autopsy which showed she was incapable of doing the things they claimed she did (responding to people she knew, even saying "IIII Waaaannnaaa (live), etc.)
2006-07-23 15:22:41 · 10 answers · asked by Jaycee 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No.
Why? Because the family - in their heart of hearts - wanted her to be doing all of the things they said she was doing. Her parents (understandably) were having a hard time accepting that she was in deed so severely brain damaged that she could not perform the simplest of tasks. And the "experts" can only guess until they are able to examine the brain (which could only be done after her passing). It was a simple he said-she said case, and that is that.
I did not agree with her parents decision to fight to keep her "alive" because I feel they were being very selfish. If she was in the state she was in, how is her quality of life? She would not be able to "enjoy" life. Her parents did it because they could not let go. I can only imagine the pain they went through, but I think they caused themselves more pain by fighting the decision for so long.
I work with people with all sorts of mental/physical disabilities. Some of them are so profoundly mentally and physically retarded that one could not understand why they were living the way they do. But they CAN let you know that they are happy, sad, and so on. From what I could see, Terri could not do that.
What a horrible thing to live through. . .
2006-07-23 15:47:05 · answer #1 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"retiredslash" is correct. Unless they knew at the time that they were giving false testimony, perjury does not apply. From what I understand, the parents honestly believed their daughter was responding. That good faith belief, later proven wrong, means it wasn't perjury.
Alexandra apparently hasn't actually read the autopsy report. The brain wasn't just a bit shrunken from dehydration. Coroners have lots and lots of empirical data as to the effects of dehyration on tissue. Instead, the autopsy revealed that over 50% of the total brain mass had dissolved. That's opposed to the 3%-4% degredation normally caused by dehyration.
2006-07-23 16:33:45 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, I think they did at one point. The problem is, they really believed she was responding, so perjury does not apply.
That was a sad case. I was somewhat angered at those who treated the husband like some sort of criminal. And, for those who know no better, he is not the one who decided to pull the plug. By Florida law, the judge has to make that decision.
Some dirt bags even tried to accuse him of causing her illness.
Does anyone here really believe if the genders were reversed, the women would have told the surviving wife to have no other relationships for the rest of her life while the husband was a vegetable?
2006-07-23 15:31:33 · answer #3 · answered by retiredslashescaped1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More like Michael Schiavo should be charged with first-degree murder. People have been twisting the autopsy report to make it say what they want it to say. Of course her brain's a bit shrunken--it WOULD be after nearly two weeks without fluids!!!
All Terri needed was a feeding tube--THAT'S IT.
2006-07-23 15:28:19 · answer #4 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a sturdy health care professional has following factors.. *His social or communique skills with the sufferers which constitutes both verbal and non-verbal (body language) communique...As our occupation is a community provider. *He must be a position sort (a health care professional who tells his/her sufferers to stop smoking ought to no longer be considered smoking outdoors the health center 5 minutes after the affected man or woman leaves.. the position's the intergrity in this actual?) *He ought to take care of to communicate in a fashion the affected man or woman knows (no longer going off on the houses of amino acids... etc. etc) as this may come out as vanity *He, ideally ought to keep on with up on his sufferers ... supply them telephone calls to work out how they're doing *The health care professional must be keen to educate!!... this is going alongside o.k. with preventive health care. The health care professional ought to offer the sufferers the fishing rods, quite than the fish. If a health care professional knows a thanks to educate his/her affected man or woman what to do and what no longer to do, the health care professional will take care of to assist the affected man or woman replace his existence-sort for the more effective so as that the affected man or woman would not ought to keep coming decrease back. *>And very last yet no longer the least he must be smart, as a lot as date, And maximum Of all moral. Dr Suraj A ok
2016-11-25 20:39:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They said she was capable of doing those things 10 years beforehand. That is why they begged her husband to use the money he got from the lawsuit to provide her with physical therapy, which he did not. Perhaps if he had, she wouldn't have deteriorated to the vegetable state she was in when she died.
2006-07-23 15:28:02 · answer #6 · answered by Taffi 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. I understand why they did it but you can't lie to the court when you are under oath. I mean I know how hard it is to lose someone you love but it happens. But they were desperate and that's why they did it.
2006-07-23 15:27:20 · answer #7 · answered by maxie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I think they were just desperate to keep her alive. I think they were in denial about her true condition and not wanting to let go.
2006-07-23 15:26:53 · answer #8 · answered by First Lady 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
did they testify under oath?
2006-07-23 15:25:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
IT WAS A SAD STORY, IT'S OVER. LET IT GO.
2006-07-23 15:33:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋