George Felos Ready To Throw In The Towel?

Last week, the Schindlers received some good news in their efforts to save the life of their daughter Terri.

Firstly, the Florida Supreme Court issued a stay barring an order to remove Terri's feeding tube until November 30. This was done so as to give Florida Governor Jeb Bush and attorneys for the Schindlers time to take Terri's case to the Federal courts, particularly the US Supreme Court.

In a separate hearing on Thursday, Pinellas County Circuit Court Judge Greer heard arguments from George Felos, who asked the court to end his stay on the removal of Terri's feeding tube early, on Friday. Attorney for the Schindlers, David Gibbs, countered by asking Judge Greer to continue the stay indefinitely.

But in a surprise decision, on Friday Judge Greer issued the indefinite stay requested by Gibbs on behalf of the Schindlers.

The decision barring the removal of Terri's feeding tube indefinitely has prompted Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, to consider ending his efforts to kill Terri:

"I think we are coming very close, if we are not here already, where proceeding in the judicial system is futile," said George Felos, who represents Michael Schiavo in his quest for court permission to stop feeding his brain-damaged wife. "It would appear that pursuing any remedy through the judicial system is simply a waste of time," Felos said. "It is hard to see where there is any benefit in staying the course in this case."

Felos further complained of Judge Greer's ruling, "I think it's outrageous." The ruling, he said, "could delay this case months, even years."

It seems to me that Felos is starting to view the prospect of further uncompensated legal wrangling with dismay. Recall that Felos hasn't been paid anything by Schiavo since 2002. Terri's settlement fund is exhausted: Felos has been paid about $700,000 by Schiavo, but there won't be any going back to that well. Felos may be deciding that he isn't willing to expend his time and resources pursuing Terri's death ad infinitum.

Terri isn't safe yet, and the battle isn't over yet. Terri will only be safe when Michael Schiavo is stripped of or relinquishes his guardianship of Terri. But this is a very hopeful sign, and reason to be thankful. We need to pray that George Felos does give up his pursuit of Terri's death as a "bad job", and that Michael isn't able to find some other lawyer to aid him in his effort to end Terri's life.

A Confused Young Man

I probably don't check my comment boxes often enough. This is especially true when I am away from the blog for an extended period, as I have been for almost 2 weeks (sorry about that - been busy).

So I am only just now responding to a confused young man named "Nathan", who left the following comment to my post about John Kerry "lying low" a while back:

Father, if I may ask, which parish in which diocese are you serving? I ask because I'd like to write to your diocesan bishop and talk to him about how you're risking the diocese's, or at least your parish's, tax exempt status on your weblog by openly campaigning against one candidate and endorsing the other.

I look forward to your response.

Of course, almost immediately after I wrote that blog, Senator Kerry, almost as though he were trying to prove me wrong, made several more confused utterances about being "guided by [his] faith", in matters of caring for the poor, the environment, etc. Strangely enough, Senator Kerry won't allow himself to be guided by his faith in the areas of abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, or protecting marriage. Most recently, Kerry urged his followers to walk with him "in the footsteps of the Lord" (thanks to Amy for the link). I wonder which footsteps of the Lord those would be? Does the Senator imagine that the Lord walks in lockstep with NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and NOW, as he does?

But, getting back to Nathan's comment, a perusal of his blog reveals that his confusion about the Church's tax examption matches, and in all likelihood is of a piece with, his confusion about Church teaching and a Catholic's political responsibility. For Nathan is one of the "Catholics For Kerry" who has convinced himself that it is somehow consistent with Catholic teaching to vote for a candidate who has literally never heard of an abortion he couldn't justify, a candidate who, in the words of Greg Sisk, is the "candidate of the abortion industry itself."

I have been critical of Senator Kerry, and I have argued, here, here, and here, that it is simply inconsistent with Catholic teaching to vote for a pro-abortion candidate such as John Kerry. I have repeatedly pointed out Church teaching that abortion is the foremost issue confronting us today, and that nothing outweighs it in moral gravity. I have also argued, as have others, that Cardinal Ratzinger's statement about remote material cooperation and proportionate reasons does not give one license to vote for pro-abortion candidates.

My arguments and statements have always been based on Church teaching, and not on partisan political concerns. And I have never "endorsed" any candidate. As I have written before, if Church teaching on life issues seems to cut more against one candidate or party because of their fanatical devotion to abortion, that's the candidate's or party's fault, not mine or the Church's

But the fact is that even were I making "political" statements (which I haven't been), I have just as much right, as a private person and citizen, to express those opinions as any layman. My comments on this blog are mine. They are not represented as, and no one could reasonably construe them as, officially expressing the pronouncements of either my parish or my diocese, the Diocese of Kalamazoo, Michigan. This weblog belongs to me, not to my parish or diocese. Its content is in no way vetted or "approved" by them. Insofar as I voice Church teaching and explain it's consequences for how we live, including exercising our political rights, my remarks are above any partisan political agenda.

So, Nathan, nice try. If, as some suspected, you were trying to intimidate me into silence, it didn't and couldn't work. Personally, I don't think that's what he was trying to do, at least explicitly. I think his comment reflects nothing more than confusion. The idea that my comments here endanger the Church's tax exemption is merely silly.

But Nathan, if you really want to write my bishop, go right ahead. Send him copies of my previous blogs that I linked above. Explain to him how you think that we can follow John Kerry "in the footsteps of the Lord."

Here's my bishop's name and address:

The Most Reverend James A. Murray
Diocese of Kalamazoo
215 N. Westnedge Ave.
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007

The Australian Bishops Get It

At least when it comes to our duty to provide food and water to people with brain damage or PVS.

Last month, the Australian Bishops' Conference issued a "Briefing Note on the Obligation to Provide Nutrition and Hydration" to PVS patients. The document is clear and concise, and takes as its starting point the Pope's "Address To the International Congress on the Vegetative State" last March.

Some American Catholic bioethicists, such as Fr. John Tuohey, couldn't seem to recognize the Pope's teaching for what it was: the exercise of the ordinary magisterium. I took Fr. Tuohey to task for this, among other things, back in July.

I'm glad to see some clerics understand the teaching of the Church on this issue, even if we have to go halfway around the world to find them.

You can also download the Australian bishops statement here as a handy PDF document, which is formatted as a pamphlet.

Kudos to the Bishops of Oz!

Michael Schiavo Reserves Right To Kill Terri "At Any Time"

In a little-noticed remark in this story (go to the picture of George Felos and click on the "watch video" link), George Felos is quoted as saying that the original judgment, that is the one giving Michael the right to remove Terri's feeding tube, is "still in place", and that Michael reserves the right to remove it "at any time". Felos also said that he didn't know when that date would be, and that Michael was "taking it day by day".

So what will Michael do? Will he announce his intention to do so and make a big splash of it, maybe with cameras present? Or will we awaken some morning to find that he has done so in the middle of the night, hoping to get away with it as a fait accompli?

It will be done when, and in the manner in which, he thinks he can get away with. My guess is that he'll opt for the middle-of-the-night approach. Everything about his case hinges on hiding facts from the light of truth. He won't be able to stand doing this in the light of day.

George Felos Shows Equal Contempt...

For people's religious beliefs as he does for the lives of disabled people who cannot speak for themselves.

Felos, the attorney aiding Michael Schiavo's efforts to kill his wife Terri, compared the Pope to Iranian mullahs (like the Ayatollah Khomeini) in court hearings last week.

The arguments in this case, as I explained below, hinge upon Terri's status as a practicing Catholic and the Pope's address last spring which, among other things, clarified the obligation to provide food and water to PVS patients.

Attorney for the Schindlers, David Gibbs, spoke concerning the Pope's statement and argued that it presents a change in circumstances which would render the removal of Terri's feeding tube a violation of Terri's religious rights.

George Felos responded by saying, "This is not Iran. The mullahs don't make pronouncements to validate, invalidate . . . a court's judgment."

That's right, Mr. Felos. The Pope, in insisting that human beings not be treated like disposable objects we can get rid of when no longer convenient, is like Muslim extremist mullahs hurling fatwahs of death against girls who don't wear headscarves.

Felos displays the contempt for religion and religious values that characterizes the majority of our society's elites. He is in good company with certain journalists and columnists who regularly warn their readers about oppressive "edicts from Rome", and agree with organizations like People For The American Way that having serious Christians in positions of power is "scary".

George Felos's statement about mullahs is indicative of the attitude of many occupying positions of power and influence, including our judiciary. That's why I'm not optimistic about the Schindlers' chances of success in their latest legal strategy.

Do Not Push Gently Into That Good Night

An outstanding article by Rosie DiManno in the Toronto Star:

We project our revulsion — which is essentially rooted in fear of our own mortality — and convince ourselves that somebody else would be better off dead because look, just look, at how wretched their existence has become or will become. And that says a great deal about the value that we subtract from a life when it is no longer vigorous and productive; when it just lies there, maybe thinking, maybe dreaming, maybe remembering.

Go and read the rest.

"She's Just Going To Die Anyway"

A great article about Terri Schiavo's case, and the Pope's recent remarks about the care of PVS patients, recently appeared on Catholic Exchange.

It's titled "The Case of Terri Schiavo", and gives a concise but thorough discussion of what our moral duty is in such cases:

[S]ociety must not lose sight of the human dignity of the individual, even if diagnosed as being in a "persistent vegetative state." Such a person deserves the same care as anyone else. The pope affirmed the following principles, which uphold the dignity of the sick person: First, the sick person, even if diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state, has a right to basic health care (nutrition, hydration, cleanliness, warmth, etc.). Second, he has a right to treatment to prevent complications related to his confinement in bed. Third, he has the right to appropriate care for rehabilitation, and to be monitored for signs of recovery; one must never give up hope of at least a partial recovery (no. 4).

The author, Fr. William Saunders, is a priest of the Diocese of Arlington, Virginia, a professor at the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College, and an all around smart guy. It's well worth reading anything he writes.

You May Be Able to Help Terri

Mark Shea has posted on his blog today a request from Children of God for Life in Clearwater, Florida. They are looking for Catholics who have changed their advance directives or otherwise acted in response to the Holy Father's March 20th "Address to the Participants of the International Congress on Life Sustaining Treatments and the Vegetative State".

This is part of the legal strategy I described below, that Terri, as a devout Catholic, would want to follow the Pope's teaching on this matter, and would not have wanted to have her feeding tube removed.

The Schindlers' attorneys have a week to present any further case law on the point and evidence that Catholics have responded to the Holy Father's teaching. The judge said that he would then rule within 2 weeks whether he would hold a full blown evidentiary hearing to determine whether to vacate the previous orders entered in the case.

The most obviously helpful evidence would be affidavits from individuals who have in fact changed the text of their directives or who have executed directives specifically following the mandate of the Holy Father's statement.

Send an e-mail to lifetree@lifetree.org if you think you can help.

The Un-Circumcised Children's Mass

The music teacher at our elementary school organizes and prepares the children for our weekly all-school Masses. And she does a good job, too. In fact, she's been my "unindicted co-conspirator" in several of my more "Thrown Back" efforts at the school.

So yesterday, she comes to me with a look of deep concern on her face.

"Umm, Father," she says, "have you looked at the readings for Wednesday's Mass yet?"

"Well, no, not yet," I answered.

"I thought so," she continued. "Well, there's all that language in it about circumcision and uncircumcision, the circumcised and uncircumcised."

"Okay", I replied, unsure where this was going.

"The little kids don't know what circumcision is," she continued. "I was just concerned because they're not going to have a clue what that means."

"Of course not," I said, still not sure where we were headed.

"Well," she said, probably marvelling at my cluelessness, "you weren't going to talk about what that is, were you? I hope you weren't planning on explaining that or anything."

Obviously she was afraid I might carry my penchant for teaching the kids a little too far.

Images went through my head of my pastor taking dozens of outraged phone calls from irate parents, all to the effect of "get rid of that idiot Johansen", if I actually did something like that.

I answered her "No, oh no! I wouldn't preach about that! It's not like I'd make that the topic of my homily. You don't think I'd actually do that, do you?"

I'm glad I could set her at ease.

New Legal Strategy to Save Terri Schiavo

Attorneys for Bob & Mary Schindler have adopted a novel but interesting legal strategy in their efforts to save their daughter Terri.

They are arguing that removing Terri's feeding tube would be an infringement of her First Amendment right to free expression of religion.

New attorney David Gibbs filed a motion Thursday for an evidentiary hearing. Gibbs argued that a recent speech by Pope John Paul II changes Terri's case completely.

The pope clarified the Church's view on advanced directives. In the pope's opinion, people in a vegetative state -- like Terri Schiavo -- have a right to nutrition and health care.

I would quibble with the article's implication that the Pope's speech last March actually presents anything new. I think that the Pope didn't present anything new in his speech, in which he declared that food and water could not be considered "medical treatment" for PVS patients, but must be considered part of the ordinary care to which every patient is entitled. Rather, he elaborated on that point of Catholic moral teaching, previously enunciated in the CDF's 1980 "Declaration On Euthanasia", and applied it to cases such as Terri's. That is how the Ordinary Magisterium works: applying theological principles to the questions of the day.

The argument boils down to this:

Schiavo's parents on Thursday asked a circuit judge to hold a mini-trial to determine if the pope's recent statement should erase a court finding that Schiavo would not want to be kept alive by artificial means.

David Gibbs III, lead attorney for Schiavo's parents, said Catholics take the word of the pope as the supreme law of the church. And to ignore it imperils the soul.

"It would be disobedience to the church," Gibbs said. "It's a sin. It would be something one would be judged for. . . . It would be an act of disobedience to God."

In other words, since Terri is a Catholic, who practiced her faith and took it very seriously before her injury, she would want to follow the Pope's teaching on this matter, and would not have wanted to have her feeding tube removed.

As I said, it's an interesting argument, and one which I think reflects the truth of who Terri is, as opposed to Michael's cock-and-bull story that Terri "wouldn't want to go on living" in her condition.

Unfortunately, since it is, in essence, a religious argument, the legal establishment is going to be inclined to dismiss it. I hope I'm wrong, but the Florida judiciary hasn't given the defenders of life much cause to be optimistic.

"Fatally Flawed"

That's Walter Weber's opinion of the recent Florida Supreme Court decision striking down "Terri's Law" in his column in yesterday's National Review Online:

Observers have criticized the decision as a frustration of the will of the people, as an exercise in judicial arrogance, and most disturbingly as a green light for the adulterous Michael Schiavo to seek yet another court order terminating the tube-feeding of his brain-damaged wife.

All true. Yet the decision is something else as well: It is an embarrassingly bad decision legally.

I have argued in the past that the court cases concerning Terri's Law are really all about judges protecting their life-and-death power and keeping their ability to make arbitrary rulings of "fact" safe from review.

Weber shows that the Supreme Court's decision is bad law as well as bad morality:

The Supreme Court's contention that "Terri's Law" gives the Governor an unwarranted ability "to interfere with the final judicial determination"?

"Nonsense."

What about the idea that, in Terri's Law, the legislature gives the governor "too much" discretion in carrying out a program?

"Made-up."

It has become increasingly obvious to me and many others that the Florida judiciary consists of a singularly sub-par bunch of hacks, who don't even rise to the low standard demanded of ideologically motivated judicial activists.

Will the Federal courts step in and redress the wrongs committed against Terri Schiavo and her parents? We can only hope and pray.

Schindlers To Go On Larry King Live

Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, will appear on the "Larry King Live" show tonight. 

I'm sure they'll have a lot to say about the Florida Supreme Court's recent ruling, and Michael's continuing efforts to kill their daughter.

The show begins at 9 PM EST. 

Requiem

I was doing some writing a little while ago, and while writing I was listening to Gabriel Faure´'s Requiem, drinking a glass of pretty good Spanish sherry, and smoking a pipe full of "Knightly News", one of my favorite blends from Jon's Pipe Shop of Champaign, Illinois - Jon's is where I first learned the noble art of pipe smoking as an undergraduate at the University of Illinois.

Now what, you are probably wondering, does this little nugget of "Fr. Rob Lore" have to do with anything? Well, it was as a student at the U of I that I first got serious about my Catholic faith, and first contemplated my vocation to the priesthood. It's also where I first got involved with the pro-life movement. When the full horror of abortion struck me, I decided I had to get involved. For a couple of years as an undergraduate, I was the Publicity Chairman for Illini for Life. As such, I and other students manned a weekly information booth at the Student Union. And since those days, abortion has continued apace: approximately 40 million unborn children have had their lives cut short in the womb since 1973. That's more than the Nazis, Stalin, and the Cambodian killing fields managed to wipe out combined.

The scripture readings for yesterday's Mass revolve around the issue of complacency. The prophet Amos chastises the Israelites for being so self-satisfied that they are unaware of their nation's slide into immorality and apostasy. The Gospel's parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is an illustration of the consequences of complacency. I reflected in my homily today that we pride ourselves, and have done a fair bit of collective chest-thumping in the last year or so, on being the most powerful, richest, and greatest nation in the world. And all of those things are no doubt true. But is our justice commensurate with our power? Is our self-donation commensurate with our riches? Is our holiness commensurate with our greatness? I have my doubts. We slaughter 4,000 unborn children every day for the sake of our lifestyles. We countenance all manner of perversion under the name of "alternative lifestyles" and "non-traditional families", for the sake of gratifying our lusts. In Florida, Terri Schiavo is very likely to be starved to death in the name of the fictive "right to privacy", and the lawyers and judges congratulate themselves on having dotted all of the legal jots and tittles.

A nation that can do all of these things, and yet proclaim its righteousness, is one in the throes of complacency.

And so, I've been reflecting on my own complacency. "I have a pretty nice life," I thought. I've had a good education, I'm (overly) well-fed, and have had the leisure and disposable income to learn about and enjoy things like Spanish sherry. I love my priesthood, and enjoy most of what I do in connection with being a priest. I am doing that to which God has called me, and I'm pretty happy as a result. I even have the time to indulge in this avocation of writing. As my former vocation director in the Diocese of Arlington, Fr. Jim Gould, told me many a time, "Johansen, you're the luckiest man on the planet."

What struck me was that at the very time I am writing this, unborn children are having their lives snuffed out in the womb. And what stuck me next was the general lack of urgency about the slaughter of the unborn among many of us who acknowledge the Church's teaching. I include myself in this category: I could be doing much more than I am now. I haven't been out to the abortuaries with other pro-lifers to say the rosary on Saturday morning in years. I give money to various pro-life organizations (and I could do more of that), but not a lot of time. I've been "in the process" of putting together a teen-oriented pro-life presentation for over a year now, but have little down on paper. Has the death of those unborn children become a mere abstraction to me? Is that what it is to those who also in some way acknowledge the Church's teaching, but nevertheless find some rationale for making it OK to support politicians who embrace that slaughter?

The right of the unborn to life is the foundation of any "seamless garment" of the Ethic of Life. I would like to see an end to war, poverty, etc. But there will simply not be any progress in those areas until we restore the foundation of protecting the most innocent and vulnerable among us. Any attempts, apart from that, to build a society that respects the dignity of life, will crumble just as a house built without a foundation. As long as we can find rationales to allow, or stand by and permit, the killing of the most innocent, we are setting ourselves up as the arbiters of life and death. And as long as we do that, we will find ways to rationalize the killing of anyone whom we find inconvenient or unworthy.

Faure´ omitted the Dies Irae, with its language of judgment and wrath, from his Requiem. He did this because he wanted to focus his work on the mercy and generosity of God. And God is, indeed, merciful. But we cannot fool ourselves by simply omitting the uncomfortable truths about Him. God is just, and does not allow injustice to go on forever. I fear great judgment for our society as long as the death toll of abortion continues to mount. I fear great judgment as long as those who claim the name of Christ can continue to justify themselves in receiving the Lord of Life at the altar, while yet mocking Him by advocating, defending, or making excuses for a slaughter simply unprecedented in human history. As one of my commentors once suggested, prayer and fasting are what these times call for. And for those innocents deprived of life while still unseen and unheard, this prayer:

Pie Jesu, Domine, dona eis requiem;
dona eis requiem, sempiternam requiem.

Merciful Jesus, grant them rest;
grant them rest, eternal rest.

Statement of the Schindler Family

Yesterday, after the Florida Supreme Court struck down "Terri's Law", the Schindler family issued this statement:


Statement by Schindler Family in Response
to Florida Supreme Court Ruling

For years now lawyers and judges – all of them total strangers – have besieged our family stating in courtrooms and the media that our severely disabled daughter, Terri, must be starved to death. We have been told that she must die in order to protect her right of privacy. And now the Florida Supreme Court tells us that a law crafted to save Terri’s life is unconstitutional when it is applied to her. None of this makes any sense to us.

The ruling by the Florida Supreme Court today was not unexpected; nevertheless the family is disappointed at the outcome. We would like everyone to understand the reason the Florida legislature and Governor Bush interceded in Terri’s case was to protect Terri from a serious miscarriage of justice. The Governor specifically wanted answers to the following questions, all of which are extremely troubling: (1) Why Terri’s purported desire to die was hidden from the jury in the 1992 medical malpractice case, during which Michael Schiavo testified that Terri would need compensation to live out her life; (2) What did Michael Schiavo mean when he purportedly said at Palm Gardens Nursing Home such things as “When is she going to die?” “Has she died yet?” “When is that bitch going to die?” “Can’t you do anything to accelerate her death?” (3) What Michael Schiavo knows about the multiple traumatic injuries of relatively recent origin that were found to be present in a bone scan conducted on Terri by Dr. Campbell Walker in March of 1991? (4) Why were nurses’ notes which documented Terri’s rehabilitation potential deleted from her chart at Palm Gardens? (5) Why were observations of the nursing assistants regarding Terri’s level of function and responsiveness deleted from her chart? and (6) What would Terri’s desires be regarding who should make end-of-life decisions for her if she knew that Michael Schiavo was living with another woman who has borne two children by him?

The family knows that Terri never expressed a desire to be starved to death, and the Legislature and Governor thought the case troubling enough to get involved directly. We profoundly regret that the Florida Supreme Court felt compelled to ignore these questions and opted instead to issue a technical legal decision that doesn’t protect Terri from the cadre of crusaders who are so desperate for our daughter be starved to death. The family knew that this outcome was probable and so we are pursuing other legal avenues, which we hope will save Terri’s life. The family appreciates all those who have supported their fight to save Terri, and again express to them our sincere gratitude. The family also will forever be grateful to Governor Bush and his legal team for their devotion to saving Terri’s life.


Contributions and/or help in the fight to save Terri's life may be made at TerrisFight.org.

Cheryl Ford Has a Blog!

Cheryl Ford RN, is the nurse who discovered the "Exit Protocol" I published a couple of weeks ago, detailing in cold clinical detail how to end Terri's life.

Cheryl has a blog, Fight4Terri.blogspot.com.

Cheryl has firsthand access to lots of information, so it's a good idea to keep on eye on her blog. Check it out!

Florida Supreme Court Rules Against "Terri's Law"

Today the Florida Supreme Court handed down their ruling on the constitutionality of "Terri's Law", the law passed last October by the Florida Legislature which gave Govenor Bush the power to intervene to save Terri's life.

Unfortunately, as I speculated before, this is pretty much the outcome I expected. It was clear from the questioning of the Supreme Court justices that they had pretty much made up their minds about the case.

You can get the ruling yourself here (Adobe PDF file). Thanks to Amy Welborn for finding the link to the case file.

I have only quickly skimmed through the ruling, but it seems to rest on the legal issues I have identified before, namely:

Separation of powers: In our system of government, the functions of the Executive branch, the Courts, and the Legislature are clearly delineated. Except when judges legislate from the bench by discovering new rights in the Constitution which the framers somehow forgot to spell out. But that's OK because it's judges who are doing it, and judges are really smart, and, after all, they really know best. In this case, it means that only judges get to make life or death decisions regarding helpless women who can't speak for themselves.

Irreviewability Of Judicial Decisions of Fact: The Supreme Court recites Judge Greer's decisions of fact, such as that Terri is in a Persistent Vegetative State, as gospel. Ditto for the judge's ruling, based on husband Michael's testimony and not much else, that Terri wouldn't have wanted to go on living like this. The Schindler's and Governor Bush have repeatedly asked for new hearings to review thses and other issues, citing new evidence and ample reason to suspect that evidence was not fairly considered before, but have been rebuffed.

This decision strengthens the ability of judges to make rulings of fact without fear of review or appeal. Judges' rulings of fact are now virtually incapable of being reviewed in Florida. In other words, a judge could, for all intents and purposes, rule that the sky is green. And once he has done so, you can point to the sky all you want and say it's blue, and it won't matter a whit to the courts.

I hope to post more later, when I have time to go through the ruling in greater depth, and if I can reach the Schindlers to get their reactions.

Sorry To Be So Invisible...

Over the last week or so. I've been away from my parish. I was on the East Coast last week, and spent last weekend visiting Washington, D.C. and Northern Virginia. Among other things, I attended the annual Partnership Dinner for Crisis Magazine in Washington Friday night. It was an outstanding evening, and I was able to see some old friends there and meet some new ones.

I also was able to meet and have dinner with fellow bloggers Zorak and The Old Oligarch Sunday evening. We've never met before, but we quickly warmed up to each other and had a great time. The conversation ranged from Pistols to Patristics. The O.O. introduced me to one of his delights, Absinthe, otherwise known as Wormwood liqueur. It was interesting stuff, but I don't know that I'll make a habit of drinking it.

Sorry, but though I now know the secret identities of the O.O. and Zorak, I'm sworn to secrecy. You'll never get it out of me!

This evening, my diocese's (Kalamazoo, Michigan) Priest's Convocation begins in the Detroit area. This is a pow-wow in which we priests and our Bishop get together and talk about priest stuff.

I'll try to blog more later, but I'll have limited opportunity to do so until Wednesday.

Proportionally Pro-Abort Politicians

Cardinal Ratzinger recently made a statement in a letter to the US bishops about "proportionate reasons" possibly justifying a vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

Some Catholics, including Fr. Andrew Greeley, have taken that to grant a broad license to vote for pro-aborts as long as you can come up with some issue you feel more strongly about than abortion.

This interpretation of Cardinal Ratzinger, and Church teaching, is almost perfectly wrong. It's so wrong as to be a caricature of the Cardinal's statement.

I intended to blog on this issue, but now I don't have to, because Apologist Extraordinaire Jimmy Akin has answered Fr. Greeley and the rest, by explaining the doctrine which Cardinal Ratzinger assumed (perhaps imprudently) everyone would understand he was referring to when he used the phrase "proportionate reasons".

As Jimmy wrote:

Many Catholics were at a loss to understand the Cardinal’s statement. “Has Ratzinger lost his mind?” some wondered. “Isn’t he departing from sound Catholic theology?”

Others, including well-known dissidents, pounced on the statement as vindication for their cause and wrote newspaper columns trumpeting it as proof that in the Vatican’s view it is okay to vote for pro-abortion politicians as long as you don’t share their pro-abortion view. In other words, a voter can be “personally opposed but . . .”

Both responses fail to do justice to the Cardinal’s remark. Contrary to the first response, he is not departing from the established principles of Catholic moral theology. In fact, he is emphasizing them. Contrary to the second response, he is not offering an easy pretext for voting for pro-abort politicians.

Go read the rest. This is a "must" read.

Terri's "Exit Protocol" Discovered In Hospice Documents

Cheryl Ford, RN, a nurse from Tampa who has been very active in the efforts to save Terri's life, recently undertook, on behalf of the Schindlers, a review of medical records from when Terri was first admitted to Woodside Hospice. Woodside Hospice is run by Hospice of the Florida Suncoast. It is of interest to note that Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, was a member of the Board of Directors of Hospice of the Florida Suncoast until the Terri Schiavo case began to attract widespread public attention a few years ago.

In her research, Ms. Ford found a document titled "Exit Protocol" in Terri's file. The document is on Hospice of the Florida Suncoast "Patient Care Notes" stationery, and is dated April 19, 2001. This document lays out, in clinical detail, the procedures to be followed in bringing about Terri's death by starvation and dehydration.

I reproduce here, in entirety and verbatim, the contents of this document. It was sent to me in the form of an Adobe PDF document. It is not yet available on the web, but as soon as it becomes available I will post a link to it.

The text of the document is in black type, my comments and explanations will be presented in red type


Exit Protocolxxxxxxxxxxxx00038

Patient Care Notesxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Hospice
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxOf The Florida Suncoast

Date

4/19/01xxxxxxxxxxxxxClinical Pharmacy
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxRe: Medication review and symptom management


Pt. is a 37 yo woman in a vegetative state with no apparent signs of distress. Enteral tube-feeding to be discontinued on 4/20/01.

Current Medications:

1. antacid suspension 1-2 tablespoons prn [prn = "as needed"]

2. Naproxen suspension 375 mg Q8* prn menstrual cramps. [Q8* prn = "every 8 hours as needed". Naproxen is a pain-relieving and anti-inflamatory drug. ]

3. Vitamin liquid daily.

Upon discontinuation of enteral feeding the following signs/symptoms may or may not occur. The following is a brief list of symptoms for which to monitor and recommended interventions.

1. d/c ["discontinue"] antacid. d/c Naproxen suspension.

2. d/c Vitamin liquid

3. Monitor symptoms of pain/discomfort. If noted, medicate with Naproxen rectal suppository 375 mg Q8* prn.

Wait a minute! George Felos, Michael Schiavo, and all the other advocates of feeding-tube removal have been saying repeatedly that dying by denial of nutrition & hydration is "peaceful" and "painless". They've both said so in interviews and press conferences, such as on Larry King Live. So if dying by denial of nutrition and hydration is, as Michael said, "painless and probably the most natural way to die", then why is medication needed for pain and discomfort?

4. Signs of compromised skin integrity — continue vigilant skin care, provide moistener to lips, consult wound-care specialist if needed.

As the body dehydrates, the skin loses its tone and dries out. Left untreated, this will lead to cracking and bleeding. The lips are even more sensitive in this respect. "Vigilant skin care" is the liberal use of lotions and moisteners to mask these symptoms. The lips must be continually swabbed with special moisteners, and have lip balm applied to them. In the last stages, though, in spite of such measures, skin breakdown often occurs. Because of the body's debilitated state, normal healing mechanisms do not function. Hence the need to consult wound-care specialists to deal with ulcers and open sores.

5. Signs of dehydration
(A) dry lips, mouth. Swab saliva substitute inside mouth prn. (see next page)

After a few days without water, the body stops producing saliva, necessitating the use of a "saliva substitute" to avoid ulceration in the mouth, and a characteristic foul odor on the patient's breath. The cessation of salivation also leads to other complications which appear in the "pulmonary" section.



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx00039

Patient Care Notesxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Hospice
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxOf The Florida Suncoast

Date

4/19/01xxxxxxxxxClinical Pharmacy Note — continued

xxxxxxxxxxxxxSigns of dehydration — continued

(B) decreased urinary output - no change in care plan.

While there may be "no change in care plan", one of the effects of dehydration is incontinence. The patient's diapers or "chux" pads will need to be changed more frequently, until such output ceases entirely.

6. Pulmonary
(A) Inability to clear secretions - reposition and swab mouth, consider scopolamine patch behind ear every 3 days.

Dehydration causes the natural mucus secretions of the mouth, nose, and throat to thicken, as the body struggles to protect these delicate membranes. The lack of saliva exacerbates this problem, preventing the normal swallowing of these secretions. These thick deposits can interfere with breathing. The use of the scopolamine patch promotes drying of these secretions, which prevents their build-up, but hastens the breakdown of the tissues.

(B) dyspnea ["difficulty in breathing"] — nebulize low dose 2-5 mg morphine sulfate Q4* prn.

In the last stages of dehydration/starvation, the patient's breathing will become difficult and labored. He or she may even begin gasping for breath, as even the lungs' ability to effect transfer of gases is compromised. Morphine nebulized into a fine spray relaxes bronchial passages and relieves these symptoms. However, because of the resultant decrease in respiratory efficiency, this may hasten death.

7. Multifocal myoclonus or terminal agitation (sometimes caused by electrolyte imbalance). Consider diazepam rectal administration 5-10 mg. May repeat in 4 hours if not resolved then daily - twice daily as needed.

Myoclonus is twitching or spasm of the muscles. Multifocal means "occurring in many different parts of the body". This is usually the result of imbalance in electrolytes, the chemicals, such as salt, potassium, and calcium, which make your bodies internal electrical "batteries" work. Nerve impulses and muscle contractions are governed by electro-chemical reactions utilizing these chemicals. Dehydration causes these chemicals to be out of balance, interfering with normal nerve and muscle function. This can result in nerves and muscles "firing off" uncontrollably, causing spasm. The patient will writhe and become extremely agitated. If you have ever had muscle cramps resulting from strenuous exercise (especially when you have sweat profusely), you have some idea what this feels like. Imagine having this happen all over your body, repeatedly. Diazepam (more commonly known as Valium) is a muscle relaxant

8. Grand Mal seizure, which is highly unlikely given current conditions and lack of contributing factors (meds). Recommend diazepam 15 mg rectally as indicated in seizure management orders.

In the final stages of starvation and dehydration, the same electrolyte imbalances which can cause muscle spasm can also lead to uncontrolled firing of neurons in the brain, according to a similar mechanism. This results in seizures.

Thank you for the opportunity to collaborate regarding this patient's care.

I would observe, in conclusion, that most of the "treatments" described in this Exit Protocol are in fact not directed at easing the patient's true condition, but in masking the symptoms of dying by starvation and dehydration. These treatments are designed to create the appearance of a peaceful "slipping away", when nothing of the sort is happening. The medications hide the fact that the patient undergoes a lengthy and painful deterioration, in which his/her body wastes away cruelly. Remember this the next time you hear or read someone say that Terri should be "allowed" to die.

Not Dead Yet

One organization that has emerged as a leading advocate for Terri Schiavo is Not Dead Yet, a disability-rights organization. Not Dead Yet was founded 1996, as a response to Jack (Dr. Death) Kevorkian, after he was acquitted in the assisted suicides of two women with non-terminal disabilities.

Not Dead Yet, in conjunction with other disability-rights groups, filed two Amici Curiae ("friend of the court") briefs in the recent Florida Supreme Court case concerning "Terri's Law".

Diane Coleman, the president of Not Dead Yet, published an editorial in Tuesday's Florida Today.

From Coleman's perspective, Terri's case is about the rights and dignity of the disabled:

...The life-and-death issues surrounding Terri Schiavo are first and foremost disability rights issues -- issues that ultimately affect millions of Americans, old and young.

These issues apply directly and immediately to thousands of people with disabilities who, like Schiavo, cannot currently process information or articulate their views to the extent that health-care providers require, and so must rely on others as substitute decision-makers.

Coleman, along with other disabled-rights advocates and myself, also sees that the legal process is being used to run roughshod over the rights of the disabled:

In the modern-day United States, bioethicists are working to dismantle the due process part of the Bill of Rights that has previously protected people in guardianship from wrongful decisions to withhold life-sustaining medical treatment.

They would misuse the right of privacy to supplant the right of due process, so that they may kill behind the closed doors of a room in a hospital or nursing home.

With abortion, and, increasingly with regard to those whose lives are for one reason or another considered not worth living, the "right to privacy" has become the "right to kill".