Terri Schiavo’s Blog

I originally wasn’t going to blog this because it’s in very bad taste, but given the last entry Brock put up I figure we’ve already crossed that line just a tad so I may as well. Someone out there has taken it upon themselves to create Terri Schiavo’s Blog.

I have to admit that when I first saw it I couldn’t help but giggle a little, but then dark humor has been a means of dealing with painful situations in my family for years so I’m not surprised that it made me giggle. My own grandmother cracked jokes about whether or not my grandfather had pants on as he was laying in state at the funeral.

If you just look at the main page it’s probably not too horrible of a joke, but once you get into the comments left by some of the visitors it quickly goes down hill. A classic example of a if-you-thought-it-couldn’t-get-worse situation. Take that as a fair warning if you decide to check it out especially if you’re one of those types who thinks there are some topics people shouldn’t make fun of. Some of the comments are downright mean-spirited. In a way, though, I can see it as type of backlash against the media circus that has been thrown up around this issue. I’m sure there are some psychologists out there that could have a field day with it.

Anyway, blame Ted if you get upset about it. I found the link through him. wink

198 thoughts on “Terri Schiavo’s Blog

  1. Yeah, “her” blog was sent to me yesterday and I too was kinda taken aback.  One the one hand, I was shocked that someone was so dark-minded that they’d put that up, but on the other hand…

    The comments are pretty “funny” in a dark humor way as well.

  2. I have a dark sense of humor as well, so I let out a chuckle when I seen the blog.  I especially enjoyed the comment by “republican doctor” under the *blink* topic. Funny stuff.

  3. Alright I was reading through the comments and I also died when I read this.  It was so funny I figured I post it here, I hope you don’t mind:

    willy_jack said…

    When she dies will they tour her body around the country like they did Reagan??

    I actually hope they run her and Ronny Reagan in 2008.

    I think the Republicans stand a chance if they do that.

    The don’t know your there tickiet in 08, people.

    We gotta stop those liberal commie bastards.

  4. That is indeed very wrong and offensive, not to mention unrealistic. Terri can’t type.

    Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for her to have an audio blog? C’mon, people, show the woman some respect.

  5. Maybe she could blink in Morse code… 

    (or is that mentioned on her blog?  I haven’t looked)

  6. Here’s my favorite dissenting voice:

    too bad i believe that all human life is sacred, because if i didn’t i swear i’d get rid of as many of you inconsiderate bastards as possible.

  7. too bad i believe that all human life is sacred, because if i didn’t i swear i’d get rid of as many of you inconsiderate bastards as possible.

    Yes, I saw that one too!  I would hope that if someone claims they think all life is sacred, it’s because they truly believe all life is sacred, not because they’re “supposed” to think that.  It’s like a Christian saying (and this is a true story), “I can’t wait for a burglar to break into my house so I can blow his damned brains out.”  You shouldn’t want to shoot someone, at least not if you claim to be a good Christian! (you know, pro-life and all that stuff) 

    And if someone is a Christian, the choice should be due to faith in a Higher Power, not “If I don’t, I’ll go to hell.”  Funny they think God might be so easily fooled:

    (scene:  Heaven)
    MAN 1:  Hey Fred!  How did you get in here?  You were a pretty bad guy on Earth … cheating on your wife, beating your kids, and that convenience store robbery where you shot that old lady.
    MAN 2:  Oh, she didn’t die.  Anyway, I just told God I was a good Christian and believed in Christ and he swallowed it.  What a maroon!
    MAN 1:  Oh yeah, John tried to get in, but the idiot admitted he stole a pair of shoes and God sent him to hell.
    MAN 2:  Ssh, ssh, here comes God now!
    GOD:  Hi fellows.
    MEN (sweetly):  Hellooooo, God. (snicker) 
    MAN 2:  What an idiot!

    —Joe

  8. DOF: The second thing that goes is your memory. I forget what the first is.
    And, yes, if you believe in Dog you’re supposed to feel guilty. (God?)
    However, many of the comments really are funny. LOL

  9. Ok, laughed my ass off.  Really, I cannot believe that at this point in the circus, anybody would be concerned about the supposed “tasteless” humor of blog.  Pretty much too late for any of the “Save Terri” folks to lay a claim to any sort of dignity.

    Hysterical.

  10. IMPoe’s right.  Now there’s a fight over how her body is to be “disposed of” for lack of a better phrase.  He wants her cremated and her parents want a traditional Catholic burial.

  11. Wouldn’t be surprised if the parents took their “tomato” out on tour.  Shameless.  Or I could be getting overly cynical.

  12. I think that’s the least of it. The Right-to-Life crowd is going to keep bleating about this case for a long time to come. They’ve already started with statements like:

    The Rev. Frank Pavone was with the Schindlers during their final visit. He said, “This is not only a death with all the sadness that brings, this is a killing. And for that we not only grieve that Terri has passed, but we grieve that our nation has allowed such an atrocity as this, and we pray that it will never happen again.”

    I think the only person who’s going to get much peace from Terri’s passing will be Terri herself.

  13. Ok, well I was hopeful that this was over. I turned off the news and watched a movie after the announcement was made. I’m so sick of this story. 24/7 here in the sunshine state.
    I nearly barfed when I saw Jesse Jackson on my tv the other day. Didn’t he have Micheal to try and help?

    Oh well.
    For me, this is over. She is at peace and that’s all I cared about.

  14. Wasn’t Terri unable to swallow?  Seems to me that if a protestor with a cup of water had gotten to her, they might have accidentally drowned her.

  15. I am of the belief that her parents should have just shut the hell up and let her pass with dignity, but apparently that was too much to ask of them, the Republicans and the Religious Right. Shameful behaviour on their part. I am not saying her husband was a saint either, but at least they could have just all been a bit more respectful and dignified in this matter.

  16. I wondered where I’d read about Terri’s blog.  I thought maybe I’d read about it on Pharyngula, posted about it on my blog, and have spent the afternoon searching through PZ Meyers’ archives looking for the original post.

    Yeah, bad taste, but the only thing that shocks me is that this was the first I’d heard of it … not that someone created it.

    Damn funny, though.  I can’t get the comments working.

  17. I am not saying her husband was a saint either
    – TheJynXeD

    No, he wasn’t, and as a fellow non-saint I can appreciate that.  He’s practically public enemy number one among the “save Terri” crowd – worse than Scott Peterson and O.J. Simpson combined with a little bit of Ted Bundy thrown in for good measure.

    It would have been so easy for him to walk away.
    It would have been so easy for the judges to just give the braying crowd what they wanted and leave her hooked up to the tube.

    For their trouble they’re hated everywhere.  Michael will need a bodyguard from now on.  Judge Greer was asked to leave his Baptist church (!) because they wanted him to be more activist instead of upholding the law.

    Oh yeah, remember the law?  The one that says you have the right to refuse medical treatment?  Michael convinced a long string of judges that she didn’t want to be kept alive that way. All to respect HER wishes.  What a price he paid to carry them out.

    I heard a talking head on FOX say what a crime it was “to force a person who is lucid, who knows what is happening to her, to die of starvation and thirst.”  I guess he knew more than the doctors, the neurologists, who did a CAT scan, and EEG (and found flat lines)

    The facts, the law, Terri’s wishes – all mean nothing to the activists.

  18. I think this guy here is the best:

    [Quote]“I THINK YOU SHOULD ALL GO TO HELL…THIS IS TERRI’S WEBSITE AND 90% OF ALL THE PEOPLE WHO’S POSTS I’VE READ HAVE BEEN CRUEL AND BULLSHIT POSTS. STUPID FUCKIN MORONS…. MAYBE YOU SHOULD GET A BRAIN AND THEN GROW A HEART!

    FUCKIN JASON RIVERA IS ADVERTISING HYUNDAI TIBERONS WHILE TERRI IS SLOWLY DYING. WHOOOO PARTY UP YOU FUCKING IDIOTS CAN WRITE PENIS ON A WEBPAGE….SO MATURE….IF YOUR NOT GUNNA RESPECT THE LADY AND THE AMOUNT OF PAIN SHES GOING THRU, THEN GET THE FUCK OFF OF THIS WEBSITE!!!!

    IF ANYTHING, YOU SHOULD BE ADMIRING TERRI AND HER FAMILY…NOT FOR HER DISABILITY BUT FOR THE PAIN THEY ARE GOING THROUGH. CAN YOU EVEN GRASP HOW DIFFICULT IT MUST BE FOR HER FAMILY TO SEE HER GOING THROUGH ALL THIS PAIN?!?!? TO KNOW THAT YOUR DAUGHTER IS GOING TO DIE BECAUSE OF A FUCKING COURT ORDER?

    BEFORE YOU JUDGE SOMEONE, AT LEAST GET TO KNOW THEM/THEIR CONDITION. I DONT KNOW TERRI , BUT I DO KNOW ABOUT DISABLED PEOPLE AND THEIR CONDITIONS. NOBODY SHOULD BE FORCED TO DIE, IT SHOULD EITHER BE THEIR CHOICE AND THATS IT. IN THIS CASE, IT SHOULD BE DEATH BY NATURAL CAUSES EVEN IF SHE CAN’T COMMUNICATE OR DO DAILY FUNCTIONS. JUST BECAUSE SHE CAN’T COMPREHEND LIKE THE REST OF US, DOES THAT MEAN THAT SHE CAN’T LOVE OR EXPERIENCE ANY OTHER BASIC EMOTION THAT NORMAL PEOPLE CAN EXPERIENCE? THINK ABOUT IT!

    MDR-“NINO RICCI”-CANADA”

    I really can’t tell if he’s joking around or what, but it’s fucking… if he’s serious, this man should be found and shot. That’s all…

    I can’t decide if I should laugh at it, or ball up and cry… no really, I felt like doing both as I read it.

  19. From the Village Voice:
    And keep in mind from the Ralph Nader-Wesley Smith report: “The courts . . . have [also] ordered that no attempts be made to provide her water or food by mouth. Terri swallows her own saliva. Spoon feeding is not medical treatment. This outrageous order proves that the courts are not merely permitting medical treatment to be withheld, they have ordered her to be made dead.”

    You sound the death toll for liberalism.  There was a time when being liberal meant upholding the value of the individual – particularly the individual with no voice.  Liberal politics is what provided for elder care, disability treatments, assistance to the poor, health care, gender equality, etc. 

    Now liberalism is death by starvation and dehydration to the disabled.  And now it is reduced to sick humor.

    This site breaks my once proud liberal heart.  Count me a very sad, disillusioned and old liberal.

  20. Oh please. You seem to forget that the courts have accepted the argument that Terri made her wishes clear to her husband that she would not want to be kept alive artificially. It was her individual desire expressed to the person who would be responsible for her care should the worst happen, which it did. I only hope that if I ever found myself in such a position that my wife would have the courage to fight for so long on my behalf as she would know best what I would want.

    The argument on whether Terri was merely disabled or truly vegetative should be answered in a few days time when the results of the autopsy are revealed, but the courts seem to feel that they were presented with enough evidence backing the claim to honor her wishes.

    What I want to know is why are you just now raising the hue and cry over letting people die via this method when it’s been in common practice for decades and was no big secret? What makes Terri Schiavo’s case so different that suddenly you’re appalled to find out that people are allowed to die of dehydration? Where were you when all those other people who died via this route were laying on their deathbeds? I agree it’s not the best way to go, but it’s legal as opposed to the right to choose to be euthanized.

  21. 1. Terri Schiavo became disabled and unable to speak for herself.
    2. Terri Schiavo never received consistent, normal treatment and therapy available to disabled individuals even though she was awarded sufficient funds.
    3. Terri Schiavo was sentenced to death on hearsay evidence litigated by her spouse with obvious conflicting interests and supported by the ACLU.
    4. Terri Schiavo had no legal voice in the court.
    5. Terri Schiavo was court ordered to have food and water delivered by feeding tube. The court ordered and therefore made it law that no attempt be made to offer food or water by mouth. She was, in effect, sentenced to dependence on a feeding tube.
    6. Terri Schiavo had no appeals process for the death sentence.
    7. Terri Schiavo was starved and dehydrated to death.

    Which part of this speaks to you as fair and just treatment of the disabled? Which part of that do accept for yourself, your child, your parent or your fellow man, as fair and just?

    “I agree it’s not the best way to go, but it’s legal…”
    Legality determines the rightness of the course?  The fact that it is now legal to litigate the death by starvation of an individual using hearsay evidence with no appeal and no legal representation on the part of the individual is contrary to liberal ideology.

    Starvation and dehydration of an individual is inhumane – period.  A jail sentence awaits those who would starve and animal.  It is ok to do it to a human – who is non terminal, simply disabled – because they are less than human.  They are less than animal, I suppose.

    “Right to die” has revolved around the terminally ill.  It addressed the use of medicine and treatment to humanely allow a terminal person to pass and not prolong suffering due to death which was imminent anyway.

  22. Sorry, Kristen, but you’re just an idiot.  Your point numbers 2 and 3 pretty much bear that out.

  23. Kristen is just very ill-informed.

    1. Terri Schiavo became disabled and unable to speak for herself.

    Duh.  Yes.

    2. Terri Schiavo never received consistent, normal treatment and therapy available to disabled individuals even though she was awarded sufficient funds.

    Bullshit.  She received extensive therapy, her husband even became a therapist so that he could help with her therapy, and she even had experimental therapy in California that didn’t work.

    3. Terri Schiavo was sentenced to death on hearsay evidence litigated by her spouse with obvious conflicting interests and supported by the ACLU.
    4. Terri Schiavo had no legal voice in the court.

    Again, bullshit.  She had a guardian ad litem (look it up if you don’t know what that is) and she was ably and thoroughly represented by BOTH sides of the debate, that of her husband and her parents.  If they couldn’t cover all the bases between them in representing her alleged wishes, then nobody could.

    5. Terri Schiavo was court ordered to have food and water delivered by feeding tube. The court ordered and therefore made it law that no attempt be made to offer food or water by mouth. She was, in effect, sentenced to dependence on a feeding tube.

    It’s because SHE WOULD HAVE FUCKING CHOKED TO DEATH if they’d tried to feed her by mouth.

    6. Terri Schiavo had no appeals process for the death sentence.

    It was not a criminal trial.  It was not a punishment.  It was carrying out her wishes as determined by the court. 

    7. Terri Schiavo was starved and dehydrated to death.

    Yes, she was.  Just as many people do to themselves by refusing food and water when they want to die and nobody will help them any other way.

    Please read this page and inform yourself of the FACTS.  Please read the court documents and stop this hysterical hand-wringing.

    Which part of this speaks to you as fair and just treatment of the disabled? Which part of that do accept for yourself, your child, your parent or your fellow man, as fair and just?

    Which part of this do you not understand that THIS IS WHAT SHE WANTED?  How can you ignore the wishes of the disabled this way and their right not to be second-guessed?

    I will fight for the right of my children, my parents and my fellow men and women to DETERMINE HOW THEY ARE TO LIVE AND DIE. 

    Stop treating the disabled as idiots and children who don’t know their own minds and have to be protected from themselves.

  24. “Conflict of Interest”
    ——————————-
    Given that the husband could divorce Terri PLUS the two attempted bribes of $1million and $10 million for the husband to give up his legal rights and the fact that there is no money left in the original malpractice fund showed that he pretty much does not have any conflicting interests.

    On the other the parents who claimed that even if their daughter expressly stated that she wants to die they would not have allowed it shows that the conflict of interest is on their side.

    Right to Choose
    ———————-
    The right for Terri to chose whether to live on or not is a fundamental aspect of the right to life, the right to be able to have one’s wishes respected. To prevent her from doing so would in effect rob her of her fundamental rights and invade the sanctity of her body by treating her as nothing more than property.

    The Polls
    ————-
    Is it just me or do you realise that almost every politician backed off on this issue the moment the polls came out to show that the majority of Americans are against the position of the Parents?

  25. I had a lengthy and well cited response to Kristen’s reply that just got eaten by Adobe Reader locking up my browser right about the time I was thinking I should move it over to wordpad. Dammit. GeekMom hit most of the points I was making, but I was going into greater detail on them. Suffice it to say that Kristen needs to read up a bit more on the facts of the case and less on what the pro-lifers are claiming about it.

  26. We do not agree on the facts. You find the court record as listed in Abstract Appeal to be sufficient. If you have ever been through the legal system, you know that what is and is not accepted as court record is of paramount importance and subject to judicial discretion.

    The scope of the court record is small in relation to documentation available. Every hearing was held in the same district court, with the same judge, with the same court record – 17 times. Appeal was only on intervention of the executive and legislative branches. Even then, the appeal was based on the same court record.

    Would you like those odds if your life wishes will be determined by a court case? Would you like your life wishes to be represented by an individual with an obvious conflict of interest?

    This is reprehensible when there is a question – and there is a question in this case – as to a person’s wishes regarding their life or death.

    Incidentally, Terri Schiavo- who was not terminally ill was housed in a hospice, contrary to hospice policy and purpose, for the years of litigation for death. A hospice is not equipped for nor is its purpose treatment and therapy for the disabled. As a disabled person, she was entitled to be in a facility purposed to caring for individuals in her condition.

    Lastly, starvation and dehydration as a means of incurring death are inhumane – to any living breathing human being – regardless of perceived level of consciousness.

    Those who cannot speak for themselves deserve a voice that is free of conflicting interests and a full review of evidence and findings when sentenced to death. Further, the disabled are never never appropriately housed in a hospice. Lastly, starvation and dehydration as a means of incurring death is inhumane. That is my fundamental issue.

  27. The scope of the court record is small in relation to documentation available. Every hearing was held in the same district court, with the same judge, with the same court record – 17 times. Appeal was only on intervention of the executive and legislative branches. Even then, the appeal was based on the same court record.

    Again I say, Kristen, you are an idiot.  Appeals are based on the same court record as new issues cannot be brought up on appeal.  I’ve not been through the court system – I’ve worked in it for 20 years.  Get your fuckin’ facts straight.

  28. The Polls

    I found the polls representative of the hijacking of the fundamental issue of Terri Schiavo’s case.  All of the poll questions assumed a firm knowledge of Terri Schiavo’s wishes.  Her wishes, despite the court rulings, are what is disputed.  The process by which her wishes were determined is fallible and suspect.

    Her death by starvation and dehydration was cruel and ugly and romanticized by the media.  It is, by all standards and cruel way of incurring death.  Somehow, the media finds that Mrs. Schiavo is “not all there” and therefore death by dehydration and starvation is acceptable – desirable, even.

  29. Terri did speak for herself back when her brain was still functioning and she made it known to her husband and 4 others that she did not wish to be artificially kept alive in such a fashion..
    Fundies deny this to push their own agenda.

    Terri was WAY past “disabled” she had no Cerebral Cortex, her EEG was dead flat, she felt no pain, she could barely see if at all, she could barely hear if at all, she could not speak, not eat, could do absolutely nothing whatsoever and had absolutely ZERO chance for recovery as the Brain does not regenerate like a lizards tail.
    Again Fundies deny this irrefutable FACT to push their own lunacy.

    While starving/dehydrating a normally functioning person can result in some discomfort, (though usually not since the bodies own pain management releases endorphins to combat this) that was not the case with Terri Schiavo as being without a functioning cortex left her without pain or any knowledge of what is happening around her, therefore your “Fundamental Issue” is moot.

  30. “as the Brain does not regenerate like a lizards tail.”
    One of many of your assertions that contain disputable facts.

    Terri Schiavo was a living, breathing, human being.  As such, the level of disability does not make moot the cruelty of starvation and dehydration as an avenue of death.  It also does not moot the fundamental question of her wishes.

    You appear to be of the “no perceptable use” school of human worth.

  31. No I appear to be of the “she has no Cerebral Cortex thus ZERO chance for recovery” school.

    This is irrefutable fact.

    The CAT scan is painfully clear as im 100% certain so will the autopsy of this fact.

    She died 15 years ago, it was macabre to keep her in the PVS like that once all medical possibilities were exhausted.
    Michael Schiavo did just that, WAY more than anyone Iv personally ever seen actually.

  32. Although I must admit I am increasingly feeling that Fundamentalist Christians fall right into the “no perceptable use

  33. Kristen:

    I have no dog in this fight.  With respect to the trial itself, I have not reviewed the trial transcripts and hold no opinion regarding the soundness of the initial decision.  I find it compelling though that through the countless appeals, the court was never reversed.

    As to this:

    If you have ever been through the legal system, you know that what is and is not accepted as court record is of paramount importance and subject to judicial discretion.

    this is incorrect.  Furthermore, your mischaracterization leads to the inference that the trial judge was biased. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, because on a gut level I wished Michael would have let Terri’s parents care for her.  Giving you the benefit of the doubt, at best I can say you are ill informed about how a trial record is compiled.

    The record made at trial is not open to any judicial discretion at all.  I repeat, there is no judicial discretion with respect to the trial record. Whatever happened at the trial was recorded, and transcribed verbatim.  That is the record.  No judge gets to mess with that. Any attempt by a judge to modify a trial record after the fact, other than to correct a clerical mistake, and even that would require consent of all the parties involved, would likely result in the judge being stripped of his official duties and being disbarred. This is not a grey area at all.  It is as black and white as we can get.

    If there was evidence that should have been a part of the record, it needed to be introduced at the trial.  Failure to introduce such evidence would be grounds for malpractice.  Given everything I’ve read about the lawyers working on behalf of Terri’s mother and father, they were and are very capable attorneys.

    We have a fundamental right to die.  A trial was had in front of an independent fact finder, the judge.  The judge, after hearing all the evidence presented to him by capable attorneys, issued a ruling.  That ruling has been appealed numerous times.

    I fail to see how Terri was denied any due process at all.  If you believe that the law should be that if there is no written expression of a person’s desire to end life support that the individual waives that right, go to it and work to change the law in Florida and if necessary your state.  However, I find it objectionable that you are attempting to erode confidence in the legal system after the fact with misinformation.

  34. Kristen keeps mentioning about this “conflict of interest” which is simply not there except on the side of her parents.

    If one is truly concern about the means in which she dies, which I too agree I am concerned about. And if as Kristen says the means of death is a truly a “fundamental issue” then the solution is to change the law to allow active euthanasia, such as an injection to make death immediate.

    By the way, Mr Jenkins, there seems to be some problem with the word one has to type before a post. Many times, it just is not there. Even if I place my cursor over it, and right click it does not even recognise there is a picture.

  35. The post made by one “Consigliere” above that “We have a fundamental right to die” does not seem right to me as a statement of fact since I believe suicide in certain countries is still a crime. Furthermore, even if suicide is not a crime, many laws prevent a person from assisting another in killing themselves.

    This leads to the interesting constitution issue on equality. If a fully abled person is able to kill himself then preventing a disabled person from getting assistance in killing himself means that the law fundamentally discriminates between abled body person and one who is diabled and unable to kill himself.

    So perhaps it is more accurate to say that one has to right to reject any form of treatment while they are conscious or provide sufficient evidence to tell one’s guardian to reject such a treatment.

  36. Meowy:

    You are correct.  The right to die is not a blanket right.  The Court has found a right to refuse medical treatment, even if it will result in death.  In contrast, the Court has struck down laws allowing assisted suicide.

  37. The first Guardian ad Litem recommended the court not approve Schiavo’s petition and is dismissed 6 months later.

    The second guardian ad litem appointed (only after intervention from Governor Bush)  The GAL should be permitted and authorized to move forward with a plan,
    designed to gain the data regarding swallowing tests/therapy and neurological
    capacity in a manner consistent with items 3 and 4, above, with and through the
    advice and input of the parties’ counsels and the Court.

    No Guaridan Ad Litem found the removal of the tube pursuant to Terri Schiavo’s wishes or interest.  The court chose to ignore and dismiss the guardian ad litems both times.

    Again, I state, Terri Schiavo’s wishes were not represented.

  38. Although I must admit I am increasingly feeling that Fundamentalist Christians fall right into the “no perceptable use

  39. Anybody else think Kristen is missing the point?

    Firt, Terri Schiavo did not make a mistake.  “Her” supporters and parents, who were overwhelmingly obviously and loudly religious types, made the mistake of turning this into an undignified and baseless media free-for-all.  They were in it for their own political gain.  Terri had nothing to do with it other than being an unwilling body.

    Sounds to me like you are the “media sheep” (whatever the hell that is).  Not everybody that has a dissenting opinion is doing it just to be “anti-Christian” as you so hysterically point out.  Have you ever noticed that these “christians” are very vocally anti-everything-but them?

    Grow a brain.

  40. Grow a brain.

    In this case, it’s ironic that the people who apparently think this is possible have consistently failed to do so themselves.

  41. DOF:  I was expecting somebody to snag the irony of that one.  Thank you. smile

    Ulfrekr:  Maybe these people with no brains are afraid they’re next.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.