Friday, August 12, 2005

NARAL pulls the ad!!

Sean Hannity announced earlier tonight that NARAL had pulled their very offensive ad.

It took less time than I thought it would, actually. But I think that many people are getting very fed up with the blatant kinds of twisting facts that was displayed in this single commercial.
And I mean all of us, from any side of the argument.

NARAL began long ago with a stand based on lies. The figures that they used were NOT real, and Dr Bernard Nathanson has told that story many times since he turned his back on the abortion industry and began to speak out for the pre-born.

Another opinion that is worth reading and has some very worthwhile thoughts, though I would not use the term "moonbats".... lol.

I could not find much online prior to this story and CNN's from 11:14pm ET. The shortest, with the quote that shows just how far out this group really is included was here...

Group pulls John Roberts TV ad
Friday, August 12, 2005

WASHINGTON - After a week of protests by conservatives, an abortion-rights group said Thursday night that it was withdrawing a television advertisement linking Supreme Court nominee John Roberts to violent antiabortion activists.

"We regret that many people have misconstrued our recent advertisement about Mr. Roberts' record," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

"Unfortunately, the debate over that advertisement has become a distraction from the serious discussion we hoped to have with the American public," she said in a letter Thursday to Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who urged the group to withdraw the ad.

All I can say is... no one misconstrued ANYTHING. They meant it exactly the way people understood it. And I am glad that the ad is gone.

God bless!

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Glass Nickel Pizza Company...

While working in a nearby city, I found Glass Nickel Pizza Company.

LOVE the menu, and often order while at work, but also have been known to stop in after second shift and get a take out order to bring home, about 30 miles or so away.... because my area is basically deprived for delivery places...sigh. Better yet, I like their food! The Feta-licious Pizza, the MUSHROOMS, the Smothered Chicken, the Spinach Cheese Bread... and on and on and on. I have not yet gotten to the pastas, and there are a couple of other specialty pizzas I have been thinking of trying...

Tonight, while watching TV, I looked them up online, figuring EVERY good place has a website! I was not disappointed. They do. Grin. And... they also have something else of interest! They deliver using cooking oil for fuel at one of their sites in Madison!

I sent them an email tonight... STRONGLY encouraging them to expand to this area, even giving them a way to find a location so that I can fall into their DELIVERY zone. ....

If they come, I will order. If they build here, I may never have to cook again.... grin.

Well, can't go that far, but you get the point!

Groups Reject NARAL Characterization of Roberts

Groups Reject NARAL Characterization of Roberts

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

WASHINGTON — The latest attack on Supreme Court nominee John Roberts (search) has caused quite a stir among supporters who call outrageous an abortion rights group's claims in a television ad that Roberts "excused violence" against abortion providers.

"John Roberts filed court briefs supporting violent fringe groups and a convicted clinic bomber," says the ad by NARAL Pro-Choice America.

The case cited in the ad went up to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1992 and focused on whether a 19th century anti-discrimination law could be used to stop abortion protests.

The solicitor general's office, where Roberts worked as a deputy, filed an amicus, or "friend of the court" brief arguing the law did not apply and maintaining that such protests had nothing to do with gender discrimination. The Supreme Court agreed in a 6-3 ruling.

"What they said was regardless of what your position is on abortion or abortion protestors, those who protest about the issue are not engaging in sex discrimination," said former Justice Department official Barbara Comstock.

Representatives of NARAL Pro-Choice America say despite the ad's language, the group does not believe Roberts condones clinic violence.

"I know he said he finds bombing and murder abhorrent," said NARAL president Nancy Keenan.

Roberts made that point clear during his oral argument before the court.

"The United States appears in this case not to defend petitioners' tortious [or improper] conduct, but to defend the proper interpretation of [the statute]," he said.

Keenan argued, however, that the position Roberts took paved the way for continued protests at a dangerous time for abortion clinics.

"The groups he sided with were engaged in horrific, horrific campaigns of violence," she said.

Roberts' advocates have been quick to respond to the ads. The conservative Progress for America unveiled an ad dismissing NARAL's assertions as part of a liberal "witchhunt."

"A far left Democratic group is making a desperate and false attack recklessly distorting Judge Roberts' record," says the ad.

The nonpartisan Annenberg Center at the University of Pennsylvania also concluded on its Web site that "the [NARAL] ad is false."

Roberts spent Tuesday and Wednesday glad-handing on Capitol Hill, where another controversy has begun to unfold. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon met with Roberts Tuesday and then told The New York Times that he asked the nominee about the case of Terri Schiavo (search), the brain-damaged Florida woman whose feeding tube removal sparked a national controversy over the limits of congressional power.

In Wednesday's Times, Wyden said his staff wrote down Roberts' response word for word, which while not addressing Schiavo specifically, indicates how much Roberts values judicial independence.

"His answer was, 'I am concerned with judicial independence. Congress can prescribe standards, but when Congress starts to act like a court and prescribe particular remedies in particular cases, Congress has overstepped its bounds,'" Wyden said quoting Roberts.

The White House and sources who attended the meeting told FOX News that the report is inaccurate.

They say Roberts did not offer his own view on congressional over-reaching, and Wyden's transcription clearly omitted the words, "I am aware of court precedents which say," that preceded his comments on Congress prescribing standards.

The sources also maintain that Roberts declined to comment on the Schiavo case, saying, "I haven't studied the [Schiavo] case. I wouldn't want to opine on it."

The White House has demanded a correction by the Times. The paper's Washington bureau chief told FOX News that it will stand by its story.

Labels: , ,

Seeking Information On Programming, RE Fr John Corapi

On Sunday morning Aug 7, 2005, I was on my way home from work, listening to Relevant Radio.

Fr Corapi was on, but I missed the name of the tape or program of his that was being used. He seemed to be speaking on Redemptive Suffering, and got into marriage, saying that part of the purpose of Marriage is the salvation of ourselves AND our spouse, and asked how much we would be willing to suffer in order to gain the salvation of our spouse.

Today's thinking is exactly the opposite. "I should not have to put up with this... " "I don't have to take this...." We think that if we are not happy, contented, etc all the time, we have 'rights' is geared toward selfish thinking. Seldom do we 'rejoice' in any kind of suffering today.

Elizabeth Leseur did not think as we do today... and her diary after her death was the catalyst that spurred her husband's conversion...and ultimate ordination to the priesthood.

If anyone has knowledge of WHICH Fr John Corapi tape was played on the radio approximately 6:30 to 7:00 AM Central time on Aug 7, 2005, please let me know via the comments here OR via email available from the profile section of my blog.

On the website, it says:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is broadcast on the Sunday edition of Fr. John Corapi.

There are so many sections this may have fit under that I cannot begin to know where to look.

God bless!

Our vows:
The groom says:I (...), take you (...) to be my wife.
I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad,
in sickness and in health.
I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.

The bride says:I (...), take you (...) to be my husband.
I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad,
in sickness and in health.
I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.

"Right is still right if nobody is right,
and wrong is still wrong if everybody is wrong,"
Archbishop Fulton J Sheen author of The Life of Christ

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Fr McBrien article Refuted by Dr John Hubert

Fr Richard Mc Brien may be the media's favorite Catholic theologian for talking about the Church (on many forums, anyway), but to most orthodox Catholics who do heed the Holy Father, he is a voice of dissent. There is little that I can find to agree with regarding
Fr Mc Brien's opinions. Theologian or not, he does not speak authentic Catholic teaching/doctrine when he expounds, in print or on the air.

Now, he has one published that is in direct defiance of JPII's words regarding Terri Schiavo, AND he goes into results from the autopsy that are not there, nor inferred there!

I have been sitting on his article, and stewing about answering it, because though I am a nurse, it is not easy to refute medical findings in an autopsy from a nurse's stand-point, especially when you add that I would be speaking not only medical, but also Catholic teaching. I would definitely have brought in JPII's words on the subject , Bishop Gracida's words on the subject, and Bishop Vasa's (and the three other Bishops') words about Terri, Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan and others.

But then ... a small miracle... Dr John Hubert, MD let it be known that he was in the process of writing a refutation of the very article I was sitting on! He has it completed, and he sent it to me via Word attachment, and it is wonderful. It is also posted online!

I recommend anyone who has had questions about Terri's autopsy due to conflicting news media that supposedly discounts her family members' contention that she was aware, and attempted to speak, etc to go and READ Dr Hubert's article as soon as you can, including his footnotes!

And THEN... pass it on to everyone you know!

He said what I wanted to say... and more... SO MUCH BETTER than I could have done!

God bless!

This post is also available at Blogger News Network.

Labels: , ,

Differences in Terms: Differences in Cases

I really have difficulty reading some news stories, editorials, etc about medical cases. This one is no different. When speaking about persons and medical cases such as Terri Schiavo and Susan Torres, it is VERY important to have correct terminology to begin with.

My response to this one was not meant to sound "nasty", but was intended to point out the very serious differences in what was written and what was.

Dear Mr. Bradley,

There are some glaring errors in your report, and as a nurse, I have to comment.

Terri Schiavo was not brain dead, she was brain damaged. She was disabled. She was like any other brain damaged person, including those born that way and those injured later in life. She was on no ‘life support’ other than a tube which allowed formula and water and any medications she may need for her period, etc to be delivered. She was not, as you said, dying. That is a fact we agree on.

Susan Torres was dying. She was dying as a result of a massively bleeding Melanoma tumor, which did not simply DAMAGE her brain… she was diagnosed brain DEAD… and there IS no recovery from brain death. Without TRUE life support (ie, respirator/ventilator) she could NOT live. Had Susan not been pregnant, the respirator/ventilator, etc would have been removed long ago, probably almost immediately.

However, whenever there is a pregnancy, there are TWO patients involved. Two. Not one. Two. And one of those patients was living, not dying, not brain injured, not brain dead. Any OB MD or nurse can tell you that fact, as we learn it in training, and in Anatomy and Physiology, etc.

To turn off her life support meant that her heart would stop…and then, later, as a result, so would the baby’s. BOTH patients would die.

Susan had NO hope of living any kind of life without those machines.

Terri WAS living without them.

Susan was never diagnosed as being in a ‘vegetative state’. Not one MD or medical professional would agree with that statement. Susan was diagnosed as brain dead. There IS no recovery.

Terri was disputably diagnosed as being in a ‘permanent vegetative state’… MDs disagreed. Other Medical professionals disagreed. Some VEHEMENTLY disagreed. The families disagreed.

However, though Terri would never return to what she had been before her collapse, she MAY have been able to gain some skills (such as swallowing, perhaps speech) had she been allowed the therapy over the last 12 years of her life that was ‘promised’ during the Medical Malpractice suit…and then prohibited by the same person who had sought money to be able to care for Terri and her rehab. We will, therefore, never know what Terri may have been able to do with proper rehab and care.

There was no family disagreement with the Torres family members because… there was no possibility of any life without the machines. Susan was NOT in a coma…she was not brain damaged. She was not “vegetative”. Susan’s brain was so massively destroyed by the spontaneous bleed from the ruptured tumor that her brain died.

Terri’s did not. Terri was brain DAMAGED… not brain DEAD. Terri was disabled.

Susan was not disabled. Susan was dying; her heart beat, and her lungs worked as long as a machine forced air into her lungs rhythmically. She could not maintain heart or lung function on her own. Without those three organs functioning, none of the rest (kidneys, liver, intestines, etc) could, either.

Terri could. Terri did. Terri was NOT dying, until they stopped giving her what you and I both need to survive… food and water.

Sorry, but the nurse in me just reacts very strongly when those facts are incorrectly stated. The two cases are not remotely alike.

Finally, there is a video that I would like to refer you to, and suggest that you view it with two things in mind:

1) If Sarah knew about things like 9/11 when SHE was ‘vegetative’… in spite of ‘experts’… how much did Terri know? The autopsy results cannot REALLY answer that question. Her brain had shrunk… as all brains do… by the dehydration as well as by the brain damage.
Read Terri’s attorney’s account of her last visit with Terri. The description of Terri’s attempt to speak is nearly exactly the way every brain damaged person I have cared for as a nurse (33+ years) is exactly how they would say I Want…

For the video on Sarah:

Click here: / CBS News Video$@$Coma$@$Woman$@$Speaks&hitboxMLC=earlyshow

Sincerely, and God bless you!

Labels: , ,

Michael Schiavo Poised To Sue Caregivers

I wonder who the poor caregiver is?

Thanks to Cheryl Ford, RN for the heads up on this one! I find this absolutely unbelievable. Who has CARED for her over the past five years but the hospice that she was in, and the people who put her there? How far back is he going to go?

Aug 10, 2005

Michael Schiavo Poised To Sue Caregivers

CLEARWATER - Michael Schiavo has asked a court to waive the two-year statute of limitations on filing a medical malpractice lawsuit against one or more of his deceased wife's caregivers.

Terri Schiavo, 41, died March 31 after her feeding tube was removed after a seven-year court battle.

Schiavo's attorney in this case, Mark Perenich, said he was not able to discuss the proposed lawsuit behind Tuesday's request for an extension of the two-year statute of limitations.

By law, medical malpractice lawsuits must be filed within two years of the alleged misconduct unless an extension is granted.

In October 2003, Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed on court order. Doctors reinserted it on orders from Gov. Jeb Bush.

David Sommer

This story can be found at:

Addendum added Thursday, Aug 11, 2005 1:20 AM

See also the story at LIFE NEWS

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

C'mon, NARAL... be honest!

NARAL, in its current advertising against John G Roberts IMPLIES that he represented violent criminals in his participation in the case of Bray v Alexandria Women's Health Clinic.

( - NARAL Pro-Choice America, a pro-abortion advocacy group, has launched a nationwide television ad campaign linking Supreme Court nominee John Roberts with
"anti-choice extremists who use bombings and other forms of intimidation against
women, doctors, and nurses at women's health clinics."

Republican and pro-life groups immediately denounced the ad campaign as false and misleading.

The new NARAL ad focuses on Roberts' 1991 friend-of-the-court brief filed on behalf of Operation Rescue in the Supreme Court case Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic -- a case arising from pro-life demonstrations outside abortion clinics.

NARAL is again, twisting facts and being disingenuous, just as it did at its inception (see Dr Bernard Nathanson's biography and many comments on the formation of this group, including how many women died as a result of back street abortions... he was there... they made up the figure...)

The defendants in that case were NOT violent. Operation Rescue is founded on peaceful, not violent resistance. They may chain themselves to doorways, and a few may shout, though they are not encouraged to do this.... but most simply pray, and resist arrest simply by not cooperating. MOST protesters at Abortion Centers are peaceful. PERIOD. There are a FEW people out there who are not part of these protests, who advocate violence. And even fewer who have carried it out.

Yet, the woman injured at a clinic bombing comes on the ad and strongly implies that Judge Roberts assisted those who WERE violent. That is not true, and a more accurate, though slanted statement of what he really did is from their own words, in a PDF file here. The Bray V Alexandria section is near the bottom.

Brainwashing is a tactic that is used a lot today on tv and radio, and this is an example. They take a tiny truth, twist it, insert a few choice words, and voila!... we have forced people to 'assume' something that is not necessarily even remotely connected to the facts.

"Papa, Do You Love Me?"

Today, there is a story online that is worth sharing in its entirety. I have experience with this story, as I was the hearer of similar news about ten years ago. In our case, however, abortion never entered our minds, my child's NOR mine, but adoption did. In our story, though internally I prayed that it would not be the outcome (only because I am selfish, and wanted my grandchild)... I told my child that I would support whatever decision was made ...and prayed she would make the right one.

In the event of adoption, I was also aware of Open Adoptions, which would mean that there would be the possibility of knowing her child.... just not in the same way. Someone else would be parent, someone else would be grandparent. But both sides of the Adoption Triad making the decisions would have to agree to this. Today, my grandson is nine, is loved, and is VERY active ... and knows both his adoptive Grandma AND his birth Grandma (Grandpas, also).

In no way am I suggesting by giving you this story or the url to where it is located, that you must act on the 'support' aspect of it, but I am saying... this story has TRUTH to it, and there IS no pre-born baby that deserves to be killed for any reason, especially for convenience... When that child arrives... and even before that child is born... it is a very much loved individual, forever, with its own blood type and DNA. God knew about him or her before time began, and called that child by name, even knowing how many hairs it would have on its head. Given the chance to live.... you will also have the opportunity to KNOW, to LOVE, and to hug/hold that individual.

Given the decision to place that child for adoption, you may EASILY have the opportunity to hear him/her say to you someday.... "I LOVE YOU, THANK YOU FOR MY LIFE!!"

For you see, a child you raise, or a child you place for adoption .... lives, and CAN someday say those words to you...............

A child aborted.... can't.

Papa, do you love me? Parents and Grandparents take Notice

Papa, do you love me?
Parents and Grandparents take Notice

A very young grandfather was interrupted in his thoughts and his walk by his seven year old granddaughter's question.

"Papa, do you love me?"
"Of course. Why do you ask?"

She tugged at his finger. When they walked she held on to one of his fingers , wrapping her little hand tightly. Their walk stopped.

"Papa, do you love me?" This time much more emphatic and impatient. He knelt down to look at her, their eyes meeting. She never looked away. Eye on eye. She could see into his soul. Seemed like that since the delivery room. What a day that was! She repeated, "Do you love me?"

"Listen to Papa. I do love you. With all my heart. Where is this coming from?"

"Becky says I'm gitimate, and I don't have a daddy, and momma got in trouble, and gitimate kids don't get loved."

Papa was stunned. "and who is Becky?"
"You know, Becky at church." For a moment, Papa thought he might need to pay a visit to Becky at church and Becky's mom, who was known to be quite a talker.

As Papa tried to put into words what he felt, he looked into the eyes of this little seven year old girl who was much too soon, having to hear this stuff. Who talked like this about children? Suddenly, an emotional tidal wave swept over him.

In an instant he was re-living every emotion, back in the rocking chair, in his living room, exactly where he was sitting when he heard the news of his daughter's pregnancy. It was perhaps the most devastating news, the most painful experience of his entire life. He had wept uncontrollably. His dreams, her dreams, dashed. He remembered the bile rising. The spasms. The pain in his chest. A piano could not have weighed more if placed firmly on his solar plexus. He couldn't speak. He could barely breathe. He found it hard to focus, his vision, or his hearing.

And the emotions: Despair. Rage. Anger. Disappointment. Self doubt. Recriminations for not being a better father. More rage, this time directed at the boy. Oh yeah, "They were in love. He was going to do the right thing." Great plan. He could have literally taken the life of that boy, and felt no regret. A few years in prison would be a fair exchange. What to do. More weeping. Than just more pain. It seemed unbearable. It took a couple of days to even breathe properly.

Now as he looked into the eyes of this little girl, he remembered another thought. A filthy, vile, disgusting, embarrassing thought. For a few moments, off and on, over a few days, after he had first received this very unwelcome news, he had entertained the consideration of suggesting an abortion. He was a Christian, grounded in the faith from a tender age, and yet when faced with every implication of his daughter being an un-wed expectant teen age mother, he had temporarily wavered.

He was looking into the eyes of a child, that in a weak moment, a moment of absolute despair, he had thought of aborting. My God! My God! My God! Forgive me.

He reached fully around his granddaughter and hugged her so hard she squirmed. Tears rolled down his cheeks. She pulled back and looked at him completely puzzled.

"What's the matter Papa. Why did you get sad?"

"Papa's not sad honey. Papa's happy. Sometimes I get so happy, my eyes make lots of tears. Listen, let's talk about Becky, ok?" She nodded.

"Becky doesn't have it quite right. Are you listening to Papa?"

"Yeah. I'm listening."

"First of all, Papa is a pretty smart expert on one thing, and that is, there are no gitimate children. Second of all, you have two daddies. Becky just doesn't know it. You have a spiritual daddy. God is your spiritual daddy. You can't see Him but He can see you and He watches you all day and all night. He can't wait for you to get up in the morning. He thinks you are very special. And you have Papa. I'm not your daddy, but I'm your Papa, and I do love you, and I think about you all day, and I can't wait to see you and talk to you.

And one more thing. Your momma is terrific. She was very young when you were born. But you know what. She thought you being born was the most important thing in the world. It was no trouble. Ok? Do you understand Papa?"

She was a-ok. They continued their walk briefly before she asked, "Papa?"


"I'm tired of walking. Think we should get some ice cream?"

Papa thought that buying this ice cream might just be the most important appointment he could have in the entire world. How thankful the rocking chair experience, and all the thoughts he entertained in that chair were firmly and finally in the past. He thought he might just make a point of rocking this little girl in that chair today. Create a little different memory. Yes indeed. Today would be a good day for a rocking.

In a time, when confusing messages come from all quarters, and admittedly, sometimes even from those raised in the faith, it seems to us there are at least three important messages that need to be heard:

No matter how a baby started, that baby can be and should be loved.
No matter how desperate the circumstances look to those closest to the expectant mom, someone should say, "We can do this, as a family, and make it work. We can do this."

And, to lonely scared Moms, "You are not, and you will not be alone."

Create options for walks by the ponds and shared ice cream, and rocks in the rocking chairs. Turn "someone in trouble" to "No Trouble."

Take a stand. Activate your faith.

Did Terri know, as Sarah did?

THIS is what I have been saying to EVERYONE for many many years, in regard to head injuries, brain damage... THIS is why I fought so hard to make people REALIZE that Terri and all disabled people have a RIGHT TO LIVE...that we CANNOT KNOW what is going on in their minds, what they do or do not know.... How much they hear, comprehend. 'Experts' can THEORIZE all they want to... but no one can say for certain.

I worked with a young man who was found unconscious in an alley, and did not come 'out of it' for several years... no one thought HE knew anything much, either. During his stay in ICU, one of the males shaved his beard to make it easier to care for him, etc. When this young man later came out of the unresponsive state he was in, he was still disabled, tremendously, but he remembered being shaved...and he remembered the nurse who had shaved him! He was not happy about it, either!

We were taught LONG ago in nursing school that the LAST thing to go is... hearing. We just do NOT have anyway of knowing how much comprehension anyone in a comatose/'vegetative' state has...

Watch the video...and as Cheryl Ford said... what did Terri know? Remember her attorney's statement of the day they pulled that tube, as she told Terri what was going to happen, and said if you could JUST say... I want to live! and Terri said AHHHHHH WAAAHHHHH.....


Subject: If Sarah knew, what must Terri have thought and felt? We watched Terri smile.

Thank you to CC for forwarding this video.

This post is also available at Blogger News Network.

Labels: , ,

Patricia Anderson speaks out regarding Schiavo award

From Cheryl Ford, RN
Attorney Patricia Anderson sent a letter to Bioethicist Kenneth Goodman in response to the Guardian of the Year Award Goodman presented to Michael Schiavo. Read the article about the so-called "welcomed hero" Michael Schiavo. The article follows Ms. Anderson's letter.

Please..........pick up your telephone and let your voices be heard. Call Elizabeth at the Florida Guardianship Association
850-322-0525 and give your opinions.

Our voices are the only way to STOP state organizations like the FSGA from honoring people like Schiavo.

Even though Terri tried to say ...I waaaaaaa to one listened.

Let us continue to speak for Terri so her death was not in vain.

Thank you for taking the time to read and share this email.

Remember, we CAN and WILL make a difference!

Cheryl Ford RN

Dear Mr. Goodman,

As Bob and Mary Schindler's former attorney, I have a passing fair familiarity with the facts of Michael Schiavo's conduct as a guardian for Terri Schiavo.

Did you know that FOR TWELVE YEARS -- from 1990 until 2002 -- Mr. Schiavo steadfastly refused to take the statutorily-mandated training all private guardians must undergo? Did you know his refusal came in the face of annual demands from the Clerk's office that he do so?

Did you also know that Mr. Schiavo did not file annual reports and plans in a timely fashion year after year and, for at least two years, filed no report and plan at all?

Did you know that when Mr. Schiavo did grudgingly and belatedly file plans -- there was no plan at all for her improvement?

Did you know the experimental surgical treatment that you specifically mentioned as praiseworthy occurred in NOVEMBER, 1990? Did you know that after the summer of 1992, Terri never received another minute of therapy of any kind -- including routine physical therapy -- up until the moment of her death, on Mr. Schiavo's orders?

These are facts documented in the court file, Mr. Goodman. They are not unwarranted "attacks" on Mr. Schiavo, simply facts that anyone who makes an effort can discover. The further fact that the Court did not ever sanction Mr. Schiavo for his shortcomings as a guardian is more a testament to an overloaded court docket than a testament to Mr. Schiavo's dedication.

Don't you think honoring Mr. Schiavo as "Guardian of the Year" is insulting to the thousands of honest, hard-working guardians who follow Florida law in act and spirit? There is much more to being a guardian than insisting on the ward's death, Mr. Goodman.

I would like to know how many of the Florida guardians voted on this year's award. Was it the entire membership or a committee of a handful of people?

Please do me the honor of a reply.

Pat Anderson
Tel: 305-243-5723
Fax: 305-243-6416

Mailman Center for Child Development
Suite 2050
P.O.B. 016960
(UM M-825)
Miami FL 33101

P.O. Box 13978

Tallahassee, FL 32317

Labels: , ,

A GOOD EXAMPLE of Standing by her Man

When you speak of someone who has chosen to live the wedding vows (unlike some that we have discussed here)... one must remember Dana Reeves.

When Christopher first had his accident while horseback riding, and was paralyzed, as well as on a REAL example of life support (the respirator/ventilator), he hit a point where he was not sure he wanted to continue to live. His mother was all for turning off the respirator. Had she been his guardian, he would not have survived to do what he accomplished in those remaining years.

Dana, however, asked him to wait. They agreed that he would wait... I believe it was a year, but it has been awhile since I read his book. Dana stood by him all those years, helping him to receive every bit of therapy that could be found to keep his muscles limber, and 'ready' in case he ever DID get a chance to walk again...(unlike someone else we have discussed here who refused ALL forms of therapy, including a simple rolled washcloth in the hands to prevent contractures..... ) He saw how much his kids needed him, regardless of any disability.

Today, it has been announced that Dana has another battle to fight, one that is hers, but she is now alone. According to Fox News this AM, Dana now is being treated for Lung Cancer, and she never smoked.

Dana lost her mother to ovarian cancer earlier this year, and Christopher last October. They have a 12 year old son together, and Christopher had a son and daughter from a previous relationship.

Will needs his mother.

We need to pray.

The groom says:I (...), take you (...) to be my wife.
I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad,
in sickness and in health.
I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.

The bride says:I (...), take you (...) to be my husband.
I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad,
in sickness and in health.
I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.

"Right is still right if nobody is right,
and wrong is still wrong if everybody is wrong,"
Archbishop Fulton J Sheen author of The Life of Christ

Semantics... words MEAN something!

Again, from Diogenes:

life begins at conception -- if you're a panda

Got this gem in the morning's e-mail:

A 13-year-old giant panda gave birth to a cub at San Diego Zoo, but a second baby died in the womb, officials said Wednesday."
--Associated Press, 3 August 2005

A cancer-ravaged woman robbed of consciousness by a stroke has given birth after being kept on life support for three months to give her fetus extra time to develop."
--Associated Press, 3 August 2005

Just an innocent cartoon..... ?

From OFF the Record
Posted by:


Aug. 08, 2005
10:54 AM EST
and from Dawn:

violence and the pro-life movement

Imagine the outcry if a prominent pro-life group referred to abortionists as "trash."

Imagine the furor if the group's literature included a "superhero" cartoon, aimed at youngsters, in which abortion advocates were exploded, vaporized, and tossed into boiling water.

Now imagine that the group putting out this literature received federal funding.

Can't imagine it? Of course not.

The group in question is not pro-life. It's Planned Parenthood.

(Thanks to the gimlet eye of Dawn Eden)

Discovery Returns Safely

Discovery is home, safely, thank God.

On Senator Frist

I was very disappointed with Senator Frist's support of embryonis stem cell research because it kills a baby in order to do its research, of which nothing promising has come. Even if it did, to kill a child or any human being in order to 'do good' or 'not waste' them is ethically and morally bankrupt.

CWN also has comments from readers at the end of this article on its website. Good points made by many... Senator Frist will not have my vote if he runs for President.

Frist support for embryo research called "betrayal"
Washington, DC, Aug. 01 (

Washington, DC, Aug. 01 ( - Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has broken with President George W. Bush by giving his support to a bill that proposes to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The bill, strongly opposed by conservative lawmakers, pro-life family groups, and the White House, is sponsored by pro-abortion Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter.

Michael Munger, an expert in congressional-presidential relations, said: "The Bush administration will consider this a betrayal."

The Tennessee Senator justified his change of position by saying on the floor of the Senate, "It's not just a matter of faith, it's a matter of science."

Sen. Frist did not address the fact that thus far the hope of embryo research producing any cures whatever is daily growing more remote as ethical adult and umbilical cord blood stem cell research continues to far outstrip it in actual results.

The senator, a heart-lung transplant surgeon, said as recently as a month ago that he did not support public funding of embryo research "at this juncture." He announced his turn-around in a lengthy Senate speech saying, "We should expand federal funding and the accompanying (National Institutes of Health) oversight and current guidelines governing stem-cell research, carefully and thoughtfully staying within ethical bounds."

In 2001, the Bush administration limited public funding for embryo research to those stem cell lines already created from embryos. Since that funding restriction, the biotechnology lobby has been putting immense pressure on the government to reverse its policy. Frist now supports the killing of embryos "leftover" from fertility treatments to harvest their stem cells.

The proposed bill has passed the House and now stands a better chance in the Senate after Frist's endorsement. White House spokesman Scott McClellan reiterated the president's stand against further funding for embryo research after Frist made his speech.

The turn-around is surprising to pro-life observers, since Frist, as recently as last October, slammed Democratic vice-presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards for his support of embryo research. Frist said in October 2004, in an apparent reference to the fact that even stem cell researchers have admitted that embryo research is failing to offer progress on finding cures, "It is cruel to people who have disabilities and chronic diseases, and, on top of that, it's dishonest."

"Stem cell research is promising," Frist said then. "The president vigorously promotes adult and embryonic stem cell research, but he does it with an ethical and moral framework."

Pro-life groups were quick to respond. "Sen. Frist cannot have it both ways. He cannot be pro-life and pro-embryonic stem cell funding. Nor can he turn around and expect widespread endorsement from the pro-life community if he should decide to run" for president, said the Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition.

© Copyright 2005 Domus Enterprises. All rights reserved.

Abortifacient patch responsible for strokes....deaths.

Abortifacient patch maker faces class-action lawsuit
New York, Jul. 29 (

New York, Jul. 29 ( - Ortho McNeil, manufacturer of the Ortho Evra birth control patch, is facing a lawsuit filed by 10 women Monday for damages related to its use. The women, who all suffered strokes or serious blood clots, described the drug as "unreasonably dangerous" and "defectively designed," according to a CNN report.

The women, ranging in age from 18 to 47, are from across the US and all suffer from long-term debilitating effects from the patch. Nineteen year-old Amanda Bianchi of Colorado Springs, Colorado, described suffering two strokes and recurring migraines after developing a 10-inch blood clot in her brain after use of the patch in 2004. "It's not fun to have to get up and not be able to go to school and live the life that you were living, you know?" she said.

"When used as labeled, Ortho Evra is a safe and effective birth control choice for many women," a company statement claimed. Last week, reported that the risk of developing a fatal or non-fatal blood clot while on the patch is three times greater than with use of the abortifacient birth-control pill. An AP report also noted that 23 deaths were attributed to use of the patch since its US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2001. An FDA spokesman assured women that "evidence indicates the product is safe and effective."

© Copyright 2005 Domus Enterprises. All rights reserved.

Others NOT impressed....

One of the emails I got on this topic was from Cheryl Ford, RN. She has it on her blog, so I am not going to post it here in full.

She has also asked that people write to protest this award, and has many who did just that, with a copy to her on her blog, also. There are a lot there, already, and I am sure more have been sent.

The thing you must remember is that Terri was DISABLED, and had NO rehab at his orders for years... and he did not protect her needs, etc as a guardian is supposed to do. And he should be given an award for being the outstanding guardian of the year?

This from that article:

"We see a lot of situations where family steps away," said association president-elect Michelle Kenney, a care manager and professional guardian in Broward County. "He stuck by. He didn't walk away."

Added past president Joan Nelson Hook, an attorney from New Port Richey: "He was an ordinary guardian who carried out his duties in extraordinary ways."

He DID? See the last post I wrote here on what it means to 'stick by... stand by' someone you are married to , and how he failed big time...

And Yes, he did carry out his duties in extraordinary ways, all right... clear up to refusing her any therapy, and dehydrating her to death.... and I have to agree:

"Oh, my God, that's offensive," said Brother Paul O'Donnell, a Franciscan friar who serves as the Schindler family spokesman. "Michael Schiavo ... basically let her rot."

If you want to write to protest this 'award'......................continue to read the email I received from Cheryl:

Cheryl Ford RN Comments:
He "stuck by her," Kenny states?
Schiavo has been carry on in an adulterous relationship for over ten years and has fathered two illegitimate children. Immediately after Terri's unexplained tragedy, he had dated several other women. Have the vows and definition of commitment and "sticking by" someone since changed in the last two decades? I don't think so! It is clear that Michelle Kenny is a part of the ignorant clan who paid no attention to the true FACTS behind Terri's situation.
It should not come as a surprise to me that it would be the Florida Guardian Association and the ignorance of its keynote speaker, Kenneth Goodman, who would acknowledge a person like Michael Schiavo. Goodman and I were guest speakers on a Ft. Lauderdale radio talk show a few months back. I decided to use the opportunity to publicly question him about just how much he knew about the specifics of Terri's case. When he could not appropriately respond to my questions on LIVE talk radio, stating he did not have the papers in front of him, it became clear to me that I was wasting my time speaking to a person who did not research the facts regarding Terri Schindler's case. People like Goodman migrate to Florida because of the obvious ease they can make a living advocating for the death of the innocent and disabled. The only "PRIMITIVE" in my opinion, is the thinking of the University of Miami BIOETHICIST, Kenneth Goodman!
It still remains despicable that an organization such as The Florida Guardianship Association would have the audacity to publicly support the cruel murder of a human being, that they would go so far to organize an award for a person like Michael Schiavo!
I surely hope that all the people who wrote and supported Terri throughout her inhumane death will take the time to write and show just how many "THOUSANDS" there are who did not agree with what Michael did to Terri!
Tel: 305-243-5723
Fax: 305-243-6416

Mailman Center for Child Development
Suite 2050
P.O.B. 016960
(UM M-825)
Miami FL 33101
P.O. Box 13978
Tallahassee, FL 32317

Labels: , ,


Among other items that came in email the past few days was one about an honor being paid to Michael Schiavo... more on that later, but first, I need to point out HIS OWN sworn testimony....

Cindy Shook Brasher gave a deposition with dates.
Remember that Terri collapsed in Feb of 90.
In later 1991, they began what Michael under oath admits to as an 'intimate relationship', and it was during this relationship that they can be documented as having spent a weekend together in a St Petersburg hotel, they approached a realtor about buying a house, and Michael euthanized Terri's cats so he could move in with Cindy and her dog. This lasted until just before the malpractice lawsuit took place in November of 92, when, during that summer, he moved into his parents' home.

Cindy was said to have stated under oath that this intimate relationship lasted about a year...

Michael admitted to this under fact, in the same deposition, Michael ADMITS to another...."Intimate relationship"..... from the transcripts:

November 19, 1993
Deposition of Michael Schiavo

Q. Are you presently involved in a romantic relationship with anyone?
SCHIAVO: Yes I am.

Q. Are you involved in an intimate relationship with this person.
SCHIAVO: Yes I am.

Q. Is this the first relationship that you've been involved in since your wife has been in a coma? SCHIAVO: No.

Q. How many other relationships have you been involved in?
SCHIAVO: I was in one other relationship.

Q. Was it an intimate relationship?

PLEASE NOTE: These two ADMITTED affairs are NOT Jodi C!!! He admits to beginning to be with her in 1994...again, under oath taken from Trial transcripts from Jan 27, 2000, he admits to being with her about five and one half years (not by name... )

Sadly, there is also room for speculation here about a third 'intimate relationship' before Jodi, if you simply go by a timeline based on his own sworn testimony from the depositions and transcripts up to Jan 27, 2000. Remember, this is TEN YEARS after Terri has collapsed under questionable circumstances...

The first two above were both testified to by the deposition taken on Nov 19,1993!!!!

He admits to another "about five years after" Terri's collapse.. which lasted about eight months... This was after the depositon taken in 93.... where he had already admitted to two....

January 27, 2000
Trial Testimony

Q: Mr. Schiavo, since Terri's incident, did you have any intimate relations with another woman?
SCHIAVO: Yes, I did.

Q: When did that occur?
SCHIAVO: Approximately 5 years after the incident. I don't know the exact dates.

Q: How long did this relationship last?
SCHIAVO: Approximately 8 months.

Q: Do you currently have an intimate relationship with a woman?
SCHIAVO: Yes, I do.

Q: How long have you known her?
SCHIAVO: 5 ½ years.


Marriage Vows
Testimony of Michael Schiavo
November 5, 1992
Medical Malpractice Trial
Page 26

Q. How do you feel about being married to Terri now?
SCHIAVO: I feel wonderful. She's my life and I wouldn't trade her for the world. I believe in my - I believe in my wedding vows.

Q. What do you mean? You want to take a minute?

Q. If the court would let us take a minute.

Q. You okay?
SCHIAVO: Yeah, I'm sorry.

Q. Have - you said you believe in your wedding vows. What do you mean by that?

SCHIAVO: I believe in the vows that I took with my wife. Through sickness, in health, for richer or poorer. I married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that.

Now, note the dates... the Medical Malpractice Trial where he affirmed that he believed in his wedding vows was NOV 5, 1992 (already with Cindy Shook) The depositon where he admitted to two separate 'intimate relationships' was taken Nov 19, 1993, and the admission to a possible third was not until the trial on Jan 27, 2000, when he also admitted to being with Jody for about five and a half years.....

With all of that in mind.... he certainly cannot say he is the manly equivalent of Tammy Wynette's song which DOES speak of temptation, but faithfulness!!


Last night all alone in a bar room
Met a man with a drink in his hand
He had baby blue eyes, cold black hair
and a smile that a girl understands.

And he came and sat down at my table
And as he placed his hand over mine
I found myself wanting to kiss him
for temptation was flowing like wine

And I was almost persuaded
to strip myself of my pride.
Almost persuaded to push my concience aside

Then we danced and he whispered
"I need You, let me take you away and be your man"
As I looked into his eyes I saw it
The reflection of my wedding bands

And I was almost persuaded
to let strange lips lead me on
Almost persuaded but your sweet
love made me stop and go home.

Keeping "Standing by" someone in mind in sickness, in health, for richer or poorer, and keeping in mind that he almost could verbatumly repeat those wedding vows he was already breaking in 91 with Cindy Shook (and had euthanzied his wife's cats in order to be able to live with her dog....)

Now, read this....

And you tell ME why I am outraged by this man's being rewarded for UNFAITHFULNESS, ADULTERY and DEHYDRATING his wife to DEATH while having TWO CHILDREN BY ANOTHER WOMAN.....

Labels: , ,

One Living, One Dying, One Pre-born

Just about the time when I think that Terri's case has lost public interest, I suddenly get a slew of alerts from many different areas. From friends who have read different articles online, from columists whose column I just came across tonight, though written a couple of weeks ago, to news on TV, in hard print media, and internet media.

Such is the case this past week. John Leo has an excellent column entitled "An Autopsy Won't End It" reviewing someone else's work. He ends with:

The autopsy confirms the extraordinary damage to Schiavo and discredits those who tried to depict the husband as a wife-beater. But the autopsy has nothing to say about the core moral issue: Do people with profound disabilities no longer have a right to live? That issue is still on the table."

THAT is the fundamental question here. As I was doing a tube feeding on a resident who is severely disabled (what they used to call severely mentally retarded, long ago in the dark ages... as many do not understand what I say when I use the terms developmentally/cognitively disabled person) the other day, a repeat of Larry King's interview with Paul Chaim Schenck, Justin and Jason Torres (which I had read the transcript of awhile back) came on the TV in his room. I thought... how ironic that I am here, with a severely disabled individual, and they are talking about quality of life, and saving the baby of a woman whose massively bleeding brain tumor from melanoma had essentially rendered her 'brain dead'.

Three people very disabled, all getting care from others for similar, yet very different reasons, and ALL THREE persons being Children of God, having a dignity that deserves to be respected...

All three? Yes, all three. My resident, Susan Torres, and ... her baby.

Three disabled, one unborn at the time, relying on others.

Dignity. Respect for who each is. Child of God. One living, one dying, one pre-born.

They EACH had a right to live until that heart stops...naturally. And none are being starved/dehydrated to death.....

God bless.

Monday, August 08, 2005

Hospital's design a healthy start

My godmother graduated valedictorian of the first 4 yr program from Marquette University 's Nursing Program long ago. St Joseph Hospital was her hospital. She has always been proud of it.

Now, there is a NEW St Joe's... and it sounds like a really state of the art institution. Perhaps there will be no 'sick building' syndrome there, if they can keep mold out, also.

There are two related stories also, one telling of a new mother and her twins being transported to the new hospital via a limousine... what a ride! And another talking about the closing of one, opening of another, babies being born, and a man named Joseph who turned out to be the first registered patient in the new hospital...

Best wishes to the staff, who helped to design the new Hospital, and to all the current and future patients at the new hospital. God bless!