http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=592526
This is getting a little rediculous folks Adam H On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:48:30 -0700, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think we are down to insults here. I have not made any statements > about men in general. Or about doctors in general, for that matter, > except that the best ones are usually those that claim to know the > least :) > > As a matter of fact I have read most of what is online about this > case. Have you? > > All I can say is that the 33 affidavits by MDs -- most of them > neurologists and rehabilitation specialists -- do carry quite a bit of > weight in my eyes, and they were not not allowed to be entered as > evidence. Now if you'd rather act like Carl Rove and call me names, go > ahead. I don't know that she doesn't want to die, but neither do we > know that she does. Don't you think it would be a good idea to err on > the side of caution? > > Dana > > On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:21:35 -0500, Jerry Johnson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, you definitively have your opinion. I can see it will not change. You > > have very strong opinions on the evils of the medical profession, the evils > > of men, and the evils of suicide. > > > > She is a poor, healthy woman being killed by her mean, evil, money grubbing > > husband. Which I have to say I think is a load of [EMAIL PROTECTED] As do > > most people. There isn't anything in a decade that indicates anything but > > brain-death. You may not want to believe that, but it really doesn't matter > > what you (or I) believe. The husband is the one with the right to make that > > decision. The courts have consistently backed that up. It's all over but > > the starvation at this point. > > > > She can certainly divorce her husband. Just get her to fill out a divorce > > certificate and sign it. Oh, right. She can't. And no, her parents can't > > file the divorce for her. Which is a good thing, or a lot more people would > > be divorced if it was up to the in-laws. > > > > Why do you think she doesn't want to die? Have you talked to her about it? > > Do you know her better than all of the people who testified before a judge > > who ruled it to be her wish? If I had the choice of laying in a hospital > > bed for a couple of decades rotting or going to "meet my maker", there is > > no doubt which I would choose. > > > > Can you list for me every single doctor and medical test that she has gone > > through in all the years? Can you absolutely say that the medical care she > > received upon hospitalization was subpar? Or are you saying the hospital > > and all the doctors are in on it with the husband? What about the original > > lawsuit the husband won? Don't you think the defense might have looked into > > her health during the case? Or are they in on it too? > > > > And finally, what do you mean there is no good evidence? Are you qualified > > to make that call? Have you seen all the medial evidence? Have you examined > > her? I haven't either, but medical professionals (who I do mostly trust) > > with no stake in the case have consistently reviewed the evidence and > > concluded she is in a persistent vegetative state. There isn't a whole lot > > of controversy on it, from what I have read. Are they ALL liars? To me it > > sounds a lot like the creationist argument that if you can find 1 > > "scientist" to back your view it is just as scientifically viable as any > > other view, regardless of the preponderance of opinions to the contrary. > > > > Jerry Johnson > > Web Developer > > Dolan Media Company > > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/17/05 07:07PM >>> > > Consider that maybe she doesn't want to die and doesn't have to be the > > way she is. We don't know because her husband hasn't bothered to find > > out. The issue here is that the lower court is traditionally the > > finder of fact, and so you can only appeal on procedural grounds. But > > the case is fundamentally wrong. Nobody should have to fight like this > > to make sure that good medical care is available to anyone. I would > > not be arguing this if there were an opinion in from a neurologist > > based on an MRI. > > > > Look at it this way, even Scott Peterson is going to get his appeals. > > But Terri Schiavo does not because of a catch-22 -- she can't divorce > > her husband because he is trying to kill her and he can try to kill > > her cause she can't divorce him. > > > > But hey, with sufficient media repetition that someone's life is not > > worth living, I guess it all becomes good. I am beginning to > > understand rants about the media. There is no good evidence that this > > woman is in fact in a vegetative state. I got more diagnostic care > > than she did when I went to the ER with a headache for chissake. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:150842 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
