Terri Schiavo autopsy results released

From the AP, via The Washington Post:

LARGO, Fla. -- An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused.

But what caused her collapse 15 years earlier remained a mystery. The autopsy and post-mortem investigation found no proof that she had an eating disorder, as was suspected at the time, Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin said...

She died from dehydration, Thogmartin said. He said she did not appear to have suffered a heart attack and there was no evidence that she was given harmful drugs or other substances prior to her death...

He also said she was blind, because the "vision centers of her brain were dead," and that her brain was about half of its expected size when she died 13 days following the feeding tube's removal...

The medical examiner's conclusions countered a videotape released by the Schindlers of Terri Schiavo in her hospice bed. The video showed Schiavo appearing to turn toward her mother's voice and smile, moaning and laughing. Her head moved up and down and she seemed to follow the progress of a brightly colored Mickey Mouse balloon.

They believed her condition could improve with therapy.

However, doctors said her reactions were automatic responses and not evidence of thought or consciousness, and Thogmartin's report went farther.

"The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain," he said. "This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."

Thogmartin said the autopsy report was based on 274 external and internal body images, and an exhaustive review of Terri Schiavo's medical records, police reports and social services agency records.

He said hospital records of her 1990 collapse showed she had a diminished potassium level in her blood. But he said that did not prove she had an eating disorder, because the emergency treatment she received at the time could have affected the potassium level.

I expect that the Left will have a field day over these findings, because they 'prove' that Terri's parents were 'wrong' (which to liberals = 'liars') and that Terri's death was probably painless because her extensive brain damage meant that she had no awareness of anything out of the ordinary happening.

Of course the autopsy can't tell us exactly what Terri heard or felt or perhaps thought during her stay at the hospice.  But to those who wished to see her die, those things mattered little.  Her life was "not worth living," we were told.  Numerous arguments were made about the burden on the health care system and the cost of nursing home care - though no self-respecting liberal would ever admit to putting a dollar value on human life.

Ultimately this case was about Michael Schiavo, the husband who tired of caring for an invalid wife.  As I previously wrote, this is a painful and distressing situation and I myself would probably fail without divine strength.  Michael found an attorney, George Felos, and a group of civil advocates who legitimized Michael's wishes for freedom and took it upon themselves to fight as many battles as were necessary to end Terri's life and, in turn, give Michael 'his life' back.

Terri's parents loved their daughter and did not want to see her die, but they were not prepared for the battles that they would have to fight.  Their legal team was inexperienced and their case was built more around sympathy than jurisprudence.  In the end they lost, and Terri was denied food and water.  Case closed.

Michael Schiavo's side in this case was undeniably morally wrong, because terminating the life of a person who is in no immediate danger of dying - even if that person is physically or mentally diminished - is murder, plain and simple.  Even if it is ordered by a court.  Sadly we do this about a million times each year in abortion clinics.  I pray that it never becomes as easy to do it in hospitals.

More on the autopsy at Blogs For Terri.  They've kept the blog going and have lots of good content regarding euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other "right to die" issues. 

Michelle Malkin has a good roundup of links.  Double Toothpicks, as always, has a good analysis of the autopsy and current news coverage of the event.

UPDATE: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS BELOW THE FOLD

Of course my predictions about the comments that the Left would spew forth were dead-on.  Read some here, and feel the love and compassion that these people have for invalids.  I'll say this one more time:  Terri's brain damage (or any one else's for that matter) is not a license to kill.  Period.  Go ahead, make fun of her parents, Bill Frist, or anyone else you passionately hate.  But it's no justification for murder.

I am consistently angered by the use of "lying" rhetoric.  "Lying" seems to have supplanted the concept of being wrong or simply disagreeing.  Read this post for an example of the use of "lying" as a descriptor for the claims that Terri's parents made regarding her medical condition.  Again, being wrong about whether or not Terri could follow objects with her eyes has no bearing on the ultimate wrongness of her death.

Regarding Michael Schiavo - yes, Terri's parents did give him permission to date other women.  They also supported Michael divorcing Terri and were willing to assume financial and legal responsibility for Terri's care.  With this option unobstructed by Terri's family, why did Michael choose instead to fight a lengthy court battle to terminate Terri's life?

The only reasoning that makes sense to me is that Michael sought legal counsel from an attorney (George Felos) who is an advocate for mercy killing.  Why did Michael choose Felos?  I don't really know, to be honest.  But once Michael was in the sway of the mercy killing crowd, his desires to see Terri die were reinforced and cemented.  They charted the moral trajectory for Michael.  And after a prolonged period of press conferences, public statements, court hearings, and the like, I believe that Michael simply couldn't turn back.  The "villain" in this sad series of events is larger than Michael.  It is the modern "cult of death" which seeks to legitimize the termination of life as an acceptable way of dealing with the sick, or anyone whose continued life would be a burden or inconvenience to the rest of us.

I believe that Michael joined Norma McCorvey and the ever-growing list of individuals who are used by legal activists as guinea pigs for their attempts at manipulating our judicial system.  I firmly believe that George Felos did not fight this battle for Michael because he cared about Terri.  He did it so that his name could appear in the law books as a "right to die" advocate, and so his agenda of mercy killing would become judicial precedent. 

I also believe that the abortion rights crowd had a major stake in this case because a judicial confirmation of Terri's right to live would seriously damage their claim that judicially mandated killings are legitimate.  And so the right to life crowd had to join in, because they want nothing more than to see the legal arguments of the abortion rights movement go down in flames.  The right to life advocates lost this battle, but again this loss does not invalidate their beliefs.

I understand that this issue was not divided along party lines or political affiliations.  Many conservatives felt that Terri's court-ordered termination should be carried out because it was the will of the court.  And many pro-life Democrats argued that Terri's life should be spared because she could not defend herself.   Many people with strong religious beliefs took both sides.  It is not my intention to offer condemnation or pronounce damnation for those Christians who disagree with me.  Paul reminds us in Philippians 3:15 that Christians will differ in regard to what they believe.  But the important thing is for all of us to seek God's will in all that we do.

I pray often that myself and my family will be spared such a tragic event.  I oppose using life support and other "heroic measures" to keep a physically dead person alive.  But if someone is not going to die, even if they are severely injured and will be an invalid for the rest of their lives, then I could not in good conscience give the order to have their life terminated.

It's a hard choice, and I freely admit that without divine strength and the support from individuals with similar beliefs I probably would not be able to handle it.  But as a Christian I understand that God's will often mandates choices that are not easy.  We learn and grow from these experiences.  Having never been tested with this kind of a burden I cannot claim any sort of moral victory, nor will I excoriate as spiritual failures those who choose differently.  But at least I feel that my view is the morally correct one.

Comments

[Susan Nunes]

May I remind you not everybody on "the left" supported the despicable Michael Schiavo.

I don't believe the autopsy proves anything one way or the other, and I said so all the time.

[Depressed]

Michael's parents admitted in court that they encouraged him to date other women, which likely pushed him down the path he went.

This case isn't "ultimately about the husband who tired of caring about his wife." It's about how all of us are sinners and that the loss of each life is the loss of God's creation. But I suppose that it's easier for people to express their anger, no, hatred, towards Mr. Schiavo rather than attempt to find constructive solutions.

[Science]

OWNED!!!!!!

[Jamie Keilman]

Might I also add that not everyone on the right (conservative) side thought it was appropriate to take a painful personal family issue and spray it across the media. My hard earned tax dollars eventually ended up being spent in an emergency session of congress and yet another round of court battles.

I thought it was tasteless that this story was as widespread as it was, I thought it was even more tasteless the “protest” in front of her hospice were and I feel that the release of her autopsy report is even more. I pray to my dear lord, Jesus Christ, that if I was ever in the same situation that the people that “loved” me (my parents and my wife) would have the common decency to keep our story private and not display my image to the media across the world.

[hbee]

Jamie, as a lefty, I agree whole-heartedly with you.

"Ultimately this case was about Michael Schiavo, the husband who tired of caring for an invalid wife."

That's so infuriatingly false. Ultimately, this case was about the marketing of a woman in a coma as an icon for a movement. Terri Schiavo couldn't tell us whether she wanted to live or die. She also couldn't tell us if she wanted to be the center of a media circus.

[Sean Masters]

"Of course the autopsy can't tell us exactly what Terri heard or felt or perhaps thought during her stay at the hospice."

We didn't need an autopsy for that, as it was already confirmed - while she was still alive - that she was braindead, showed no signs of response, and felt nothing of pleasure or pain.

It was the "life" camp - comprised mainly of religious zealots and political pundits all looking for an increased market share - who continuously ignored the scientifically documented, medical facts, and pressed the possibility that Terry might feel pain or might be able to drink water on her own.

Yes. You ignored medical science and "lost". I don't think you're a liar. I don't think you "lose at life". I'm not a liberal, but a Centrist, as well as a Deist (as were half of our Founding Fathers). I am, however, quick to point out that politicians and religious ZEALOTS - not the average person, but the fanatic - were, yes, WRONG, and that medical science was ONCE AGAIN correct about something.

[jz]

This was not murder - only the miracles of modern medicine were keeping her heart beating and her body nourished. So what are we to do then, outlaw death because it is possible to hook someone up and make their body continue a little longer - even with no chance of recovery? You have lost respect for death. When it is time to die, it's time - we should not try to put it off forever but accept it as part of the cycle.

[Susan Nunes]

I wish people on "my side" of the political spectrum would knock off the nonsense that severely disabled people have a "duty" to die and quit backing a lying "husband" who couldn't even keep his lies straight.

It's disgraceful.