Schiavo Polls

[Shane Roach]

http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=11131

It has become more or less common knowledge that the polls used to create the illusion of overwhelming public support for Schiavo's death used leading questions. The longer this story drags on, the better it will be for those who suported her parents. In the brief period of the two weeks leading up to Terry's death, support for the decision to let her die dropped 10% as well, as more and more information on the actual facts came to light.

If this issue stays alive, soon it will be clear that the only people that were using her death for politics were the ones skewing the polls, and the backlash may be signficant. Policiticians understood the issue all too well, which is why most Republicans and fully half of the Democrats voted in congress to seek some redress in this case. So far the Dems have succeded in casting the Republicans as the ones doing all the politicing about this, but for those who really cared about this case and followed it well enough to know, for example, of the family friends who stated that Terry would not have wanted her mother hurt as she was, and that Mr Schiavo refused to use the lawsuit settlement for therapy for Terry which might have resulted in her learning to swallow thus making the whole tube debate irrelevant, the concern is the coldness and obstinance of the far left, not the activism of the religious right.

 

[David Gould]

http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=11131

It has become more or less common knowledge that the polls used to create the illusion of overwhelming public support for Schiavo's death used leading questions. The longer this story drags on, the better it will be for those who suported her parents. In the brief period of the two weeks leading up to Terry's death, support for the decision to let her die dropped 10% as well, as more and more information on the actual facts came to light.

If this issue stays alive, soon it will be clear that the only people that were using her death for politics were the ones skewing the polls, and the backlash may be signficant. Policiticians understood the issue all too well, which is why most Republicans and fully half of the Democrats voted in congress to seek some redress in this case. So far the Dems have succeded in casting the Republicans as the ones doing all the politicing about this, but for those who really cared about this case and followed it well enough to know, for example, of the family friends who stated that Terry would not have wanted her mother hurt as she was, and that Mr Schiavo refused to use the lawsuit settlement for therapy for Terry which might have resulted in her learning to swallow thus making the whole tube debate irrelevant, the concern is the coldness and obstinance of the far left, not the activism of the religious right.

The problem is neither the coldness and obstinance of the far left, nor the activism of the religious right.

The problem is that there are very strong feelings on both sides of the issue and that leads to harsh words, extreme measures and emnity.

There is little to be done about that, though - the end of life is something humans all have difficulty in dealing with and is something that is bound to generate strong feelings either way.

 

[Ninja Turtles]

Regardless of polls, the courts' decisions were correct. Something omitted from the Terri's Fight website was this...

Click on this link, I have linked a post I wrote in another thread on this board: Post.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Bottom line I believe is that if there is not a living will , it should be assumed that the person wants to live when they can breathe on their own and their heart and kindeys are functioning on their own .Because eating is not auto function of the body , denying food and water is just wrong unless the person themselves has made it clear that they do not wish it . There also needs to be more outlined criteria of who is a suitable guardian for someone in that condition . A man with another romantic interest cannot possibly have the best interests of his wife in mind .

 

[Ninja Turtles]

Bottom line I believe is that if there is not a living will, it should be assumed that the person wants to live when they can breathe on their own and their heart and kindeys are functioning on their own. Because eating is not auto function of the body, denying food and water is just wrong unless the person themselves has made it clear that they do not wish it. There also needs to be more outlined criteria of who is a suitable guardian for someone in that condition. A man with another romantic interest cannot possibly have the best interests of his wife in mind.

He wished to end care before he met the other woman. He was encouraged to meet other women while he was caring for the wife by the parents, didn't seem to have a problem then.

The problem isn't the system, it was the parents case. Read the link I posted and explain how the Greer's opinion was wrong, especially in the way he analyzed Hammesfahr and Maxfield's testimonies.

A small aside, no spaces before commas and periods.

 

[Angel4Truth]

He wished to end care before he met the other woman. He was encouraged to meet other women while he was caring for the wife by the parents, didn't seem to have a problem then.

The problem isn't the system, it was the parents case. Read the link I posted and explain how the Greer's opinion was wrong, especially in the way he analyzed Hammesfahr and Maxfield's testimonies.

A small aside, no spaces before commas and periods.

Actually that isnt true , He had a relationship with this woman now and 2 others before first bringing the case to have her feeding tube removed , have you followed the case?

 

[Ninja Turtles]

Actually that isnt true, He had a relationship with this woman now and 2 others before first bringing the case to have her feeding tube removed , have you followed the case?

Did you read the opinion?

 

[David Gould]

Bottom line I believe is that if there is not a living will , it should be assumed that the person wants to live when they can breathe on their own and their heart and kindeys are functioning on their own .Because eating is not auto function of the body , denying food and water is just wrong unless the person themselves has made it clear that they do not wish it . There also needs to be more outlined criteria of who is a suitable guardian for someone in that condition . A man with another romantic interest cannot possibly have the best interests of his wife in mind .

The problem with putting conditions is that not everyone will agree with them. We do not vet people for parenthood; we do not vet people for marriage. And a spouse is deemed under law to have the responsibility. The law can make no judgment as to whether they are a good spouse, a bad spouse or an indifferent spouse.

In addition, judging a person you do not know except through media reports seems a bit much.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Did you read the opinion?

The judges opinion has nothing to do with the comments i made . Please re read what I posted . I said I believe that the criteria of a guardian needs to be more clarified and that her best interest werent in mind with someone who had another romantic interest . Also it needs to be more outlined in the law about what constitues life support and when it can be stopped .

What does any of those things have to do with judge greer . But since you wont stop bringing him up , I felt he ignored his duty by not considering evidence that was not available at the time michael first brought the case or the fact that he perjured himself in his first trial on malpractice to that of his trial to have her tube removed . My post was about the things that should happen so this type of tradgedy never occurs again maybe you missed where i said my opinion?

 

[Ninja Turtles]

The judges opinion has nothing to do with the comments i made . Please re read what I posted . I said I believe that the criteria of a guardian needs to be more clarified and that her best interest werent in mind with someone who had another romantic interest . Also it needs to be more outlined in the law about what constitues life support and when it can be stopped .

What does any of those things have to do with judge greer . But since you wont stop bringing him up , I felt he ignored his duty by not considering evidence that was not available at the time michael first brought the case or the fact that he perjured himself in his first trial on malpractice to that of his trial to have her tube removed . My post was about the things that should happen so this type of tradgedy never occurs again maybe you missed where i said my opinion?

Hostile for no reason.

 

[Angel4Truth]

The problem with putting conditions is that not everyone will agree with them. We do not vet people for parenthood; we do not vet people for marriage. And a spouse is deemed under law to have the responsibility. The law can make no judgment as to whether they are a good spouse, a bad spouse or an indifferent spouse.

In addition, judging a person you do not know except through media reports seems a bit much.

I know that he is an adulterer , he has a different religious veiw than hers , there is evidence that she was considering divorce before her "colapse' and that he perjured himself many times and even lied in tv interveiws if you compare them . All these things speak to the mans credibility and i dont have to know him personally to know those things damage it and also just because a spouse is deemed under law to have a responsibility it doesnt mean they should have it when they dont have someones best interest in mind .

Parents have responsibilty over their children , but when there are allegations of abuse , they are carefully considered before that parent can resume responsibility . That is what I am saying here , I do not believe everything was weighed as it should have been since much of the evidence didnt come to light till AFTER greer made his first ruling . Had everything new been weighed from the begining , i would feel differently but that didnt happen and why I have a problem with it all .

No one would execute a criminal if there were substantial amounts of evidence that were contrary to his original trial , the same weight should have been used here . Allegations of abuse , weighing the best interest of the individual and all the testimony of other witnesses to events should have been considered before this was allowed to happen , BECAUSE he said otherwise at another trial that was before that one .

 

[Ninja Turtles]

I know that he is an adulterer,

He's not an adulterer. His wife was dead, body still alive.

he has a different religious veiw than hers , there is evidence that she was considering divorce before her "collapse" and that he perjured himself many times and even lied in TV interveiws if you compare them.

Not a practicing Catholic and talk of divorce isn't evidence unless you have divorce papers and something written. Perjured himself on television? You mean like he messed up details in a ten year span? How about perjury dealing with one's studies and background while saying a person can be rehabilitated?

All these things speak to the mans credibility and i dont have to know him personally to know those things damage it and also just because a spouse is deemed under law to have a responsibility it doesnt mean they should have it when they dont have someones best interest in mind .

Parents obviously couldn't prove this in court. How would you go about entering all this new "evidence"?

Parents have responsibilty over their children , but when there are allegations of abuse , they are carefully considered before that parent can resume responsibility . That is what I am saying here , I do not believe everything was weighed as it should have been since much of the evidence didnt come to light till AFTER greer made his first ruling . Had everything new been weighed from the begining , i would feel differently but that didnt happen and why I have a problem with it all .

It was all weighed and all the medicine pointed to a mass of flesh controlled by a brain stem.

No one would execute a criminal if there were substantial amounts of evidence that were contrary to his original trial , the same weight should have been used here . Allegations of abuse , weighing the best interest of the individual and all the testimony of other witnesses to events should have been considered before this was allowed to happen , BECAUSE he said otherwise at another trial that was before that one .

There was no abuse and those accusations came from Hammesfahr read the court's opinion about him. Why would you believe a man that has so thoroughly lied in court about his work and prestige? If you ask a reputable person like Dr. Michael Baden, the "abuse," is nothing more than injury consistent with a bulemic person that has collapse, received CPR, and was resuscitated.

This case was clear. You talking about weighing the truths, the familyhad so many lies coming from their side, how can anyne expect the judge to rule in their favor?

 

[419gam]

That poll is equally if not more biased then ones seen done by other ogranizations.

"Another Zogby question his directly on Terri's circumstances. "If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked. A whopping 79 percent said the patient should not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes. "

Too bad that under state Law Terri was on life support, so the question is not directly related to the Schiavo case. The theres the following

"The Zogby poll found that, if a person becomes incapacitated and has not expressed their preference for medical treatment, as in Terri's case, 43 percent say "the law presume that the person wants to live, even if the person is receiving food and water through a tube" while just 30 percent disagree."

Too bad that the court clearly found that Terri had expressed her wishes

 

[Angel4Truth]

He's not an adulterer. His wife was dead, body still alive.

If she was dead , and not his wife as you say , he should have let her parents handle it , cant have it both ways . Either he was married to her or he wasnt , if he wasnt , he had no right being guardian , if he was , then hes an adulterer period .

Not a practicing Catholic and talk of divorce isn't evidence unless you have divorce papers and something written. Perjured himself on television? You mean like he messed up details in a ten year span? How about perjury dealing with one's studies and background while saying a person can be rehabilitated?

Parents obviously couldn't prove this in court. How would you go about entering all this new "evidence"?

It was all weighed and all the medicine pointed to a mass of flesh controlled by a brain stem.

There was no abuse and those accusations came from Hammesfahr read the court's opinion about him. Why would you believe a man that has so thoroughly lied in court about his work and prestige? If you ask a reputable person like Dr. Michael Baden, the "abuse," is nothing more than injury consistent with a bulemic person that has collapse, received CPR, and was resuscitated.

Yes he perjured himself , state attorney generals office even said so , but statute of limitation for prosecution for it had passed . You dont know if there was abuse or not , as you werent there and any allegations of abuse should be thoroughly investigated no matter who a person is to determine if its true or not , your say so on it , isnt good enough and neither is his . Also all the evidence was NOT weighed , that is why congress got involved to order a 'fresh" look so NEW evidence and tons of other evidence that was not heard at the original hearing could be weighed .

This case was clear. You talking about weighing the truths, the familyhad so many lies coming from their side, how can anyne expect the judge to rule in their favor?

How do you know they were lies ? Because Michael Shiavo said so when hes been shown a liar more than a few times?

 

[Ninja Turtles]

If she was dead , and not his wife as you say , he should have let her parents handle it , cant have it both ways . Either he was married to her or he wasnt , if he wasnt , he had no right being guardian , if he was , then hes an adulterer period .

Never said she wasn't his wife. All he has is a sack of flesh controlled by a brainstem and it's not coming back. Terri checked out a long time ago. The wife is gone, the body remains, he still has legal claim to that body.

How do you know they were lies ? Because Michael Shiavo said so when hes been shown a liar more than a few times?

LOL, you actually want to consider the usage of Hammesfahr and Maxfield as being reputable? LOL And then Hammesfahr made the battered wife claim, and his allegation is supposed to be investigated? LOL

 

[Ananel]

*sighs* Myself, I'd just assume allow the woman to be laid to rest and be done with the matter. Despite their failings, this was ultimately a matter adjudicated by the courts. Final judgments will be metted out by God in the end, but in the meantime I see no reason to trumpet the case and parade the corpse around for either side's benefit.

...it seems, how do I put this? In poor taste.

 

[Ledifni]

http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=11131

It has become more or less common knowledge that the polls used to create the illusion of overwhelming public support for Schiavo's death used leading questions. The longer this story drags on, the better it will be for those who suported her parents. In the brief period of the two weeks leading up to Terry's death, support for the decision to let her die dropped 10% as well, as more and more information on the actual facts came to light.

If this issue stays alive, soon it will be clear that the only people that were using her death for politics were the ones skewing the polls, and the backlash may be signficant. Policiticians understood the issue all too well, which is why most Republicans and fully half of the Democrats voted in congress to seek some redress in this case. So far the Dems have succeded in casting the Republicans as the ones doing all the politicing about this, but for those who really cared about this case and followed it well enough to know, for example, of the family friends who stated that Terry would not have wanted her mother hurt as she was, and that Mr Schiavo refused to use the lawsuit settlement for therapy for Terry which might have resulted in her learning to swallow thus making the whole tube debate irrelevant, the concern is the coldness and obstinance of the far left, not the activism of the religious right.

For starters, look into the actual facts about therapy for Terri Schiavo. Evidently you don't care whether she had therapy, because you heard from somebody that she didn't and spouted it without bothering to check. And that's just one of many errors in your post. It's full of emotion and misinformation, and almost not one word of actual fact.

 

[eptatorata]

For starters, look into the actual facts about therapy for Terri Schiavo.

For starters, read all the court filings.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Hostile for no reason.

I dont understand what was hostile about anything I stated ,I keep giving my opinion and you keep posting after what I clearly claim is my opinion or experience to harrass me about it I also see that you have a pattern of following me across threads and not adressing any points but merely reciting my words and stating - rude , hostile , or making other false claims . I dont think that harrassment is allowed on this forum so maybe you will wish to move on at this point and stop seeking to post to me , because after this , i will not be adressing anything you write . God bless you and have a wonderful day.

 

[Randall McNally]

...also just because a spouse is deemed under law to have a responsibility it doesnt mean they should have it when they dont have someones best interest in mind .

You keep repeating this but you have not explained it. What it is about a separate "romantic relationship" that precludes him from having Terri's best interests in mind?

Really, the only relevant facts were her medical condition and her alleged wishes. He can't be responsible for the former, and why would his "adultery" cause him to misremember the latter?

Parents have responsibilty over their children , but when there are allegations of abuse , they are carefully considered before that parent can resume responsibility .

I think the court records will attest to the fact that such allegations were considered.

That is what I am saying here , I do not believe everything was weighed as it should have been since much of the evidence didnt come to light till AFTER greer made his first ruling . Had everything new been weighed from the begining , i would feel differently but that didnt happen and why I have a problem with it all .

What was the new evidence and why did it not sway any of the other courts?