Comments on: Vindication For Michael Schiavo

By: kadamson

kadamson — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:45:32 +0000

#72 is under the illusion propogated by the media blab that a living will cleans up the decision making surrounding one’s death. If you’ve ever even had a traffic stop, you would know that any legal statement is still widely open to interpretation at every level of decision making.

This case placed on the American conscience the permission to deny food and water to the disabled.

I hope #71 will always be conscious during any incapacity so he/she can interpret his/her living will to all those concerned.

By: Mary Cabrera

Mary Cabrera — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 18:03:41 +0000

The people who talk like #70 are the same people who have living wills of their own so that they won’t have to go on like Terri, but it’s okay for Terri to exist like that. So, are we committing suicide by having living wills?

By: Kristen Wallace

Kristen Wallace — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 21:41:33 +0000

oh, yes…Michael has been vindicated.

woo hoo – high five.

Stay healthy. Don’t become disabled and unable to speak for yourself. Someone will speak for you. You do prefer to die, right?

By: Kristen Wallace

Kristen Wallace — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 21:35:43 +0000

I worked for a couple of years at a state school for the mentally retarded (what it was called then). There were many non-responsive patients who received direct care that included feeding tubes and physical therapy. I’m sure they had no living will. They definitely had no money – no future – only the present. I can’t imagine at the time someone taking a look at them and deciding that these people probably preferred death and therefore food and water would be withheld so that they could die by starvation and dehydration.

How times have changed in twenty years.

By the way, it is not legal to do this to puppies. It is considered inhumane.

By: cheap hotel

cheap hotel — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:00:41 +0000

cheap hotel

McAllister Allen blunt.cluck Anabaptist evenhanded counters pinkish marriott http://www.secured-hotel.com/

By: Norm

Norm — Sat, 09 Jul 2005 07:37:51 +0000

Matt;
Michael Schiavo got away with murder, period!

By: Matt Margolis

Matt Margolis — Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:02:24 +0000

Well, just because I believe that Michael Schiavo did not abuse his wife and that he was wrongfully villified, doesn’t mean I think he didn’t handle some things incorrectly.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:19:28 +0000

Matt,

What’s your response to the writing on Terri’s tombstone? (I assume it was written by her adulterous husband, Michael.)

By: Jay

Jay — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:58:25 +0000

Matt, you are surmising what most of us have. I think Terry Schiavo was/is a cash cow for the religious right. Her parents sold the mailing lists of all those who sent them donations to groups like Focus On the Family and AFA. Randall Terry crawled out from whatever rock he’s been hiding under to try to give her water (she couldn’t swallow, if he gave her water she’d drown!). My own Senator Rick Santorum was down there mugging for the cameras and managed to raise $100,000 cash for himself.

By: Raging Bee

Raging Bee — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:51:01 +0000

Someone posted on LaShawn’s blog (#80) that he had allowed his father to die because of the progression of his Alzheimer’s — and LaShawn explicitly condoned the decision (#81)! Not only that, she even said she would not want to be kept alive under such circumstances. Then, having explicitly condoned decisions such as Michael’s, she fell back on insisting that Michael had no credibility, due, of course, to all those totally made-up allegations that somehow kept on resurfacing on blogs like hers! The hypocricy is simply laughable.

I love the smell of imploding wingnuts in the afternoon…