever closed and that all determinations are to be reconsidered upon receipt of credible, new information. In addition to fading memories, the 15-year survival of Mrs. Schiavo after her collapse resulted in the creation of a voluminous number of documents many of which were lost or discarded over the years. Receipt of additional information that clarifies outstanding issues may or shall cause an amendment of her cause and manner of death.

Didn't actually read the autopsy report did you?

Or just didn't read it as selectively as you ...

it said, and I quote

"Autopsy examination of her neck structures 15 years after her initial collapse did not detect any signs of remote trauma, but, with such a delay, the exam was unlikely to show any residual neck findings."

Nice try.

The paragraph just before the one you quote said:

No trauma was noted on any of the numerous physical exams or radiographs performed on Mrs. Schiavo on the day of, in the hourse after, or in the months after her initial collapse. Indeed, within an hour of her initial hospital admission, radiographic examination of her cervical spine was negative. Specifically, external signs of strangulation including cutaneous or deep neck injury, facial/conjuctival peteciae, and other blunt trauma were not observed or recorded during her initial hospital admission.

The report then confirmed no signs of trauma were discovered during the autopsy itself.

The next paragraph in the report states:

Mrs. Schiavo had no traumatic injuries observed or recorded by her initial treating physicians despite numerous physical exams and radiographs. Contutions , abrasions, recent fractures, and, particularly, healing fractures would have been visualized during her initial months of treatment (via her physical exams and multiple radiographs) and attempted rehabilitation.

pages 5-7 of the report then discuss the basis for some of the erroneous reports of "trauma" and rebut them at length

I like this part:

During her initial hospitalization, she received twenty-three chest radiographs, three brain CT scans, two abdominal radiographs, two echocardiograms, one abdominal ultrasound, one cervical spine radiograph, and one radiograph of her right knee. No fractures or trauma were reported or recorded.

Further on pages 7-8 the IME rebuts reports that Ms. Schiavo was given substances to speed her demise.

The IME looked for signs of abuse or trauma and found none.

There was never evidence of either to begin with. Case closed.

The only thing known is that it was caused by lack of oxygen to the brain, however her heart showed no signs of having had a major heart attack which leaves signs that any competent medical examiner could point out. Therefore we know something caused her to lose the ability to breathe for longer than 2-3 minutes, which is about the time it takes for the body to consume residual oxygen and for major brain cell die-off to start.

Wow. 39 pages and that is all that was said? :rolleyes:

And of course the end of the report said this

It is the policy of this office that no case is ever closed and that all determinations are to be reconsidered upon receipt of credible, new information. In addition to fading memories, the 15-year survival of Mrs. Schiavo after her collapse resulted in the creation of a voluminous number of documents many of which were lost or discarded over the years. Receipt of additional information that clarifies outstanding issues may or shall cause an amendment of her cause and manner of death.

So?

The standard policy of the office is that cases are technically never closed, so they will consider new evidence if it arises. Simple boilerplate -- meaningless. :rolleyes:

The fact of the matter is the IME's report is consistent with the findings of all the Courts regarding Ms. Schiavo's condition and her treatment by Mr. Schiavo.

New Granada accurately reported the IME's results, but nice try at muddying the waters.

Oooooh Ravenshrike--I think you just got pwned.

You were among those that argued the videotapes showed Ms. Schiavo responding to visual stimuli.

Those claims were, as [NS]Ihatevacations notes, laughable. We now know for certain that Ms. Schiavo was incapable of seeing thing like those balloons.
I have a question. (Note that I haven't had the time to read the full official autopsy report, yet.)

In the autopsy report, do they specify exactly WHEN she went blind...or does it only state that she was blind at the time of death? Remember that starvation/dehydration causes the eyes to dry out and blindness to set in near the time of death. She could have been visually cognizant up until just a few days before her death.

Unless the autopsy states that she had been blind for *years* before her death, we still don't know whether she was responding to visual stimuli or not.

1. Ms. Schiavo was not a practicing Catholic at the time of her heart attack.
As noted before, I have not yet read the autopsy report myself, but I was under the impression that the autopsy stated that she had never suffered a heart attack...and never suffered from bulimia, either.

Care to explain?

As noted before, I have not yet read the autopsy report myself, but I was under the impression that the autopsy stated that she had never suffered a heart attack...and never suffered from bulimia, either.

Care to explain?

I made that statement before I had read the entire report myself and I mispoke. The main point of that statement is entirely accurate -- that she was not a practicing Catholic at the time her condition started.

The autopsy does not conclude that she never suffered from bulimia. It does question the evidence of whether she had bulimia. It does not state a conclusion either way.

It does conclude there is no evidence she suffered a myocardial infarction.

But rather than play 20 questions with me -- read the bloody report yourself!

I made that statement before I had read the entire report myself. The main point of that statement is entirely accurate -- that she was not a practicing Catholic at the time her condition started.

The autopsy does not conclude that she never suffered from bulimia. It does question the evidence of whether she had bulimia. It does not state a conclusion either way.

It does conclude there is no evidence she suffered a myocardial infarction.

But rather than play 20 questions with me -- read the bloody report yourself!
Okay... but what about the assertion that everyone (including yourself) was making about her being blind (as addressed in my earlier post)?

I need to read the report a little later tonight.

Okay... but what about the assertion that everyone (including yourself) was making about her being blind (as addressed in my earlier post)?

I need to read the report a little later tonight.

I'm too tired to read right now, but according to the report I heard, she was blind because the part of the brain involved in interpreting images from the eyes had atrophied. That isn't really something caused by dehydration, at least not as far as any biology or pathology class I have had would say.

Edit: So I looked it up anyways:

Of particular importance was the hypoxic damage and neuronal loss in her occipital lobes, which indicates cortical blindness.

The damage that caused blindness was not to the eyes themselves, but in the brain. It was neuronal loss.

I'm going to bump this in hopes that Corneliu will drop by and proffer the public apology he owes the board.

I'm too tired to read right now, but according to the report I heard, she was blind because the part of the brain involved in interpreting images from the eyes had atrophied. That isn't really something caused by dehydration, at least not as far as any biology or pathology class I have had would say.

Edit: So I looked it up anyways:

The damage that caused blindness was not to the eyes themselves, but in the brain. It was neuronal loss.
Okay. I also went and read the whole report last night.

As far as blindness, all that it states is that she was blind at the time of death. It doesn't state how long she was blind before death.

So, all of you claiming "victory" about the blindness vs. visual stimuli (following the balloons) thing are doing nothing but flapping gums. The autopsy report does NOT support your arguments.

In fact, after reading the report, it actually leaves MORE questions open than it answers.

In fact, after reading the report, it actually leaves MORE questions open than it answers.
I do agree with Tex on this.

I briefly skimmed the report (Yes, I could've read it more), and it doesn't do much to satisfy the various questions. It does give firmative answers to some, but others it leaves wide open.

So, all of you claiming "victory" about the blindness vs. visual stimuli (following the balloons) thing are doing nothing but flapping gums. The autopsy report does NOT support your arguments.

In fact, after reading the report, it actually leaves MORE questions open than it answers.

However, the autopsy also does not support the arguments of the other side as well. It also debunks various accusations, particularly the more vicious ones dealing with attempted murder that was levied against Mr. Schavio.

And more questions you say. Questions such as? We are not empaths to be able to determine that which may have arisen in your mind after all. Keep it civil and I am sure someone on this board will have an answer for you.

Okay. I also went and read the whole report last night.

As far as blindness, all that it states is that she was blind at the time of death. It doesn't state how long she was blind before death.

So, all of you claiming "victory" about the blindness vs. visual stimuli (following the balloons) thing are doing nothing but flapping gums. The autopsy report does NOT support your arguments.

It does for those of us who actually know a bit about neuronal biology. That type of neuronal loss doen'st happen overnight. Mrs. Shiavo's brain would have started deteriorating from the date of her collapse and considering the report of extreme degredation in the occipital lobes, it is safe to suggest that it started there very soon. As such, she was likely going blind from the date of her collapse and the date at which she was fully blind was probably quite a while ago. Is this absolutely for sure? Of course not, but the biology certainly supports it.

I'm still waiting for that apology. ._.

I can see both sides as reasonable (sort of), but I was more leaning towards her parents' side of the case.

I can see both sides as reasonable (sort of), but I was more leaning towards her parents' side of the case.

The parents side was never reasonable - it was just extremely emotional. In a very understandable way, and judging them while sitting on the sideline is somewhat unfair - but still unreasonable.

The way the husband was demonised however is inexcuseable.

As for Zooke, I can't say that I've run into her that often, but you certainly seem to have the goods on her, and she's pretty scarce on this thread, so...

That's right...you haven't run into me very often as I have a busy life and don't spend much time posting here. It's apparent you didn't connect that obvious fact with my absence from this thread. (Hint: If it says "offline" under my name, that means I am NOT ONLINE) Let me correct that misconception that I am hiding in shame, right now.

While I am at it, here is some of the evidence I was speaking of regarding Zooke's hypocrisy.

She calls people here sick for discussing the autopsy results. But, when Ms. Schiavo died, Zooke created a whole thread called: What if Terri Schiavo's autopsy proves she was not in a vegetative state?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zooke
The brain has regenerative properties in some cases. What if her autopsy shows that she was aware and would have improved with rehabilitation? What if it also shows that her brain damage was caused by trauma and not from coronary arrest?



She also engaged in lots of speculation about what the autopsy "might" show and repeated some the worst allegations against Mr. Schiavo (although at times she claimed this rumor-mongering and innuendo was just "hypothetical):
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.p...83&postcount=25
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.p...53&postcount=67
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.p...8&postcount=109
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.p...4&postcount=248

Zooke slavered for the results of the autopsy. Now they prove she was wrong about practically everything regarding the case. She claimed before their were "unanswered questions" (those "questions" being scurrilous accusations without foundation). Well, we have the answers she demanded. But we are sick for discussing the answers.

Ever hear the tale of the Fox and the Grapes ...

I was going to rise above your cheap shots and snide personal remarks, but buddy, you've gone too far this time. You have taken my comments out of context, misconstrued my intent to perpetuate your arguments, and basically called me a hypocrite and a liar. I presented the claims of Mrs. Schiavo's parents and some of the questionable actions of her husband to propose that there was a slight chance that the autopsy results would show that she was not as severely brain damaged and/or her condition was due to spousal abuse. With this supposition, what would the ramifications have been in our society? What knee-jerk reactions and new laws would have been created? You even supplied a link to one of my posts where I tried to get the topic back to what I had proposed:

My topic was proposed to explore the possible reactions and changes that such autopsy findings might lead to. It may not be likely, but it is possible. What would the lasting effects of such a finding be? If it is any easier to deal with, take the Schiavos and Schindlers out of it, and think of it in terms of a legal and moral issue based on a pretend scenerio.

I was hardly :slavering" for the autopsy results. Again, links you thoughtfully provided:

to be continued

According to your earlier posts Zooke, you used a significant number of 'what-ifs' to help justify your cause. I should point out that the use of what-ifs is a very shaky assumption since it can run the other way as well. Ergo what-if they never found a treatment to regenerate tissue cells in the period of her lifetime.

The use of what-ifs should be avoided when making arguments. Specifically if they are future predictions.

Unless you are clairvoyant of course.

On a side note, would I be correct in assuming that you are of the persuasion that believes Terry Schavio made no wish to have her life terminated in such a situation?

Because if you believe she did have that wish, doesn't that mean arguing for her continued life support also mean you are arguing that her wishes should be ignored?

EDIT: Oh, and Cat-Tribe, the links do not work. Could you post the quotations if they are not overly long?

Well, sorry, some of us don't read the New York god-damn Times.

Or watch the telivised news aparently.

I truly hope that autopsy proves that she was totally brain dead and that no injuries are found to have caused her condition. I hate to think she went through 2 weeks of dying aware of her deteriorating condition. I hate to think of the repercussions that might follow a finding of brain trauma. Her husband has 2 children who need a father with them...not spending all of his time in court.

It is sick to consider several outcomes to a situation and discuss the ramifications of the various outcomes but it's not sick to use a person's suffering and death to advance your opinions and gloat?????? It is high humor to make remarks like:

I laughed when they declared her blind, this being because 1 major point of the pro-shiavo people was that she followed people across the room with her eyes

Well you have to understand that conservatives would have felt a great deal of kinship with this woman. Her brain was mostly liquified and she was completly incapable of recieving coherent information from the outside world.

But it is flaming when I pointed out to the person who laughed at her blindness:

That is sick. I bet you get the grins from fatality accidents, too.

So be it. Gives me a better understanding of just exactly what type mentalities I'm dealing with.

As for Cornie...he promised to write an apology letter to Mr. Schiavo, and I fully expect him to do so. But, he does not owe you people an apology for anything.

Again, not just brain-damaged. You are either utterly ignorant of her medical condition or you are being deliberately deceptive.

I probably have a better understanding of the difference between brain-damaged and brain-dead than most folks. Brain death is defined as the irreversible loss of all functions of the brain. It can be determined in several ways, no electrical activity in the brain, no blood flow to the brain, absence of function of all parts of the brain (no movement, no response to stimulation, no breathing, no brain reflexes.) This is the condition my daughter was in when we approved her removal from life-support. Terri Schiavo was brain-damaged. She had massive damage and atrophy of the brain, but she still maintained autonomic functions and displayed movement, reaction to painful stimuli, and semi-consciousness. I suggest that you are the one blissfully ignorant or deliberately deceptive.

That's right...you haven't run into me very often as I have a busy life and don't spend much time posting here. It's apparent you didn't connect that obvious fact with my absence from this thread. (Hint: If it says "offline" under my name, that means I am NOT ONLINE) Let me correct that misconception that I am hiding in shame, right now.



I was going to rise above your cheap shots and snide personal remarks, but buddy, you've gone too far this time. You have taken my comments out of context, misconstrued my intent to perpetuate your arguments, and basically called me a hypocrite and a liar. I presented the claims of Mrs. Schiavo's parents and some of the questionable actions of her husband to propose that there was a slight chance that the autopsy results would show that she was not as severely brain damaged and/or her condition was due to spousal abuse. With this supposition, what would the ramifications have been in our society? What knee-jerk reactions and new laws would have been created? You even supplied a link to one of my posts where I tried to get the topic back to what I had proposed:



I was hardly :slavering" for the autopsy results. Again, links you thoughtfully provided:

to be continued


Oh, dear. Watching you squirm like this over your own hypocrisy is quite sad, really.

She had massive damage and atrophy of the brain, but she still maintained autonomic functions and displayed movement, reaction to painful stimuli, and semi-consciousness. I suggest that you are the one blissfully ignorant or deliberately deceptive.

Semi-consciousness meaning a state of awareness? And the evidence for this would be? Mind you, evidence is all I am asking for.

As for the others, meaning motor control, we are not certain that it occured under conscious control or were simply muscle reactions.

How hard it is to say: "I was wrong."

Or watch the telivised news aparently.
That's uncalled for. At the time New Foxxinnia posted that comment, it was just hitting the news.

Besides, I watch the news every day and it wasn't mentionned here. Not all news network carried it, all over the world.

According to your earlier posts Zooke, you used a significant number of 'what-ifs' to help justify your cause. I should point out that the use of what-ifs is a very shaky assumption since it can run the other way as well. Ergo what-if they never found a treatment to regenerate tissue cells in the period of her lifetime.

The use of what-ifs should be avoided when making arguments. Specifically if they are future predictions.

Unless you are clairvoyant of course.

On a side note, would I be correct in assuming that you are of the persuasion that believes Terry Schavio made no wish to have her life terminated in such a situation?

Because if you believe she did have that wish, doesn't that mean arguing for her continued life support also mean you are arguing that her wishes should be ignored?


We use "what-if"s all of the time. What if I get the promotion? What if I had missed seeing that red light? What if I get pregnant? What if I had/hadn't married him/her? I have no idea what the future will hold...just as no one knows what the future does not hold. Our whole life is made up of "what-if"s and the "hope" they turn out for the best. How do we justify taking away "hope".

I have no idea if her wish was to have her life terminated. I believe that mankind does not have the knowledge, understanding, foreknowledge, or responsibility to determine the time or manor of anyone's death, including our own. I am confused by the acceptance of capital punishment, abortion, suicide, and euthenasia as it is alien to even our most basic instincts.

That's uncalled for. At the time New Foxxinnia posted that comment, it was just hitting the news.

Besides, I watch the news every day and it wasn't mentionned here. Not all news network carried it, all over the world.
Still haven't heard about it in any news, still haven't read about it in any newspapers (Europeans)...Obviously not an issue around here.

Still haven't heard about it in any news, still haven't read about it in any newspapers (Europeans)...Obviously not an issue around here.

Perhaps that's because the autopsy has determined that she's still dead.

Semi-consciousness meaning a state of awareness? And the evidence for this would be? Mind you, evidence is all I am asking for.

As for the others, meaning motor control, we are not certain that it occured under conscious control or were simply muscle reactions.


Read her doctor's reports...even the autopsy report. She was treated with pain relievers for menstrual cramps and received suppository morphine after being disconnected from her feeding tube...I would assume to handle discomfort. It requires some amount of consciousness and awareness to suffer pain and discomfort.

Perhaps that's because the autopsy has determined that she's still dead.

:0 really...so what's the fuss?

:)

:0 really...so what's the fuss?

:)

You've got me. By now she probably smells pretty ripe, too.

Read her doctor's reports...even the autopsy report. She was treated with pain relievers for menstrual cramps and received suppository morphine after being disconnected from her feeding tube...I would assume to handle discomfort. It requires some amount of consciousness and awareness to suffer pain and discomfort.

Yes, I read about the painkillers being administered and the morphine as well. However, I didn't see anything that made it anymore than a precautionary measure on the off chance that she might have a consciousness to begin with at the point of administration.

Not exactly conclusive proof is it?

Oh and Whispering Legs. Wasn't she cremated? At the very best, her remains would smell somewhat charred. But thats about it.

Oh, dear. Watching you squirm like this over your own hypocrisy is quite sad, really.

I'm hardly squirming. I am pointing out how some of you take posts, attach an unintended intention to them, and then personally attack the person who made the post. Example:

Oh, dear. Watching you squirm like this over your own hypocrisy is quite sad, really.

Thank you for demonstrating my point very nicely.

Read her doctor's reports...even the autopsy report. She was treated with pain relievers for menstrual cramps and received suppository morphine after being disconnected from her feeding tube...I would assume to handle discomfort. It requires some amount of consciousness and awareness to suffer pain and discomfort.

Perhaps the administration of pain relievers after the removal of the feeding tube was done solely to prevent all those angly protestors outside from storming the hospital ?

Yes, I read about the painkillers being administered and the morphine as well. However, I didn't see anything that made it anymore than a precautionary measure on the off chance that she might have a consciousness to begin with at the point of administration.

Not exactly conclusive proof is it?


The autopsy report cited an earlier examination when she started having discomfort and trouble with some of her physical therapy. The examination that followed determined she had a knee joint degeneration consistent with someone in her condtion. I don't believe there was ever any argument that she didn't have physical sensation.

Even the name of her condition is "persistent" not "permanent" vegetative state.

The autopsy report cited an earlier examination when she started having discomfort and trouble with some of her physical therapy. The examination that followed determined she had a knee joint degeneration consistent with someone in her condtion. I don't believe there was ever any argument that she didn't have physical sensation.

Even the name of her condition is "persistent" not "permanent" vegetative state.

Knee joint degeneration consistent with someone in her condition you say? Hmmm, I am having some difficulty linking that to consciousness. Care to explain?

And did it specify what kind of trouble she underwent with her physical therapy? It is late and I really do not want to swim through that report again. Complications could mean anything really, be it natural rejection or unexplained issues. Unless there is a definitive evidence that she had a consciousness at that point of time, it remains only a maybe at best.

As for the term "persistent" and not "permanent" used to describe her vegetative state, it doesn't really mean anything much, not as far as we can tell with the autopsy. It would seem that too much of the brain mass had atrophied over the years.

Even the name of her condition is "persistent" not "permanent" vegetative state.

you'd think you would learn to just keep your head down, but no, you'd rather participate in a game of real life whack-a-mole. you people are a complete mystery to me.

care to show me somewhere where some medical professionals make a relevant distinction between persistent and permanent vegitative states?

Even the name of her condition is "persistent" not "permanent" vegetative state.
ponit being WHAT exactly? I watched the guys on tv when this broke, they said a couple times that it was IMPOSSIBLE for her to recover and likened her to a classic PVS case and noted that person's brain was bigger than Schiavo's.

Did anyone else want to beat the hell out of the guy who asked the first question, I don't remember what exactly he asked but I do recall them stating the answer 2 minutes before and his question being immensely stupid

Knee joint degeneration consistent with someone in her condition you say? Hmmm, I am having some difficulty linking that to consciousness. Care to explain?

And did it specify what kind of trouble she underwent with her physical therapy? It is late and I really do not want to swim through that report again. Complications could mean anything really, be it natural rejection or unexplained issues. Unless there is a definitive evidence that she had a consciousness at that point of time, it remains only a maybe at best.

As for the term "persistent" and not "permanent" used to describe her vegetative state, it doesn't really mean anything much, not as far as we can tell with the autopsy. It would seem that too much of the brain mass had atrophied over the years.

I heard the autopsy report when it was first released by the coroner, and he talked about some sort of joint calcification or nodule growth in one knee that was discovered when she had trouble with her PT. I believe he said it later appeared in the other knee. He pointed out that this was a common occurance in paralytics. Rather than "permanent" I would have been more accurate in using the word "coma". Here's a brief description and comparison of the 2 conditions.:
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/coma/coma.htm

A coma is a profound or deep state of unconsciousness. An individual in a state of coma is alive but unable to move or respond to his or her environment. Coma may occur as a complication of an underlying illness, or as a result of injuries, such as head trauma. A persistent vegetative state (commonly, but incorrectly, referred to as "brain-death") sometimes follows a coma. Individuals in such a state have lost their thinking abilities and awareness of their surroundings, but retain non-cognitive function and normal sleep patterns. Even though those in a persistent vegetative state lose their higher brain functions, other key functions such as breathing and circulation remain relatively intact. Spontaneous movements may occur, and the eyes may open in response to external stimuli. They may even occasionally grimace, cry, or laugh. Although individuals in a persistent vegetative state may appear somewhat normal, they do not speak and they are unable to respond to commands.

you'd think you would learn to just keep your head down, but no, you'd rather participate in a game of real life whack-a-mole. you people are a complete mystery to me.

care to show me somewhere where some medical professionals make a relevant distinction between persistent and permanent vegitative states?

Perhaps if you quit playing whack-a-mole so much and took the time to learn the differences in terms before you criticized someone, you wouldn't be so confused and mystified.

Perhaps if you quit playing whack-a-mole so much and took the time to learn the differences in terms before you criticized someone, you wouldn't be so confused and mystified.

so that's a 'no' on the demonstration of a relevant distinction then? could it be because there isn't one?

so that's a 'no' on the demonstration of a relevant distinction then? could it be because there isn't one?


Do you read what others post or do you just make this stuff up as you go.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085425&postcount=101

Do you read what others post or do you just make this stuff up as you go.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085425&postcount=101
so what? she was in a persitent vegitative state, move on

Ihatevacations']so what? she was in a persitent vegitative state, move on

You were the one who intruded on a discussion of her sensory abilities. I took the time out of my day off to defend my previous thread and posts and to counter the vicious attacks made on my character. YOU'RE the one who wanted to get into the mix. Get over it!!

Jeb Bush is currently investigating into Michael Schiavo, even though the autopsy already took away any possibility of tampering or foul play. I can't believe the governor can't just let it go and let this man get on with his life. Politicians shouldn't get involved in family matters.

It is a further credit to the courageous, dedicated Mr Schiavo that he has not sought damages from the various groups that have defamed his character during the course of this national disgrace.

I heard the autopsy report when it was first released by the coroner, and he talked about some sort of joint calcification or nodule growth in one knee that was discovered when she had trouble with her PT. I believe he said it later appeared in the other knee. He pointed out that this was a common occurance in paralytics. Rather than "permanent" I would have been more accurate in using the word "coma". Here's a brief description and comparison of the 2 conditions.:
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/coma/coma.htm

I also note that in the same paragraph you quoted, it also stated that people in a PVS condition can also follow the symptoms of a coma victim. Still not conclusive. We are once again left with a maybe and not a certainty.

The relevant quotation is as follows.


Coma may occur as a complication of an underlying illness, or as a result of injuries, such as head trauma. A persistent vegetative state (commonly, but incorrectly, referred to as "brain-death") sometimes follows a coma.

No definitive evidence.

You know, I was all for her being euthanized, but a shotgun to the face would have been more humane than starving her. And if she is undeserving of some ounce of humanity because her brain was entirely nonfunctional, then who cares if they kept her alive, if she didn't know the difference and it made her parents happier. The main reason she was starved was to free her husband from the responsibility. She should have been euthanized properly or not at all.

The only problem was that medical administration of chemical induced death is illegal where she was I believe.

The only problem was that medical administration of chemical induced death is illegal where she was I believe.

Made illegal by the same people who cried out againt the cruelty of starving someone to death was it not?

Well you have to understand that conservatives would have felt a great deal of kinship with this woman. Her brain was mostly liquified and she was completly incapable of recieving coherent information from the outside world. They made a point of telling us that she could smile, but the conveniently left out that it was while FOX news was on. To a conservative when you say that such a life is not worth living, they take it personally.
I am sorry but the irony of a republican feeling empathy for a brain- dead person was too much to resist,sort of like big brother telling us what's good for us. Let the poor woman rest in peace people.

I am glad that they have ruled out foul play in her death. I didn't agree with the way of death, but its an issue that is left in the gray by most sets of morals and religions.

I always believed that if there was a chance that she could be saved, then try. If there was facts linking her husband to foul play, then the parents should get rights over her.

I always made the standpoint that no one here is connected, and it was a great misdeed for it to become national news. How would you feel to see a loved one in the stages of death everywhere you turn. I'm not even worried about the parents or the husband at this point. They went through a lot of stress, and were in the spot light. But think of reletives. Those that had to face this person they had grown up with or known, and now she was cursed to a life of no life. To those people I feel sorry.

So what if someone was right or wrong? A woman has passed on and is now in the next exsistance. May she rest in the peace that she deserved, and may all her loved ones feel closure now that they don't have cameras in their windows, showing them pain as a spector sport.

This is just one more way how our government should back off. It was never supposed to become like this, why make it that way now? In all honesty this was a case that should have been left up to the state of Florida and its laws.

I really like how CNN commented it..
The autopsy showed that she would never be abel to be revived, however the information regarding how she came to be in that state, will not be realesed...

I really like how CNN commented it..
The autopsy showed that she would never be abel to be revived, however the information regarding how she came to be in that state, will not be realesed...

I thought the autopsy made it clear that there was no medical evidence to support a viable theory as to how she came to that state?

My apologies to calling Mr. Shiavo every name in the book.

My apologies to calling Mr. Shiavo every name in the book.
Holy Shit Cats!!!

(alright, I admit-I just wanted to say 'Shit Cats')

EDIT: I should (also) say that it's straight up. Said he would do it, did it. I'm cool (though I haven't been involved.) He can feel how he wants to about it but he owned up where he said he would if he was wrong. I would hope that this would be the last of it for this aspect of it.

commendable

My apologies to calling Mr. Schiavo every name in the book.


You Sir (or madam), have just gotten yourself onto my list of extremely well respected players. Hope you don't mind me correcting your spelling though.

You Sir (or madam), have just gotten yourself onto my list of extremely well respected players. Hope you don't mind me correcting your spelling though.

I do try to the best I can UNIverseVERSE! And no I don't mind.

My apologies to calling Mr. Shiavo every name in the book.We may not agree on alot of things but never let it be said that I never respected you.

Good show Corneliu.

I thought the autopsy made it clear that there was no medical evidence to support a viable theory as to how she came to that state?
True. The autopsy didn't answer a single a question as to how she initially got into the state that she was in. All it did was leave more questions to be answered.

Did you know that there are methods of strangulation (such as the police headlock/sleeper hold) that can leave no trace of strangulation...not just no trace 15 years later, but no trace (in some cases) even 15 MINUTES later?

You cut off oxygen to the brain long enough (by compressing the oxygen-supplying artery ), it would be very easy to put someone into the state Terri was in.

The only answers supplied by the autopsy: she was blind [I]at the time of death, she had extreme cerebral atrophy, she had NOT had a heart attack or suffered from bulimia and that there were no signs of bone trauma. That's it. All the autopsy did was leave even MORE unanswered questions.

True. The autopsy didn't answer a single a question as to how she initially got into the state that she was in. All it did was leave more questions to be answered.

Did you know that there are methods of strangulation (such as the police headlock/sleeper hold) that can leave no trace of strangulation...not just no trace 15 years later, but no trace (in some cases) even 15 MINUTES later?

You cut off oxygen to the brain long enough (by compressing the oxygen-supplying artery ), it would be very easy to put someone into the state Terri was in.

The only answers supplied by the autopsy: she was blind [I]at the time of death, she had extreme cerebral atrophy, she had NOT had a heart attack or suffered from bulimia and that there were no signs of bone trauma. That's it. All the autopsy did was leave even MORE unanswered questions.

The only unaswered questions are:

Why are baseless accusations being made against Mr Schiavo, who had and continued to have no motive for his wife's death?

What does this rabid, frothy mouthed, insane hate spewing say about his accusers?

True. The autopsy didn't answer a single a question as to how she initially got into the state that she was in. All it did was leave more questions to be answered.

Did you know that there are methods of strangulation (such as the police headlock/sleeper hold) that can leave no trace of strangulation...not just no trace 15 years later, but no trace (in some cases) even 15 MINUTES later?

You cut off oxygen to the brain long enough (by compressing the oxygen-supplying artery ), it would be very easy to put someone into the state Terri was in.

The only answers supplied by the autopsy: she was blind [I]at the time of death, she had extreme cerebral atrophy, she had NOT had a heart attack or suffered from bulimia and that there were no signs of bone trauma. That's it. All the autopsy did was leave even MORE unanswered questions.

Oh no, you are one of those husband killed her types. Even with your example; doing that to a person does take training. You would be lucky to be able to read a book and use it correctly the first time.

The fact of the autopsy still disproves the "she will get better" and the "she is aware of her surrounding" claims.

Did you know that there are methods of strangulation (such as the police headlock/sleeper hold) that can leave no trace of strangulation...not just no trace 15 years later, but no trace (in some cases) even 15 MINUTES later?

You cut off oxygen to the brain long enough (by compressing the oxygen-supplying artery [I can't remember the name offhand]), it would be very easy to put someone into the state Terri was in.


I do hope that this particular statement of yours is not going to be the first step to another accusation of murder on the side of Mr Schavio. Your theory would mean that this person would be trained in that particular method for it to work. And if that does not work, what else I wonder. More exotic methods of terminating someones life that would seem even more unlikely for Mr Schavio or for that fact, your average citizen to perform?

It left unanswered questions, but you sirrah, your questions have a tinge of deliberate maliciousness about them.

You Sir (or madam), have just gotten yourself onto my list of extremely well respected players. Hope you don't mind me correcting your spelling though.

Hey leave him alone. He can't help it as he is from the South.

Corneliu: :p

My apologies to calling Mr. Shiavo every name in the book.

OH MY GOD!

Corneliu apologiesed! It's the sign of the apocolypse! Everybody to the underground shelters!


Considering some of the rather "unflattering" things you have said about him; it is commendable you said that.

Good show old bean! :D

OH MY GOD!

Corneliu apologiesed! It's the sign of the apocolypse! Everybody to the underground shelters!


Considering some of the rather "unflattering" things you have said about him; it is commendable you said that.

Good show old bean! :D

I do try to keep my promises TBF! I know it took awhile but I did have more pressing matters to attend too, not to mention debates.

My apologies to calling Mr. Shiavo every name in the book.
Thanks for doing it and not trying to weasel out like some others on this thread are doing. I respect that.

Read her doctor's reports...even the autopsy report. She was treated with pain relievers for menstrual cramps and received suppository morphine after being disconnected from her feeding tube...I would assume to handle discomfort. It requires some amount of consciousness and awareness to suffer pain and discomfort.
The part of the brain that detects pain is not the same part of the brain where consciousness resides. All that would be required for her level of functioning would be the mid and hindbrain, consciousness resides in the forebrain, an area largely destroyed in this individual.

True. The autopsy didn't answer a single a question as to how she initially got into the state that she was in. All it did was leave more questions to be answered.

Did you know that there are methods of strangulation (such as the police headlock/sleeper hold) that can leave no trace of strangulation...not just no trace 15 years later, but no trace (in some cases) even 15 MINUTES later?

You cut off oxygen to the brain long enough (by compressing the oxygen-supplying artery ), it would be very easy to put someone into the state Terri was in.

The only answers supplied by the autopsy: she was blind [I]at the time of death, she had extreme cerebral atrophy, she had NOT had a heart attack or suffered from bulimia and that there were no signs of bone trauma. That's it. All the autopsy did was leave even MORE unanswered questions.

It's the carotid artery and there are traces of trauma that can be seen by the trained eye. They just don't leave the level of bruising regular strangulation does because the amount of pressure, the distribution (the areas of pressure), and the length of contact are all lessened.

Most importantly, no one has EVER shown any remotely plausible motive for the strangulation of Terri Schiavo. If what you say is true no one will have anything remotely resembling proof of any misconduct by Mr Schiavo and given that Mr. Schiavo not only deserves the benefit of the doubt but people should be ashamed for just assuming something as crass and baseless as foulplay on the part of Mr. Schiavo.

True. The autopsy didn't answer a single a question as to how she initially got into the state that she was in. All it did was leave more questions to be answered.

Did you know that there are methods of strangulation (such as the police headlock/sleeper hold) that can leave no trace of strangulation...not just no trace 15 years later, but no trace (in some cases) even 15 MINUTES later?

You cut off oxygen to the brain long enough (by compressing the oxygen-supplying artery ), it would be very easy to put someone into the state Terri was in.

The only answers supplied by the autopsy: she was blind [I]at the time of death, she had extreme cerebral atrophy, she had NOT had a heart attack or suffered from bulimia and that there were no signs of bone trauma. That's it. All the autopsy did was leave even MORE unanswered questions.

How dare you even begin to think that, on absolutly no grounds of proof or credible evidence, that he strangled her. And Im pretty sure that many people have given testimony that she had an eating disorder.

Thanks for doing it and not trying to weasel out like some others on this thread are doing. I respect that.

I'm sure you were referring to me. Obviously, nothing I can say or have said (such as hoping that she was unable to suffer and that her husband would be cleared of guilt so that he would be around to raise his children) will get you to abandon your perception of what I said. And, I still wonder (and think it would be a good subject for debate), what would be the possible ramifications in our legal system and our society if her family's claims had been proven at least partially true. Leave it to say, I'm relieved that it's over, that he can continue life with his girlfriend and their children, and that a lot of America got a wakeup call on leaving definite instructions as to our care if we are unable to make our wishes known. I sure did!!