http://www.terrisfight.org/

Terri was admitted to the hospital in February 1990. To this day, her family does not know the true cause of her collapse. Doctors immediately excluded heart attack as her blood enzymes were not elevated. Terri's toxicology screen also eliminated any suspicion of drugs.

At the time of Terri's admittance, blood tests revealed a depletion of electrolytes and her attending physician hypothesized that low blood potassium may have caused her collapse. It was with this information that Michael Schiavo entered into a lawsuit against Terri's General Practioner and Gynecologist, claiming negligence on their part.

In preparation for Terri’s October 2002 trial, her ER records were reviewed and it was plainly noted in the “Admitting Summary” that Terri had a “rigid neck” when she was admitted to the hospital. These injuries were never disclosed to Terri’s family, not-to their knowledge-were they ever investigated. The doctor reviewing these records testified that the only other patient he treated with similar injuries was the victim of an attempted strangulation.

The prospect of foul play may have led to Terri’s collapse and ensuing heart stoppage was enhanced when a bone scan was recently found. This scan, taken 53 weeks after Terri’s collapse revealed that Terri had fractured ribs, damage to her pelvic area, L1 vertebrae, spine, both knees and both ankles. It also revealed that Terri had suffered a broken femur and a broken back. Three doctors concluded that Terri had endured trauma. The radiologist responsible for the scan plainly stated: “This patient has a history of trauma”.

Terri's family and friends want her feeding tube to remain and fights for her to remain alive. Terri's husband wants to remove the feeding tube and instists that this is not how she would have wanted to live. I feel that it's horrible what Terri has been through and continues to go through today. Just this week it was ordered that the feeding tube be restored to her after 6 days of no food or water!

It really sticks out for me to that she did not have any type of will (whether it be a living will or otherwise). Should she die, her husband will inherit what is left of Terri’s $750,000 medical fund. Since receiving the award money in 1993, her husband has ceased and prohibited any new or aggressive treatment for Terri. He has only maintained Terri at a nursing home (currently, Terri is in a Hospice facility). He has totally ignored or denied rehabilitation therapy that could possibly assist Terri’s recovery. It's also worthy to note that current guardian laws can allow spouses to have TOTAL control over a loved one, and may even allow his or her death against the parents' will.

************************************************** *********

From the site:

Terri was 26 years old when she suffered brain damage from a sudden collapse. Terri receives her food and water by means of a feeding tube. Terri’s other bodily functions are physically stable. Terri smiles, laughs and cries. Terri recognizes voices and responds. At times, she vocalizes sounds, trying in her best way to speak. Terri is not a brain dead vegetable as characterized by her husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo nor a houseplant as implied by his attorney. Terri is not on a respirator or any artificial life support. She is a living human being and needs to be granted an opportunity to recover. Terri has not had any progressive rehabilitation or arousal therapy in more than ten years.

In a trial initiated by Michael Schiavo, Circuit Court Judge, George W. Greer, issued a verdict delivered on February 11, 2000. Judge Greer granted authorization to discontinue Terri’s feeding tube. Judge Greer’s verdict will cause Terri to die in 10 to 14 days. Terri’s death will be by painful starvation.

In a malpractice lawsuit, Terri’s husband personally received over $300,000 for his loss of consortium. Terri was awarded $750,000 from this suit and an additional $250,000 from a separate malpractice lawsuit. The money was awarded to Terri for her care and rehabilitation and to be placed in a Medical Trust Fund. Terri’s husband received his personal award money and Terri’s medical fund money in early 1993. From the date he received the award money in 1993, Michael Schiavo has denied Terri any rehabilitation treatment. Michael Schiavo has confined Terri to a nursing home (currently, Terri is in a Hospice facility) where she is 'maintained.'

Her husband has directed that Terri only be sustained in a nursing home which is contrary to the intent of the award money. Michael Schiavo has on two occasions unsuccessfully attempted to end Terri’s life by instructing her caretakers not to medicate Terri for potentially fatal infections. The first occasion occurred less than nine months after her husband received the malpractice award money.

Recent News

October 21, 2003, the Florida Legislature and House passed bill 35E - Terri's Bill -into law.

This law allowed Florida's Governor, Jeb Bush, to issue an Executive Order allowing nutrition and hydration to be returned to the disabled Florida woman.

Terri had been without nutrition and hydration for more than 6 days.

She has been transported to Morton Plant Hospital in Clearwater. And is to be receiving proper attention immediately.

************************************************** *********

Go to the site and look at the time line. Check out the downloads and how alert and reactive she is. Ask yourself how humane is it to die a slow death of starvation and dehydration. Her situation strikes me as very terrible and everything that has happened with it is incredibly wrong. What are your thoughts on this case? How can it be justified to pull someone's feeding tube and let them die a slow painful death as all their organs basically shut down?

The thing that bothers me about the general news reporting on this issue is that they have said what evidence there is for Terri's wishes in this situation. If she had no living will and there was no other compelling evidence of her wishes, in most cases they would not be allowed to stop feeding her.

That bothers me. However, the family is presenting this situation in a misleading way. She has no cerebral cortex. She has no consciousness. That doesn't mean she will not react to things. Yes those reactions make her look alive. People even do things while under general anesthesia that make them look awake and conscious. But there is no way she can be rehabilitated. She has a big hole in her skull where her cerebral cortex used to be. It aint coming back. I feel the family is fighting this because of their own needs for hope not for the needs of their daughter. I can't comment on the stuff they suspect about the husband. But don't let this mislead you. Read what the physicians have to say about this. Removing a feeding tube is done all the time, and it is not a painful way to die. Not just from scientific conjecture, but from people who started to die this way and then came back have reported a lack of pain. Plus, she's not even conscious.

http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_1475130.html contains some audio reports on this.

Yes the family could find some physicians who claim they can rehabilitate. There are always cruel people willing to take money from desperate people when they know they can't deliver.

There's only $50,000 left in that fund. That's not much.

I'd hate to be kept alive like that. I saw some videos of her.. they're very disturbing to watch.

I want to add that if there is compelling evidence that she would have wanted to die in this situation, the fact that the florida congress used their power to reverse the ruling should make us all shiver with fright. We should all be allowed to have our wishes regarding our medical care honored no matter how much they may upset people.

This situation should be decided by what she would have wanted. Not her parents, Jeb Bush, the right to lifers or her husband (unless he has a durable power of attorney with the right to make these decisions on her behalf.)

What needs to be examined in this case is the law and the facts about her wishes. Nothing else.

i think it's awful that they're keeping her alive. but then making her die slowly of dehydration/starvation doesn't rate too high on my humane scale either. she should be euthanized.

This whole case is so very interesting. I don't feel it's humane to pull someones feeding tube. On the other hand, some may see it as inhuman for her to continue.

It also worries me as to how all of the money award is almost gone to legal fees. So, if they do keep her alive on the feeding tube there's hardly enough to keep covering the cost. That's what the bulk of the funds were awarded for-her ongoing care in her home by her husband (which of course isn't happening).

November 1992 – A medical malpractice trial is petitioned by Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo. He asks the jury for 20 million dollars to pay for his wife’s (Terri) future medical and neurological requirements. This request was based on estimates of her life expectancy, which Michael Schiavo and his attorneys were estimating at 50 years .

November 10, 1992 – Jury Document, Item 5. What is the amount of Theresa Schiavo's future damages for medical expenses and lost earning ability to be sustained in future years?

A.) Total damages over future years: $9,400,000.00
B.) The number of years over which those future damages are intended to provide compensation:
17 years
C.) What is the present value of those future damages: $4,300,000.00

Note: The jury award amount was reduced to $1,290,000.00 to reflect Terri’s attributable negligence. Separate from these monies was Michael Schiavo’s personal award of $600,000.00.

Prior to this trial and in a completely independent medical malpractice lawsuit, Terri was awarded $250,000.00 in an out-of-court settlement. Also, prior to the two medical malpractice lawsuits, an estimated $50,000.00 was contributed to Terri’s medical fund via community fundraisers.

In Summary, Terri has received an aggregate sum of $1,590,000.00. Nonetheless, in June of 1993, the asset balance in Terri’s account was reduced to $761,507.50, as reported by Michael Schiavo. Schiavo's attorney, however, has sealed the accounting, which would disclose how Terri's account was depleted by approximately $828,492.50, (52%) in only 1 year and 6 months.

Bear in mind, Michael Schiavo is the inheritor of Terri's medical fund.

Note: In the ensuing (9) years since the 1992 jury malpractice award, Michael Schiavo has used Terri’s medical fund money in his pursuit of Terri’s death and to defend his guardianship role. The bulk of the money has gone for legal fees. Although Terri’s medical fund is sealed; there are court transactions available for public inspection.

The family estimates that Terri's account balance is now less than $300,000. They expect Attorney Deborah Bushnell and Attorney George Felos to invoice over $90,000 to bring their legal fees current. They also believe that after legal fees are paid the balance in Terri’s fund, as of February 28, 2002, will be around $200,000.

What if you felt you knew for a fact your spouse did not want to be kept alive and her parents, who may not have shared any of your spouses world views or maybe didn't even have a close relationship with her started embroiling you in a bunch of court challenges for guardianship, etc.? Would you hire a lawyer, hell yeah.

I don't know this guy or the parents or their relationship with Teri. I think we shouldn't be so quick to judge the motives of this husband. Even if he is a jerk, if he has evidence that she shouldn't be kept alive then she shouldn't be. Case closed.

And if she is unconscious, removing a feeding tube won't be inhumane. In fact it's done all the time with people who are mentally gone and who did not want extraordinary efforts to be made to kept alive.

As sad as this situation is, and as difficult as it must be for Terri's parents/family, they need to face reality and let her go. They are prolonging their own agony.

But she is conscious. The videos show it. She's not in a vegetative state. She didn't have a living will (or any will for that matter) so Florida law prevents her feeding tube from being removed. I don't see how they keep getting away with removing it.

ETA: Maybe a part of the solution to this whole mess would be to appoint an independent guardian. Someone who has nothing emotionally or otherwise to gain from either her living or dieing.

In the bond of love that two people have for one another when in love they speak of thier wishes. She spoke of her wishes to her husband about not wanting to be a veg, she has the right to die, any and every person has the right to die. The Gov has no place steping in let her die, this is purly a political move in an election year and is wroong, wrong, wrong. he needs to take her to a fogien country where she can pass as she wanted, with out humilation and in privacy.

The only proof that anyone has that it is her wish to die is that of her husbands word. There was nothing in writing and no witnesses. Who's to say what is true? He should move on with his life, divorce Terri, sign guardianship over to her parents, and marry his fiance of 7 years that he just had a baby girl with.

In the civil hearing, he swore to uphold his marriage vows to, in sickness and in health. He swore to bring her home and take care of her or get her the care and things she would need in her home. She never saw home. She saw the hospital, then the nursing home, then hospice care. The courts awarded him what they felt was enough funds for her husband to take care of her for the next 50 years. That's what he fought for. Not to have her tube removed. He fought for money to take care of her. Why is he changing his tune now? Seems to me if that if the wishes he speaks of now is truly what she communicated to him before her collapse, he would have acted sooner than after he spent the money to get the tube removed. Instead of fighting the courts for money to take care of her and uphold his vows he would have been fighting to get the tube removed from the getgo. It just doesn't seem to me that he's had her interest in mind with the decisions he's made. Her interest and wishes appear to be an afterthought for him; at his convenience.

Here's a link to a Newsweek article on this situation:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/985278.asp?vts=102720031119

I think this article is pretty even handed.

FYI..Michael Schiavo (the husband) will be on Larry King Live tonight on CNN at 9 p.m. discussing Terri and the ongoing cases.

From what I read in another forum, once the judge decided there was clear and convincing evidence of Teri's wishes (and I doubt the media is telling us all the relevent facts) that neither the husband nor the family has a choice in the whether the tube is removed. Any guardian has to abide by what the judge decided the evidence showed was her wishes. Once we know the evidence, we may not agree with his verdict.

I don't think we know enough from the media, and certainly not from the parents to make a judgment about the husband or anyone else. The juiciest take on this from a media point of view is that of a horrible, greedy husband trying to kill his conscious wife who had no wishes to be allowed to die in this situation. Until I read the court documents, I don't feel I can make that judgment.

As far as her consciousness, I saw the videos, too. I don't think they show anything. As I said before, even people in deep general anesthesia react to voice, visual movement, and especially having something shoved in their mouth. But none of us hear are neurologist nor have any of us seen her MRI's or brain scans or whatnot. So I don't think any of us can make a judgment on that either.

I agree Thalia. I'm so interested in seeing this interview tonight. I feel bad for her either way. They need to be careful because whatever the decision it will set precident right? I don't believe there's been another case similar to this one yet. I could be wrong though.

I agree Thalia. I'm so interested in seeing this interview tonight. I feel bad for her either way. They need to be careful because whatever the decision it will set precident right? I don't believe there's been another case similar to this one yet. I could be wrong though.

Yeah, my gut tells me that everyone close to this is concerned about everything except Teri. I hate family fueding.

I would agree with last few posts. With this one exception, the media have over their bounds IMHO this is a private personal matter that has no business in court of Public Opion, just furthers the cause that the media want only blood and hype and contraversy. Hell if beings from another planet were to pick up our modern media.... I doubt they would want to stop by, i know i wouldnt.

Whether or not she appears to be conscious and responding, I tend to agree that she is just not there. I watched my father die of cancer last winter, and even though his body was there and he was conscious and responding to stimuli, it was not him. My father ceased to be long before he died. It is just something one has to learn to accept. Terri's parents, while they are admittedly in a very difficult and painful situation, must learn to let go. They have got to allow their daughter to die.

I place no blame on her husband for becoming engaged again and having a child -- he is trapped by his lingering wife, who is indeed no longer his wife. He cannot fully recover and begin to lead a normal life again until her family allows her to die so he can start fresh. He has already grieved; I am sure that he went through the grieving process years ago.

I empathize so much with Terri's family, but it would be better for all parties involved to let her die.

It disturbs me that this woman's family are insisting on keeping her body alive when she has so clearly passed on. It's very sad when one you love dies, but after 10 years they have to accept that she will not suddenly get better. It's also disturbing that they are showing no thought at all for thier daughters wishes in this matter. She stated clearly that what her wishes were in regards to situations like this, and they should abide by it.

She was only 26. Many people don't have wills at this age, this does not mean thier wishes should be disregarded. I've told my sister the exact same thing this woman told her husband. Perhaps I should put this in writing. I'd hate to be a in a condition like this and be completely unable to do anything about it..

This is similiar to families refusing to allow organ donations, even though the person in question signed a card beforehand. This is why we all need a living will and give it to a trusted friend. Heck, give it to a few friends, in case someone destroys theirs.

I find it hard to believe 100% of what either side is saying in this matter.

I also believe with Kiz; you can be dead long before your heart or brain stops functioning. This woman is dead. Her body functions, but she is dead. Let her pass over and be done with it, instead of dragging it on.

I watched the interview last night and learned some things. I didn't know she was bulimec (sp?). Her husband states that's the reason why she was so low on potassium that her heart stopped (scuse the typo's and spelling errors as I'm trying to rush). I also had no idea that in the first years after this happened that he flew to California with her and had a brain stimulating implant put in (that wasn't successful). Of course, there were some things on her family's site that were contradicted by her husband in the interview last night. That's bound to happen.

There's one thing that's bugged me though and I wish Larry would have asked it. My question (and I did try and call in and ask but didn't get through) is that if she wanted to not be kept alive like that and her husband knew this before the collapse, why did he fight from the very beginning to win a lawsuit with the hospital/doctors to get the funds necessary to take care of her the rest of her life? I don't understand. His actions then don't jive with his wishes now.

They showed different parts of previous interviews with her parents last night too. For some reason, and I can't tell you why, but they just don't sit right with me as being sincere. Just my gut instinct though.

On the other hand, something about the husband didn't sit right with me either. Hell, this whole situation doesn't sit right with me.

Well, at this point all we can hope for is that they make up their minds one way or the other. To keep taking the feeding tube away and then giving it back seems so wrong.

Do people really die a slow peaceful death when their feeding tube is removed like the husband said last night?

I've watched someone die like that and, from what I could see, yes. She was given sedated anyways. In the end, someone took a vial of morphine and let her go.

I wish I had seen the interview. Here is a link to the CNN synopsis:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/28/schiavo.lkl/index.html

I really didn't like the way he was mud slinging at the family. He would have came across much better if he hadn't done that. I would have felt him more credible in what he was saying if every other word wasn't a negative about the family.