Schiavo’s Brother Faults Media
March 8, 2007 - 2:51amBobby Schindler, brother of late Terri Schiavo, spoke to members of the Cornell community last night to promote awareness of issues facing disabled individuals.
After collapsing in her home on Feb. 25, 1990, Terri Schiavo suffered several minutes without oxygen to her brain, resulting in severe brain damage. Although she needed immediate care afterwards, a few weeks later, she only required a feeding tube to regulate her nutrition.
During 1991 and 1992, Schiavo showed signs of improvement due to rehabilitation programs and therapy, according to Schindler.
In 1993, Terri was awarded a medical trust fund of $1.5 million for life-long rehabilitation, of which her husband Michael was made guardian.
According to Schindler, after Michael deposited this money, Terri stopped receiving therapy.
Tensions arose in 1993 between Michael and Terri’s father Robert Schindler.
In 1998, Michael wrote the Schindler family a letter, explaining that he was petitioning the courts to remove his wife’s feeding tube.
Terri’s family opposed removal of the feeding tube. Michael, backed by his brother and sister-in-law, said Terri had made statements before she suffered brain damage that she would not want to live in such a condition.
“Our family was very naïve at what we were up against,” Schindler said. “The attitudes of our country [toward this issue] have been changed because of the influence of the media, judges, doctors and bioethics.”
Schindler said he was frustrated that the media portrayed his sister as bedridden and unable to be moved. In fact, Schindler said, had Terri been alive today, he could have brought her with him; she would have merely needed a wheelchair to be transported. Schindler emphasized that Schiavo was not connected to breathing stabilizers of any sort.
“My sister was not dying. She was physically as healthy as you and me,” Schindler said.
Although she could not respond rapidly, she did show signs of coherence, according to Schindler. He recounted a moment when he told his sister that he had the chance to shake hands with Bruce Springstein. Terri had purchased her brother his first C.D. by the artist. When he told her, she smiled.
Such responses were ignored by the court systems, according to Schindler. He said he believed then that videos demonstrating her ability to react to speech would convince the courts that she was not in a persistent vegetative state — one in which a person cannot respond to any external stimuli — but a judge said this did not prove his case.
On March 31, 2005, 14 days after the removal of her feeding tube, Terri died from dehydration.
“The courts have taken [on] a power of God,” Schindler said.
Schindler said doctors took on a similar role and are still quick to overlook the benefits of long-term rehabilitation.
“If society knows the truth, then we can properly address the issue and give [the disabled] the right to live, a basic human right,” said Elisabeth Wilbert ’07, vice president of Cornell Coalition for Life.
CCFL invited Schindler to speak to demonstrate that the club supports pro-life organizations.
“It was a good opportunity for Cornell to get a personal view of something with such a national interest,” said Tristen Cramer ’09, president of CCFL.
Schindler said his family would have preferred not to generate national interest; family members received a large number of e-mails that condemned the family for keeping Terri alive.
“I learned a lot more true information compared to what the media portrayed,” said Kourtney Reynolds ’09.
Schindler said he hopes to devalue false information given to the public by the media.
He also said that euthanasia occurred before his family’s struggle and continues to occur today.
“Are we going to care for [the disabled] or find ways to justify killing them?” Schindler asked.
No one should play God if
No one should play God if there is any one person that wants to keep some one alive let them.My mother was sick for 3 years and the doctor's kept telling me to call in hospis and let her go i moved in with my mother and took care of her for 3 years and that time i had with her God gave me if it had been up to the doctor's i would have lost her 3 years ago.So if any one wants to work hard to keep their loved ones alive then let them.
What matters here is what SHE wanted
Not what anyone else wanted. We can just hope that the decision was made according to her and Gods will.
Are they still pimping a dead woman for dough?
How pathetic. The Schindler's have been making a living off Teri for over a decade, shouldn't they find real jobs? The sales of that tape fell to nothing once it was revealed Teri had only half a brain, so now they use speaking engagements to leach money from a gullible public. If Teri's body had continued to live, it would no doubt today be a roadside attraction at 'Schindlerland'...
Schiavo
Just because Terri did not tell her parents or siblings her wishes, does not mean she did not have a meaningful discussion regarding her this subject with her husband. I have never discussed my "end of life" wishes with my parents or siblings. For what? It is up to my husband to make final decisions regarding my care, or lack of it. He is well aware that when I can no longer participate in life, I no longer want to go on. I believe that Terri would have been horrified at the fight between her parents and husband, and her parents continuing to vilify Michael Schiavo, the man she married and apparently loved.
Terri Schiavo, the married adult.
Bobby Schindler misleads. The court case was probate to determine what medical treatment Terri Schiavo would accept or reject given her circumstance.
In no way was the court asked to determine the value of human life with or without disability.
In no way was the court being asked to determine whether life with a disability was worth living.
Americans have the right to medical self determination. Americans have the freedom of medical CHOICE. Americans are allowed to decide what medical treatments and surgeries they would accept or reject and under what circumstances.
Americans can reject medical treatments or surgeries because they are too intrusive, unproven, too costly, scarring, too dangerous, too ineffective, unhelpful, have severe or even minor side affects, are experimental, would be inconsistent with their religious beleifs or practices, are too invasive, or are simply unwanted. Fact is there is no requirement for an American to justify their choice or give their reasons.
Bobby Schindler would have you beleive that the surgical implantation of a PEG tube is comparable to spoon feeding an infant- he makes that comparisson because he beleives the end justifies the means and to him the bottom line is getting food into a person- without drawing any distinctions as to the means.
The problem is that spoon feeding an infant is in no way comparable to the surgical slicing through the skin, fascia, muscle and into the stomache to implant a PEG feeding tube. This surgery requires anesthesia which is inherently risky. Anesthesia is required even for those in PVS- anesthesia is not ONLY about alleviating pain or rendering the patient unconcious. It is about relaxing the muscles and deadening reflex response.
The tube through the skin creates a path for infection. Caregivers are required to learn how to maintain the incision site. Caregivers are required to learn how to recognize signs of a developing infection. They are required to learn how to clean the incision site. They are required to learn how to set up a feeding "paste" pump, how to operate the pump and how to clean and maintain the pump.
Bobby Schindler doesn't want you to think of a feeding tube in terms of surgery or medical treatment. He wants PEG feeding tubes reclassified under the law- no longer recognized as a medical treatment requiring surgery.
He wants the PEG to be reclassified to "basic care".
You can discuss medical treatment and surgery with your doctor and decide for yourself whether you will accept or reject the medical treatment or surgery. You have the choice. You have the right. You have the power to decide.
Hospitals and doctors are OBLIGATED by law to provide "basic care". No discussion. No decision. No choice. You have no power to stop it. You have no voice.
If you cannot be fed by mouth or by a nasal canula threaded through your nose and into your stomache then you will be brought to surgery and you will leave surgery with a PEG feeding tube sticking out of your abdomen and ready to be attached to a feeding "paste" pump.
Americans understand what it means to be kept alive unnaturally. Americans understand what it means to be kept alive artificially. Americans understand what it means to be kept alive by tubes attached to respirators or attached to feeding "paste" pumps.
The posters here still don't
The posters here still don't get it. The case was not about a bunch of religious nuts trying to invade some dubious "right to privacy"; this was a disability rights case first and foremost.
Guardians do NOT have the right to order a judge to kill their disabled wards, especially when the argument made in favor of killing is based on dubious statements made by the guardian's family members. It's called conflict of interest, but incompetent Judge Greer didn't care. The appelate courts couldn't overrule.
There's something terribly wrong when rotten relatives can kill you off because you become too inconvenient for them.
This isn't a religious nut issue; it's a matter of civil rights for the disabled who DO have a right to live.
Guardians don't order courts to do anything...
I'm afraid YOU still don't get it.
You think the case was about the rights of the disabled?
You think guardians ORDER judges and the courts? Quite the contrary madam. In the first place guardians are appointed by the court and can be removed by the court.
Any authority the guardian has comes from the court.
In this particular case the guardian requested the court to make a determination.
The Schindlers brought forward their best case- other than apparently they "forgot" to bring RN Carla Iyer with them to court even though Carla swears that years before the case was heard she had been calling the Schindlers to tell them their son in law had been trying to murder their daughter.
I can't understand how those calls wouldn't be memorable or seem important. But apparently a small percentage of society is willing to understand.
This case was not about the rights of a group.
It was not about the rights of a class of citizens.
It was not about special interest groups, concerned bystanders or whether mom and dad should be allowed to over rule or overpower the decisions of their ADULT MARRIED daughter or over rule or overpower the decisions of their daughters husband.
It was not about how powerful the lobbyists were for a particular special interest group- and many special interest groups came forward to join other opportunists, profiteers and publicity seekers in pushing an agenda, cashing in or repaying political debts.
This case was about ONE INDIVIDUAL and her choice which was: "no tubes for me".
At the end of the day Robert Schindler senior was out negotiating money deals with a mailing list broker while his "beloved" daughter lay dying in her final days on earth.
At this point the entire Schindler family is living off salaries and expense reimbursements from their "not for profit" foundation. Maybe the foundation is non-profit, certainly its founders are not.
Gods laws ALWAYS overide Mans Laws
I am floored by the comments on this page. It is totally disgraceful that human life is so easily dismissed because the person is disabled.Are any of you posters Christian? How can someone justify the slaughter of an innocent? First it is babies which is so acceptable...oh that's right they are not babies just fetuses. Once society accepted the killing of the unborn and rationalized it away it was just a matter of time before the target moved to other defenseless human beings. There I said it....human beings...that is what they are. Not vegetables, or fetuses. If the words are acceptable to dehumanize then it is so much easier to swallow...right?
The issue is not about a husband and a wife, it was about MURDER in plain view. The husband had shacked up with another woman, who he asked to marry him.....while his present wife was still living. If this man could not keep his commitment to the woman he made a sacrament with before GOD, then how could he be believed to be telling the truth? He had much to gain $$$$$$$. Michael let the courts kill his wife through his request. Just because Man made laws allowing what was done to Terri does not mean that Gods laws (Thou shall not commit murder) weren't broken. Man can make any law that he/she wants but the real question is ...is it contary to Gods law? We will all one day have to meet our maker and it will not be that far off as life is very short. Repent...Repent...Repent as John the Baptist asked.
When murder is rationalized or trivialized a country's demise is soon at hand. Didn't we learn anything from the fall of the Roman Empire? Didn't we learn anything from the sacrafice that Jesus made for us on the Cross? I will pray for all of you. May God Bless Terri and her Family on this second anniversary of her cold blooded murder.