Terri Schiavo's Parents Ask Judge to OK Divorce

[mayfly]

I think he won't give her a divorce because then he won't be entitled to the lawsuit earnings she was awarded.



Tuesday, March 01, 2005



TAMPA, Fla. — The parents of Terri Schiavo (search) asked a judge to allow the severely brain-damaged woman to divorce her husband — even if she dies — in one of a flurry of 11 new motions filed by the couple.

In the divorce motion filed Monday, Bob and Mary Schindler (search) accused Michael Schiavo (search) of adultery and not acting in his wife's best interests. The Schindlers have less than three weeks to find a way to keep their daughter alive before her feeding tube is removed.

"We have filed divorce proceedings because of (Schiavo's) total disregard for Terri as his wife," Bob Schindler said. "He is married to Terri, but he is living with another woman and he has two children by her. It has become quite obvious that his priorities are not in Terri's best interest."

The Schindlers' attorney, David Gibbs, said the divorce effort is unprecedented, and would allow Terri Schiavo to end her marriage to Michael even after she dies.

The Schindlers and their son-in-law have fought each other at every level of the Florida court system since the late 1990s on whether Terri Schiavo should live or die.

Michael Schiavo says his wife, who has spent 15 years in what doctors call a vegetative state, once told him she would never want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents have fought his efforts but Pinellas Circuit Court Judge George Greer ruled that Schiavo can have her feeding tube removed on March 18.

Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, called the new motions little more than an attempt to clog the case with further delays.

Gibbs said Greer had indicated he will not hear the divorce request and five of the other motions, but that the matters would be appealed.

Also Monday, the couple filed an appeal to overturn Greer's denial of an indefinite stay while they pursue their last legal options. Gibbs said it was not known when the appeals court would act on that motion, or how quickly it would respond to the others coming its way.

Appearing at a rally in Jacksonville, the Schindlers called on Gov. Jeb Bush (search) to look into the circumstances that led to their daughter's 1990 collapse from a chemical imbalance. They asked Attorney General Charlie Crist to investigate whether her civil rights have been violated.

Felos has said that even if Michael Schiavo were to divorce his wife, any new guardian would be obligated to remove Terri Schiavo's feeding tube because the court has ruled it is her wish not to be kept alive artificially.

"I think everyone knows the parents are going to try anything, including throwing in the kitchen sink, to frustrate the court's final judgment and Terri's wishes," Felos said.

Other motions by the Schindlers ask that some news reporters be allowed to see Terri Schiavo's interactions with her parents, since they contend she responds to them; that they be allowed to take pictures with her before she dies and that those photographs not become Michael Schiavo's property, as a current court order now requires; that she be allowed to die at home; and that they be allowed to bury her rather than the cremation her husband has planned.

[Shainie]

I'm still with the parents on this one. I think Terri's husband is a dog. I don't think he should get a single penny.

Can you imagine this being your child and you suspect her husband is the reason for her condition, and then while she's wasting away in a care center he's off living with another woman and having children with her. . . AND THEN he gets a ton of money after he pulls the plug on her? Makes me ill.

[luvmetender]

Originally Posted by Shainie

I'm still with the parents on this one. I think Terri's husband is a dog. I don't think he should get a single penny.

Can you imagine this being your child and you suspect her husband is the reason for her condition, and then while she's wasting away in a care center he's off living with another woman and having children with her. . . AND THEN he gets a ton of money after he pulls the plug on her? Makes me ill.

Whoa! Where is the evidence that the husband is the reason for her condition?

And yes, you are right, she is "wasting away."

I suppose you think the husband should have put his life on hold forever?

Mods, this thread needs to be moved to the R&P forum, (which is where it used to be)

[crazytimes]

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

1. Why has he refused several recommendations for Terri's continued therapies?

In April of 1991, about a year after her collapse, therapists at Bradenton Mediplex Rehabilitation Center determined that Terri's condition was improving and recommended Michael have her transferred to Gainesville Rehabilitation Center to receive advanced therapy so she could continue her recovery.

But by July, Michael had instead moved her to Sable Palms Nursing Home, with no such therapy.

Later, he refused to allow therapies that her parents believed might have allowed her to swallow, so she would not have to rely on a feeding tube.

[Mouse7088]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

Whoa! Where is the evidence that the husband is the reason for her condition?

"suffered massive brain damage when she collapsed at her home 13 years ago under unexplained circumstances, at the age of 26."

No "evidence" (which I would think a DOCTOR to could report)...just constant questioning of the onset of her condition.
There have been bone scans that showed numerous "traumas" (bone scan revealed a healed broken right femur bone and healed bone fractures in Terri Schindler Schiavo's ribs, pelvis, spine and ankle.), but since Michael is her guardian, he is able to keep all over the findings from her (Terri's) family.

I suppose you think the husband should have put his life on hold forever?

Then he shouldn't have had a problem with divorcing her YEARS ago and allowing her parents to take over full care/treatment.

[bestmidwest]

Originally Posted by Mouse7088

Then he shouldn't have had a problem with divorcing her YEARS ago and allowing her parents to take over full care/treatment.

Amen. I just don't understand this case at all. He could have divorced her and I don't really think anybody would have thought poorly of him for it. Her parents desperately want to care for her. I have friends who have a child in a similar condition and though she may not be able to do all of things their other kids do...well, I can't get into it...it makes me too emotional. Let's just say I don't think it's right to kill her if there are people who want to take care of her. I also know that it's the law...but it's hard to conceive of someone who only knew her for a few years being able to make decisions as opposed to the people who gave birth to her and raised her. He should have stepped aside.

[luvmetender]

I asked everyone I talked to today how they feel about this case. My co-workers, my boss, a few friends, a few neighbors, my daughter, her roommate, her boyfriend. Without exception, every single person thinks that she should be taken off life support. And that is exactly what her husband is trying to do FOR her, not TO her. Taking her off life support is not KILLING HER, it is letting her die with some dignity. I look at the videos of her and it makes me cry that she is being forced to live that way. LET HER GO!!!

[luvmetender]

Originally Posted by bestmidwest

He could have divorced her and I don't really think anybody would have thought poorly of him for it.

You can't possibly believe that.

Ya know what, I am going to have to excuse myself from this conversation, because it just hits too close to home for me. But before I go, I just want to let you all know that you don't know what it's like until you are actually in the situation.

So go ahead and be judgmental.

[crazytimes]

I don't think we are being judgmental at all. He COULD have done things in the past that could have helped her condition, but he chose not to. I think that was wrong.

And becoming dehydrated and starving to death doesn't sound very dignified to me. Sounds more like torture.

Also, there ARE people who have experienced things like her and HAVE lived. It's not as if every doctor has said she is a lost cause; many have said things for her COULD improve with the proper care.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

[Juliannaluv]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

..... I just want to let you all know that you don't know what it's like until you are actually in the situation.

This is why I haven't commented on this situation. Unless you've (Myslef included) been there you have no idea what torture anyone in the family (whether it is her biological family or her husband) is going through, making the decisions they have to make. I really don't know enough hard facts to comment further. All I can do is pray for the Lord to guide everyone involved.

[bobbcat]

she should be taken off life support. And that is exactly what her husband is trying to do FOR her, not TO her. Taking her off life support is not KILLING HER, it is letting her die with some dignity. I look at the videos of her and it makes me cry that she is being forced to live that way. LET HER GO!!!

Mere feeding is not typically considered as 'life support,' albeit food is required to sustain life. Starving this woman to death should be considered cruel and unusual punishment by any reasonable standard.

All that aside though, what I find most striking about this case is the lack of written evidence that this woman wished to not be kept alive by any artificial means. In other words, she has not and never has had a living will. It is amazing to me that these judges who have ruled in favor of discontinuing her feedings have ignored this pertinent fact, merely going by what her demented husband has had to say. Utterly outrageous.

[Shainie]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

Whoa! Where is the evidence that the husband is the reason for her condition?

Read my post again, I said "YOU SUSPECT". I'm sure you read the other articles about why the parents suspect he did it, back when we were discussing this before.

Originally Posted by luvmetender

I suppose you think the husband should have put his life on hold forever?

Nope, I think he should have divorced her before he started having another family. The reason he didn't divorce her? MONEY The reason he wants her dead? MONEY

He could less give a crap about her. He's not some loving husband who wants what's best for his wife. He wants the cha-ching.

Her parents brought her into this world, they should have a say when she leaves it.

[Shainie]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

But before I go, I just want to let you all know that you don't know what it's like until you are actually in the situation.

So go ahead and be judgmental.

Listen to those words yourself Luv. You're not Terri's mother, so you can't judge her for wanting her daughter to live.

[mayfly]

It amazes me that in one week one man gets the death penalty for killing his wife, and another man gets a million dollars of her life insurance and settlements from her law suit.

[trust no one]

While I was watching FOX News reporters this weekend fall over each other trying to prove their concern for the life of Terri Schiavo, not one Fox News contributor is reporting about the cases in Texas where life support is being removed by hospitals over the objections of family members. The law allowing that to happen was signed in 1999 by then-governor George W. Bush.

Lest anyone thinks this is a case of Bush "evolving" in his opinions, just five days ago a Texas hospital removed life support from a baby over the objections of his mother. Yet Bush never made a peep. Neither did FOX News.

According to FOX, keeping Schiavo alive was so important to Bush that he flew back to the White House to sign a bill that Congress planned to enact just for that purpose (no coverage, of course, from FNC about why Congress is focusing on this state court decision involving a private, family matter). From an AP story, FOXNews.com reported:

During previous travels, Bush has had legislation flown to him overnight by military plane for his signature. But in this case, McClellan said that the fact that a woman's life is at stake made it necessary for him to travel to the bill. "Terri Schiavo's feeding tube has been removed and we stand with ... all those who are working to defend her life," he said.

So why does Bush think Schiavo's life is worth saving but the baby's isn't? Could it have something to do with finances? In another case of a Texas hospital trying to cut off life support over the objections of a family, The Houston Chronicle reports, a patient's inability to pay for medical care combined with a prognosis that renders further care futile are two reasons a hospital might suggest cutting off life support, the chief medical officer at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital said Monday. Dr. David Pate's comments came as the family of Spiro Nikolouzos fights to keep St. Luke's from turning off the ventilator and artificial feedings keeping the 68-year-old grandfather alive... (The attorney for the family) Mario Caballero said he believes the hospital wants to discontinue care because Nikolouzos' Medicare funding is running out.
Comment: Why hasn't Bush expressed any concern about Mr. Nikolouzos? He wouldn't even have to leave Texas to deal with it.

Last December, FOX News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes said on C-Span that he requires his reporters to "present the news, if there is more than one side, make sure you have it. If you think there's something else you don't agree with make sure it's in the story." Question for Mr. Ailes: Isn't this the kind of news you said you require your reporters to include? So where is it?