26-03-2005 12:30									#1
	Schiavo Thread Part the Third Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Link to the first thread (takes you to last post):http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...7&goto=lastpost

A link to the second thread (takes you to last post): http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...5&goto=lastpost

It's a complete ideological shitstorm in here, so put on your wading boots. You have been warned.

	26-03-2005 12:35									#2
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Capt Dizle Could someone tell me upon what basis the law introduced by Martinez was shot down? What court did that? Federal court in Florida?

It wasn't shot down. It was either poorly written in a way that allowed the Federal Courts to ignore its intent or it was brilliantly designed to look like it was doing something while leaving the way for the Fed courts to not have to get involved with a very serious Consitutional issue. Probably a bit of both.

	26-03-2005 12:37									#3
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

To NYE form the other thread-

If the courts had found that she did not ask to die, then that would have been it-what standing would anyone had had to demand her support be taken away if the courts found insufficient evidence for pulling the plug? That is where the court is biased towards life.

So: if it was found she wanted to die, then there is no point of council
If insufficient proof of such a claim was found, then no need for council cause the tube stays.

Maybe if the husband decided to challange the court and began to question such a veridict then a council for Terry would have been called for, but not otherwise.

	26-03-2005 12:39									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Then the agent would instruct counsel to oppose termination of care, and would be knowledgable in the background and be able to give counsel competent assistance.

But Mr Schiavo did not go to court to get permission to terminate his wife's care. He went to court to ask it what to do. Therefore the court's job was to determine not whether to "kill" Mrs. Schiavo or not, but simply what Terri's wishes would have been. The two sides were arguing what Terri's wishes were. The court found that Terri would have wanted to die, not that Michael Schaivo had a right and permission to kill her.

	26-03-2005 12:46									#5
	Remove this text

I can't believe some of you are bored to spend around ranting and raving about a single case like this... is the whole media of your nation hysteric about this single case? W. just offered to sell with dirt price some of your prime jets to a guy who is damn near getting kicked off from power by his own people, why don't we have a single thread about that but three about some random woman who died years ago?

Self-quote:

quote: Wait... so Schiavo is just a gal who died ten years ago and who ya'll are just using to further your own shallow political agendas? No let's be honest for a second, if any of you truly believes that she can be turned alive back again and any of you wants to save her, why not drive to Florida (why not? you sure are closer to FL than I am) and offer to become her legal guardian of some sort? I'm sure nobody would have any problems if some of you would want to use your own money to upkeep a cute plant in your home.

Why do you bother to argue about this so long, anyway? If you'd be able to change each other's minds about this, you would've done so a long time ago.

	26-03-2005 12:48									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Fifteen years ago, and people have volunteered to care for her. That's not the point. The point is she wanted to die rather than be kept in such a state.

	26-03-2005 12:49									#7
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

From the last thread:

quote: Can your small mind grasp that?

Why you should care about other families' internal strifes so much? No.

	26-03-2005 12:50									#8
	Support Apolyton

I don't. I care when a bunch of hypocritical busybodies hijack the government in order to interfere with someone's internal family problems.

	26-03-2005 12:53									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I don't. I care when a bunch of hypocritical busybodies hijack the government in order to interfere with someone's internal family problems.

Why should you care. I think we need some reeducation. Let's put you in one of those Maoist circles...

	26-03-2005 12:54									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

What have I ever done to you to deserve that?

	26-03-2005 12:55									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara What have I ever done to you to deserve that?

You haven't yet shot him- that was your first mistake.

	26-03-2005 12:55									#12
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by GePap To NYE form the other thread- If the courts had found that she did not ask to die, then that would have been it-what standing would anyone had had to demand her support be taken away if the courts found insufficient evidence for pulling the plug? That is where the court is biased towards life. So: if it was found she wanted to die, then there is no point of council If insufficient proof of such a claim was found, then no need for council cause the tube stays. Maybe if the husband decided to challange the court and began to question such a veridict then a council for Terry would have been called for, but not otherwise.

The point is getting to the bottom of the patient's wishes when there is a dispute.

This issue is not going to go away.

While JT wrote a very good piece on where sensitivity to the issue is coming from, the real reason this is important is in deciding what happens when there is a dispute.

I am not convinced that Ned has it wrong.

If there is a dispute, the state must assure itself that the patient's interests are looked after before the state uses its power to intervene to terminate support for a life. I am not convinced that a judge has the time to invest into such a question, nor should he or she. Furthermore, it is not the function of a judge to be an advocate.

	26-03-2005 12:56									#13
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap You haven't yet shot him- that was your first mistake.

I'm not stupid enough to try and take on the military militarily. That be like trying to take on a bear with my teeth and fingernails.

	26-03-2005 12:56									#14
	Increase the size of your Attachments

What do you call those things? And I'm just flaunting the little I learned at USNA poly sci classes. We had a really cool lecture from a spook who was also an O-6 attached to the embassy. He had done some cool things behind the curtain.

	26-03-2005 12:57									#15
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Furthermore, it is not the function of a judge to be an advocat.

The judge wasn't being an advocate. The judge was making a finding of fact. That is the purpose of judges.

Another way of looking at it is that the judge was deciding between two parties claiming to represent Terri's interests. Why appoint another one?

	26-03-2005 13:01									#16
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Judges are supposed to hear representations from the people affected.

The only thing clear in this case is that neither the husband nor the parents can be counted on to accurately represent the person most affected.

	26-03-2005 13:02									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yeah, the Martinez law seems wacky. Give legal counsel to someone with whom you can not communicate for the purpose of affording them the same protections under law that accrue to those facing a death sentence in a criminal case.

That can't work, it would require a presumption of her will that cannot be known. She doesn't need an advocate, she needs a guardian to act in her best interest and a court to oversee it. She had that.

There doesn't seem to be a basis for a due process claim here to me.

	26-03-2005 13:03									#18
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither The point is getting to the bottom of the patient's wishes when there is a dispute.

And that was the point of the civil case! The point brough up was that Terry didn;t have her own council, which would have been useless.

quote: While JT wrote a very good piece on where sensitivity to the issue is coming from, the real reason this is important is in deciding what happens when there is a dispute. I am not convinced that Ned has it wrong. If there is a dispute, the state must assure itself that the patient's interests are looked after before the state uses its power to intervene to terminate support for a life. I am not convinced that a judge has the time to invest into such a question, nor should he or she. Furthermore, it is not the function of a judge to be an advocate.

THE STATE DID NOT INTERVENE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A civil court judge is NOT an agent of the state- they are there to decide a dispute between 2 private parties.

As for you saying a judge oes not have the time- if someone who's role in society is to mediate disputes and render a judgement does not have the time, WHO THE HELL DOES?



And the judge was NOT an advocate-people presented evidence to the judge, the judge made a decision and a ruling. That is what judges do in civil cases.

	26-03-2005 13:06									#19
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Judges are supposed to hear representations from the people affected. The only thing clear in this case is that neither the husband nor the parents can be counted on to accurately represent the person most affected.

And unfortunately the person most affected has 0 way of stating their wishes or in fact doing anything else- heck, she could not even pay her bills, and if the bills stopped being paid, the plug would be pulled anyways.

Thus, providing her with council would be meaningless as the councellor would not have a clue as to what the wish of the patient actually was, and thus would invariably have to take one of the two posisitons, so what is the point? Just let the two sets of lawyers on each side argue it.

Is this too hard to grasp, cause its like the third time someone says it in this debate.

	26-03-2005 13:08									#20
	Put an end to popups!

boring, guys...

	26-03-2005 13:09									#21
	Increase Your PM Length

And Ned's point is that SHE was not represented by anyone who could have cared a fig to instruct HER OWN lawyer to argue strenuously that she live.

Step back and consider...

Which neutral party spent more than half an hour with the patient? Which officer of the court went around and talked to everyone who knew her? Did the judge even speak to the nurses?

Now tell me, was the 'defendant' represented before the sentence of death was handed down?

	26-03-2005 13:11									#22
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

And keep in mind, what should happen in future?

There are a **** load more of these cases coming.

THAT is what we should be concerned with.

	26-03-2005 13:11									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

One basic thing here is that unlike a death penalty case, where the state is seeking to punish by death for crime, in this case the state is trying to simply determine what Terri wanted and carry it out. I don't really see that the wishes of the husband or family matter one jot.

	26-03-2005 13:18									#24
	Remove this text

Now, if Terri is allowed to die physically and later, it can be proven that her husband lied, I think he should be tried for murder.

But if that could be proved surely it would have come out in 15 years?

Or maybe not. Make a nice episode for "Cold Case".

	26-03-2005 13:22									#25
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither And Ned's point is that SHE was not represented by anyone who could have cared a fig to instruct HER OWN lawyer to argue strenuously that she live.

what? The point of council is to give their client the best advice they can about the law and to represent thier client's interests the best they can. If her interest was to die, why would any lawyer claiming to be her lawyer fight to keep her alive? They woulkd be violating thier client's interests.

quote: Step back and consider... Which neutral party spent more than half an hour with the patient? Which officer of the court went around and talked to everyone who knew her? Did the judge even speak to the nurses?

The court appointed guardian who stayed with her for hours on end, far longer than any nurse com,ing in and out would. As for speaking to people who Knew her, what the hell would they know of her medical state?

And the judge would not need to speak to the nurses, since he had the advice of people who spent far more time examining her throughly than any nurse would.

Where have you been getting your information??

quote: Now tell me, was the 'defendant' represented before the sentence of death was handed down?

For the umpteeth time:

SHE COULD NOT BE REPRESENTED UNTIL A FINDING OF HER WISHES WAS MADE BECAUSE TO DO OTHERWISE MIGHT BE TO VIOLATE HER WISHES, WHICH IS WHAT A LAWYER IS NOT SUPPOSED TO DO.

Christ...

	26-03-2005 13:23									#26
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Capt Dizle Now, if Terri is allowed to die physically and later, it can be proven that her husband lied, I think he should be tried for murder. But if that could be proved surely it would have come out in 15 years? Or maybe not. Make a nice episode for "Cold Case".

The parents might very well sue the husband for unlawful death, the way this ugly case is going.

	26-03-2005 13:24									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

what I don't understand is why this is even an argument.

All you have to do is watch the videos. Even the one's where her eyes follow the balloon are pathetic. Even the worst mentally disabled person can feed themselves.

Most of you right to lifers probably haven't heard the audio of those videos. That's the most disturbing part. You can tell her brain is fried. ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

She does not have enough neurons to work with. So it's not like her brain can rewire itself.

I'm tempted to sneak into that hospital and put her out of her misery with my 9mm. But the doctors say she's not really in misery. I'm just tired of this story going on so long.

	26-03-2005 13:29									#28
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Dissident what I don't understand is why this is even an argument. All you have to do is watch the videos. Even the one's where her eyes follow the balloon are pathetic. Even the worst mentally disabled person can feed themselves. Most of you right to lifers probably haven't heard the audio of those videos. That's the most disturbing part. You can tell her brain is fried. ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. She does not have enough neurons to work with. So it's not like her brain can rewire itself. I'm tempted to sneak into that hospital and put her out of her misery with my 9mm. But the doctors say she's not really in misery. I'm just tired of this story going on so long.

You could just use your 9mm to put yourself out of your misery then. Wait, don't do that. I was joking.

	26-03-2005 13:29									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by GePap SHE COULD NOT BE REPRESENTED UNTIL A FINDING OF HER WISHES WAS MADE BECAUSE TO DO OTHERWISE MIGHT BE TO VIOLATE HER WISHES, WHICH IS WHAT A LAWYER IS NOT SUPPOSED TO DO. Christ...

And a rolleyes back at you...

SHE SHOULD BE REPRESENTED BY A LAWYER ADVISED BY THE COURT APPOINTED GUARDIAN!

Are you stiff? Do you not get it?

SHE WAS NOT REPRESENTED BY A LAWYER BEFORE IT WAS DECIDED SHE SHOULD DIE!

	26-03-2005 13:30									#30
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Capt Dizle You could just use your 9mm to put yourself out of your misery then. Wait, don't do that. I was joking.

I'm not in any misery. But rest assured, if I am, then I will kill myself (if I 'm able).