In an attempt to not be unduly harsh or partisan, in regards to Judge Greer’s handling of and rulings on the Terri Schiavo case, I took another look at Florida State law. As some individuals continue to assert that Judge Greer ‘followed the law to the letter’ and was strictly ‘constructionist’ and ‘conservative’ in his rulings, I thought I might have misinterpreted Florida law as it is written. If I’d made an error in my assessments of the case and in fairness to the honorable judge, it certainly warranted my additional review. I’ve made mistakes before and will, no doubt, make them again! Alas, it strongly appears that I was correct the first, second and third times.
Florida statutes regarding euthanasia (or as our friends to the left of center wish to call it ‘the right to die’) seem relatively clear. Florida statute 765.309: Mercy Killing of Euthanasia Not Authorized; Suicide Distinguished states: 1) “Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to condone, authorize, or approve mercy killing or euthanasia, or to permit any affirmative or deliberate act of omission to end the life other than to permit the natural process of dyingâ€ÂÂ; 2) “The withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging procedures from a patient in accordance with any provision of this chapter does not, for any purpose, constitute a suicideâ€ÂÂ. Note: I find the phrase “or to permit any affirmative or deliberate act of omission to end the life other than to permit the natural process of dying†of particular interest and salience. The omission, for Terri Schiavo, was food and water. Barely (or not at all in my opinion) arguable, is that ‘withholding food and water’ constitutes a ‘natural death’.
One of the arguments detractors and pro-euthanasia advocates present is that Terri Schiavo had ‘feeding and hydration tubes’ inserted in her body and those, alone, were ‘sustaining her life artificially’. I strongly disagree with that allegation and interpretation of “artificialâ€ÂÂ. But, for the moment, let’s assume it is true. Michael Schiavo and Judge Greer also ruled that no one was allowed to give Terri food or water orally. Had she been given sustenance in this “natural†way, Terri would not be dead, today. The evidence that Terri Schiavo was forced to die by the direction of the state is unequivocal. Also, let’s take a look at the phrase “the withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging procedures from a patient in accordance with any provision of this chapter does not, for any purpose, constitute a suicideâ€ÂÂ. As we know, Terri’s death was not suicide. Rather, it was ‘death by the hands of another’; her estranged husband and the US court system. Florida law and statute 765.309 was, indeed, violated.
Florida statute 458.326 Intractable Pain; Authorized Treatment: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to condone, authorize, or approve mercy killing or euthanasia, and no treatment authorized by this section may be used for such purpose.†Again, this statute is clear in its refusal to accept, condone or allow euthanasia. Then, there is Florida statute 782.08 Assisting Self-Murder: “Every person deliberately assisting another in the commission of self-murder shall be guilty of manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s.775.082, s. 775.083 or s.775.084.†Seems fairly evident that this law was, also, broken. But, as judges are the ones who ‘interpret the laws’, in order to affect and impose their wills upon a gullible population, they have ‘interpreted’ the laws differently. Note: With the explicit language of Florida statutes, the only way (that seems even remotely plausible) they could have done so was to disregard said laws. Yet, another Florida statute that was deliberately violated? Certainly seems so.
An additional Florida statute, which seems to have been disregarded by the courts, is 744.3215 “Rights of persons determined incapacitatedâ€ÂÂ. I’ve received myriad emails arguing that Terri Schiavo, in her condition, was neither guaranteed nor even allowed an attorney. Well, kids, that’s not what 744.3215 says. In fact, this statute states, amongst other rights afforded to the disabled, that “A person who has been determined to be incapacitated retains the right: (l) to counselâ€ÂÂ. That counsel (IE legal counsel) would be in the form of a legal advocate. Terri was denied legal counsel. Another of the guaranteed rights in this Florida statute is (d) “to be treated humanely, with dignity and respect, and to be protected against abuse, neglect, and exploitationâ€ÂÂ. Suffice it to say, Terri Schiavo was not in any way “protected against abuse, neglect, and exploitationâ€ÂÂ; unless one considers her killing to actually have been her “protectionâ€ÂÂ. Insanity! Euthanasia is not protection and is, most certainly, exhibiting “abuse, neglect and exploitationâ€ÂÂ. Murder is one of the most severe forms of abuse.
Then there are the specious declarations that those individuals who signed sworn affidavits, in favor of Terri Schiavo, were “not credibleâ€ÂÂ. Really? Then, why in the world would they have affected them? What did they have to gain? The only thing that three nurses “gained†was to lose their jobs after agreeing to testify against Michael Schiavo. Hmmm. Doesn’t sound like they gained much…or anything. The problem is that whenever the pro-euthanasia/ culture of death folks are challenged, they become agitated and start shrieking one of their mainstay mantras “it’s unconstitutional!â€ÂÂ; even when that which is being effected is constitutional. So, the next time one of the death-cultists “double-dog dares you†to provide proof of your arguments on the Schiavo case, just quote them chapter and verse of Florida state law. And, if that doesn’t shut them up, there’s always Amendment XIV to the US Constitution.
