Just Slow Down

Top 14. Apr 1, 2005 2:42 PM

» buzzcook - Cognition

In response to Medical Diagnosis posted by BrianTubbs:

At one point Schiavo had the ability to think and act independently. She lost that ability completely and without hope of recovery 15 years ago.
The thing which made her and individual was lost.

Brian it is completely possible that Schiavo's heart could have been removed and kept functioning while the rest of her body was allowed to rot as her brain had. I suppose you could call that life.
If her organs are donated then we could call that life as well.

The Soul, Ka, Id, Ego, and and Super Ego like Elvis left the building. Our bodys are only carriages of the mystery. To suggest that a cells ability to divide is the same thing misses an important point.

I'd also suggest that PVS is different from having ones brain turn to liquid goo. We could perhaps argue with the former but the latter is a physical fact.

I had momentary hope that the coming autopsy would satisfy the doubters. I doubt that now because the same cranks that aided the Schindlers will step up to the plate again and the same compliant media will promote the side that garners the highest ratings over objective reporting.

Brian at some point don't we have to trust science over emotion and the judical system over politics.

-- posted by buzzcook

Top 15. Apr 2, 2005 3:25 PM

» Frank_Monaldo - Re: Cognition

In response to Cognition posted by buzzcook:

Dear Buzzcook,

I glad you are so certain about your diagnosis. However, there was no reason to deny modern diagnostic tests for Terri Schiavo. There was plenty of time before the immediate legal conflict, but the tests were not performed.

To condemn a man to death we must be certain "beyond a reasonable doubt" as to guilt. Even given this level of moral certainty, no modern judge would deny a condemned prisoner a DNA test that might exonerate the criminal if no DNA had been performed during the trial.

There will be an autopsy report that may or may lend evidence to your diagnosis. Now that there is no doubt that she is dead, it may some comfort to know that she was really brain dead when she was starved to death. However, no one has presented me a congent reason why MRI and PET tests could not have been performed in the last year. If everyone is so darn sure about Terri Schiavo's condition, then they should welcome such tests as additional confirmation.

As a professional scientist, I have a reasonable respect for the credibility of science. Nonetheless, I know of no scientist that would not welcome additional tests to provide confirmation of an hypothesis.

-- posted by Frank_Monaldo

Top 16. Apr 4, 2005 3:09 AM

» buzzcook - Re: Re: Cognition

In response to Re: Cognition posted by Frank_Monaldo:

"However, there was no reason to deny modern diagnostic tests for Terri Schiavo. There was plenty of time before the immediate legal conflict, but the tests were not performed"

I see you have your own certainty here Frank. In fact there were reasons to deny the MRI test as is mentioned above. And seeing as the reason the MRI was "contraindicated" happened before the legal dispute began makes the plenty of time statement a bit suspect.

" However, no one has presented me a congent reason why MRI and PET tests could not have been performed in the last year."

Geez Frank, cogent?
1. convincing or believable by virtue of forcible, clear, or incisive presentation; telling.
2. to the point; relevant; pertinent.

The lady had big old electrodes in her head that would interfere with an MRI making it useless.
Now I hope that's to the point enough, relevant, pertinent. I won't try forcible or incisive.

" If everyone is so darn sure about Terri Schiavo's condition, then they should welcome such tests as additional confirmation."

Frank, perhaps you'd like to prove that those tests would do as you say they'd do? I haven't heard any cogent argument in their favor.

There will be no end to this with an autopsy. I am convinced that is a false hope. We're looking at a Vince Foster news story were no matter how much proof is offered there will always be a market for crap.

There are plenty of examples of prisoners being denied DNA tests.
There are plenty of patients in hospitals being denied medical tests.
Perhaps if the supporters erring on the side of life helped people in those situations their motives wouldn't be suspect in the Schiavo affair.

-- posted by buzzcook

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/art...

Top 17. Apr 17, 2005 1:32 PM

» buzzcook - Just a final note

Just as with the autopsy I am positive that this report exonerating Michael Schiavo will not make any difference.

"In the four years after Michael Schiavo won the right to remove his wife's feeding tube, the state's social welfare agency investigated 89 complaints of abuse but never found that he or anybody else harmed Terri Schiavo, records released late Friday show.

The state Department of Children and Families repeatedly concluded that Michael Schiavo ensured his wife's physical and medical needs were met, provided proper therapy for her and had no control over her money. They also found no evidence that he beat or strangled her, as his detractors have repeatedly charged.

snip

"The records show that DCF took seriously its duty to investigate abuse allegations, which became familiar fodder on the Internet: Terri Schiavo was dirty and unkempt. She did not receive proper dental care or rehabilitative therapy. She was kept in isolation. Her husband beat her and broke her bones. He wanted her dead for her money or to remarry. He pumped her full of insulin, hoping to kill her. He often asked, "When will (she) die?" Her lips were cracked and dry.

The names of the complainants were blacked out under Pinellas County Circuit Judge George W. Greer's orders."

"The evil men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones"
Michael Schiavo isn't interred quit yet, just ahead of Bill Shakespear's time line.

-- posted by buzzcook

Top 18. Apr 17, 2005 2:34 PM

» Frank_Monaldo - Re: Re: Re: Cognition

In response to Re: Re: Cognition posted by buzzcook:

Dear Buzzcook,

(1) The electrodes argument has been dismissed elsewhere. They could have been removed. If she was really brain dead, what's the problem with the test?

(2) I think you would be the first to be rightly upset if a potentially exculpatory DNA test were not performed before an execution. After all, people on death row have already been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, why do yet another test? Of course the counter argument is that taking life is so serious, no stone that could reveal important information ought to be left unturned. People on death row are allowed a federal de nova review, which was not done by the federal courts in this case.

Again, you do not provide a persuasive reason to avoid the rush. Surely during the last five years, an MRI and PET test could have been done. We might have avoided a lot of heart ache.

(3) You will note that I never claimed that Michael Schiavo beat his wife. However, I did say that since he was, effectively if not legally, married to another woman and had two children by her, that there is a prima facia case he had mixed interests. He himself remembered that his wife made a passing remark about not wanting to have extraordinary efforts made on her behalf: seven years after the stroke. I do not think that meets the required "clear and convincing test" of the patient's wishes in the law.

(4) Finally, you made an ad hominem argument when you said, "Perhaps if the supporters erring on the side of life helped people in those situations their motives wouldn't be suspect in the Schiavo affair." Wasn't it you who decried those who questioned Michael Schiavo's motives?

-- posted by Frank_Monaldo

Top 19. Jun 15, 2005 2:19 PM

» buzzcook - Autopsy

Schiavo Autopsy
Not one opinion is changed
As I predicted

Terri Schiavo blind?
But what about the video?
Ballon follows eye

I'm betting the autopsy news will get scant coverage past today and that Terri Schiavo will remain a rallying cry for the right for years to come.

-- posted by buzzcook

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/articl...

Top 20. Jun 18, 2005 10:44 AM

» Frank_Monaldo - Re: Autopsy

In response to Autopsy posted by buzzcook:

Dear Buzzcook,

I think you might appreciate a thoughtful article on this topic at this link:

by Paul McHugh, University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University. There is an interesting distinction betweem "brain death" an "persistent vegetative state."

Regards,
Frank

-- posted by Frank_Monaldo

Top 21. Jun 18, 2005 1:25 PM

» buzzcook - Re: Re: Autopsy

In response to Re: Autopsy posted by Frank_Monaldo:

Reading Paul Mchugh's article I couldn't help but notice he uses points that most people knew to be untrue at the time and that the autopsy has incontrovertably proven to be untrue.
Frank many intelligent men have come to the same conclusion as McHugh once they accept the talking points put out by Ranel Terry and his ilk as gospel.

I read your article now you read mine.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

-- posted by buzzcook

Top 22. Jun 24, 2005 5:05 PM

» Frank_Monaldo - Re: Re: Re: Autopsy

In response to Re: Re: Autopsy posted by buzzcook:

Dear Buzzcook,

Sorry for the tardy response.

Your initial observation that the results of the autopsy would not change many minds is correct. However, the issues involved where significantly broader than the specific diagnosis, the aspersions on the motives of some involved on behalf of Ms. Schiavo suggested in the Washington Post link not withstanding.

1. Regardless of the autopsy, there were more dispositive tests while Terri Schiavo was alive that could have been performed to assess her condition that weren’t. I, for one, would have preferred, them to gain reassurance. The fact that the autopsy showed that Teri Schiavo was blind and this was not discerned when she was alive certainly must give pause on the limits of medical evaluation. If a convicted murdered were denied due process or the ability to run potentially exculpatory tests, the fact that after the execution even clearer and more conclusive evidence of guilt were found does not mean that the original decision process was correct.

2. Once in a persistent vegetative state, the law in Florida did not provide that her husband decided her fate, but rather the court had to be convinced that withholding food and water would have been what Ms. Schiavo would have wanted. Michael Schiavo at first did not know, except that seven years after the fact Michael Schiavo suddenly remembered that in a casual conversion Terri expressed such a preference. This thin reed clearly does not meet the standard of "clear and convincing evidence" required of the court. When added to the testimony of Terri's friend the contrary, I am not sure it would even meet the “preponderance” of evidence test. The state court, in my judgment, erred.

-- posted by Frank_Monaldo