Terri’s Death – Its Psychological Effects (and Consequences)

Editor’s note:  As some of you discovered, we posted a “special edition” last week (which would normally be an “off week”).  Today’s post is our usual bi-weekly offering.  Our next article will be, as it normally is, two weeks from now.  Also, we want to inform our readers that we have fixed a "problem" on our blog: heretofore, one was not able to comment "anonymously," because of a design error (that we weren't aware of, and which someone brought to our attention).  That has now been remedied.

In the article before last, we described the physical suffering that Terri Schiavo endured during her last days.  But what about her mental suffering.  Many experts agree that, as bad as physical pain is, the psychological pain is often far worse – especially when – slowly, methodically, and knowingly -- one is being put to death against his or her will.  One is tempted to compare the psychological effects of her ordeal with that of a condemned prisoner.  But this is not a valid comparison, for the simple reason that, for one thing, a condemned prisoner is guilty of a crime, and deserves to die.  Terri wasn’t – nor did she deserve her fate.  She was an innocent lamb, whose only “crime” was that – in Tony Cekada’s words -- she was “a burden on society.”

Tony might also want to claim that, in her diminished mental state, she was incapable of experiencing any “psychological trauma,” and wasn’t “responsive.” Well, perhaps she could not form complete phrases or sentences; but she was not, as Tony implies, an unfeeling “vegetable.”  Here is what Fr. Frank Pavone (who was at her bedside) had to say: “I told Terri she had many people around the country and around the world who loved her and were praying for her.  She looked at me attentively.  I said, ‘Terri now we are going to pray together, I want to give you a blessing, let's say some prayers.’   So I laid my hand on her head.  She closed her eyes. I said the prayer.  She opened her eyes again at the end of the prayer.  Her dad, who has a mustache, leaned over to kiss her and said, ‘OK Terri now here comes the tickle.’  She smiled and laughed [our bold emphasis] and after he kissed her I saw her return the kiss.  Her mom asked her a question at a certain point and I heard her voice.  She was trying to respond.  She was making sounds in response to her mother's question, not just at odd times and meaningless moments.  I heard her trying to say something but she was not, because of her disability, able to articulate the words.  She was certainly responsive.” ¹

Now one might contend that any input from Fr. Pavone (or the Schindler family) will be “subjective” or “biased.”  However, the same could be said for input from the “Michael Schiavo” side too.  Plus, we can say this: that Fr. Pavone and the Schindlers had nothing materially to gain – either from keeping Terri alive, or from her death – but Michael Schiavo did.  By her death, he stood to gain (as American Digest reported) six to eight million dollars (in book publishing and movie rights, and speaking engagement fees).  The Schindlers offered him a million dollars if he would let them bring Terri home and take care of her at their expense -- but he refused, because he could make much more from her death. Michael Schiavo, then, had everything to gain by lying, but nothing to gain by telling the truth.  For these reasons, then, we think that input from the Schindler side is the more accurate.²

So, is there any evidence of psychological trauma in Terri’s ordeal?  Yes, there is. And what kind of horror might she have experienced?  Most experts (in the fields of torture and of those facing certain death) agree that its mental pain and anguish are generally much more than the physical pain, and that there is a whole kaleidoscope of terrifying emotions that the victims experience: fear, bewilderment, disbelief, morbid apprehension, despair, helplessness – you name it.  In Terri’s case, just imagine how all these feelings were magnified by the fact that she was unable to communicate those feelings – to vocalize them.  Just imagine her frustration (not to mention, her terror) at not being able to do so.

So, that being said, what evidence is there of psychological trauma?  Again, we refer to eye-witness testimony.  Bobby Schindler (her brother), who was there at her bedside, said, “What will be forever seared in my memory is the look of utter horror on my sister’s face when my family visited her just after she died.”  This same view was echoed by many others, including Fr. Frank Pavone: “The night before she died, I was in her room for probably a total of 3-4 hours, and then for another hour the next morning -- her final hour. To describe the way she looked as ‘peaceful’ is a total distortion of what I saw.  She was a person who for thirteen days had no food or water.  She was, as you would expect, very drawn in her appearance as opposed to when I had seen her before.  Her eyes were open but they were moving from one side to the next, constantly darting back and forth.  I watched her for hours, and the best way I can describe the look on her face is ‘terrified sadness.’  Her mouth was open the whole time.  It looked like it was frozen open. She was panting rapidly.  It wasn't peaceful in any sense of the word.  She was panting as if she had just run a hundred miles.”  Again, one can only imagine the unspeakable horror that Terri experienced as she wasted away. ³

But, regardless of how much mental anguish that Terri suffered – or how aware of it she was, the “bottom line” on this is that NONE of it was necessary: since the Schindlers were willing to take care of Terri (and pay Michael a million dollars just for being allowed to do so), there was absolutely no legitimate reason for him to have her put to death – but he did.  His reason, as we said earlier, was MONEY.  Like Tony, he was only thinking of the money.  But was this his only reason?  Perhaps there was another one: what if she had recovered – at least to the point where she could “communicate”?  After all, she was making progress in her rehabilitation (until her husband put a stop to it); and there’s no way of Michael’s being certain to what degree she might have recovered.  Was he afraid that, if she recovered “enough,” she might “say something” (or communicate it in some other way) – something that might be “incriminating”? ⁴

The thing that supports this theory even more so is that he not only had her put to death, but had her cremated as well.  Of course, Terri’s family -- being devout Catholics -- bitterly opposed this; but Michael ignored their pleas.  Why?  What possible motive could he have to deny such a harmless request, and have her cremated?  Because he was also afraid that something “forensic” might turn up – that’s why.  Remember those bone scans that showed the fractured bones?  They were clear evidence of “trauma.”  Perhaps other forensic evidence might have turned up too; and that, along with those bones scans, might have been enough to point an incriminating finger at him.  So, he probably wanted to make sure that NOTHING of that nature remained.  He was bound and determined to erase every shred of evidence that he could. ⁵

All of that is “bad enough.”  But the real tragedy of Terri Schiavo’s death is what it set in motion: it kicked into high gear the “right-to-die” movement. What Roe vs. Wade did for abortion, the Schiavo case has done for euthanasia.  Bobby Schindler, who now works tirelessly for the pro-life cause, says this: “Yes, things have changed – they’ve gotten worse. Exactly how many persons are being killed like Terri every year is difficult to know, although I think the numbers would shock us. What we do know is that we have a very active and aggressive right-to-die movement.  There are many dynamics involved to successfully convince our general public that it’s ‘okay’ to dehydrate and starve a human being to death.  If I had to point to one of the major accomplishments, it is how the right-to-die forces have been able to reclassify feeding tubes as ‘medical treatment.’  However, just as effective is how they’ve influenced the masses to buy into the notion that some persons are in fact, not persons. Consequently, these human ‘non-persons’ have no ‘value’ and can be killed.”  “Even more frightening,” He adds, “is how this ideology has impacted and been accepted in our culture, in particular, our health care community.  This, along with changes in public policies, now puts life and death decisions in the hands of physicians, hospitals boards, and ethics committees – basically strangers – in the place of family members.”

What he says is absolutely true.  There is a general “pro-death” mentality nowadays.  How many times have you heard someone say, “If something happens to me, I don’t want to be resuscitated”; or, “If I have a stroke, I don’t want to live,” etc.  The general mindset nowadays is – to use Tony’s words -- not to be “a burden on society.”  Many of our nursing homes, for instance, are little more than death factories, where patients deemed too “incapacitated” (either mentally or physically) are not fed, i.e., they are starved to death.  (Sometimes, they’re even denied hydration, as Terri was.)  This is especially true in hospices, where the terminally ill are routinely denied both food and water (especially the latter, to hasten the onset of death, thus making the process more “cost effective”).⁶

The SGG and MHT cult-masters can take grim solace in knowing that they helped make all this happen.  That they could have cared so little about Terri is not surprising, because they never cared as well about those SGG school kids so grossly mistreated back in 2009, nor about those being abused at MHT now.  They only care about themselves.  We hold out little hope that these maggots will ever change – but maybe their parishioners will.  Perhaps what happened to Terri will one day make them realize what the cult-masters are all about.  If so, then – at least for them – Terri’s death will not have been in vain.

___________________________

¹ Dr. William Polk Cheshire (a Florida neurologist), corroborates this too, and also says that Terri was certainly capable of feeling pain.   (Click here for more of what Dr. Cheshire said.)  Michael Schiavo’s lawyer trumpeted out several medical “experts” to testify that Terri was in a “PVS” (Persistent Vegetative State); but, as Dr. Cheshire’s testimony shows, she was NOT in a state of PVS.  (Please note too that Dr. Cheshire takes a “pro death” stance in cases of PVS, so he is not a pro-life “professional witness” hand-picked by the Schindlers to testify.  He simply stated that Terri was not in a state of PVS, and therefore didn’t warrant having her life terminated.  He made this admission under absolutely no “pressure” from either the Schindlers or any “pro life” source.)

² Schiavo’s vested interest in her death is a prime reason to doubt his credibility.  When he testified that Terri told him that “if anything happened to me, I would not want to be kept on life support,” two of Terri’s girlfriends (and one of Michael’s former girlfriends) refuted that testimony  (The judge in Terri’s case, George W. Greer, by the way, accepted his testimony and discounted theirs – even though he [the judge] got the facts wrong about the testimony.  For more on this, click here.)  We might also add that Michael Schiavo’s lawyer’s outlandish statement -- “She looked beautiful.  I’ve never seen such a look of beauty upon her” – is reason enough to make one discount anything coming from that quarter.

³ There is, indeed, more evidence that Terri was aware that she was being intentionally put to death -- and, in addition to that, that Michael Schiavo lied and/or changed his story several times during his testimony.  But, in the interest of saving space, we have not included it here.  There is also evidence that there was much misinformation put out about Schiavo, not only by Michael Schiavo and his lawyers, but by the mainstream media as well.  (For those who wish to read more, click here and here.)

⁴ Although several “medical experts” held out little hope for Terri’s cognitive recovery, there were several who did hold out that hope.  One must remember too that many (if not most) of those in the “no hope” camp were hand-picked by Michael Schiavo.  Also, the general climate in the “mainstream media” being what it is, one can be sure that they were of the same mindset -- and eager to publicize only their point of view.  Plus, it is by no means certain that she couldn’t recover.  There are many examples -- especially in recent years) -- of patients thought to be “brain dead” who completely recovered.  (The fact is, even with today’s “advances” in neurological knowledge, the brain is still a largely uncharted domain, and no one can say with certainty that there is “no hope” of recovery – in ANY case.)

And, what if Terri had recovered to the point where she could have communicated what really happened when she had her “accident” – and before?  How much of Michael Schiavo’s testimony could she have refuted?  For that and other reasons, he would’ve had a powerful motive to make sure that she would never be able to “talk.”  (One of the many websites available – with several related “links” – asks, “What is Michael Schiavo afraid of?”  Good question!  For those with the time to investigate, it has some intriguing leads to explore.)

⁵ One might dispute our reasons given for her cremation, and say that the bone scan evidence was there, whether she was cremated or not.  Yes it is; but past evidence – especially written evidence, such as depositions, affidavits and yes, medical reports -- has often been successfully challenged, whereas current forensic evidence isn’t.  It can be examined and re-examined, as many times as one wants.  Also, there might be other evidence that a thorough autopsy could reveal: toxicology, for instance.  Michael Schiavo contended that her initial collapse (and subsequent oxygen deprivation) was the result of a “potassium imbalance” – but no imbalance was found.  However, there may be “forensic” ways to determine if oxygen deprivation was caused by smothering.  But we’ll never know, will we, now that she’s just a pile of ashes.  With cremation, all evidence is irretrievably lost.

⁶ The “Obamacare” healthcare plan, for instance, reportedly stipulates that, past a certain age, cancer care not be given, and the patient then left to die – because continued treatment would be “prohibitively expensive.”  More and more, health decisions are being made on the basis of cost, not the patient’s wellbeing – and being made by “administrators” with no medical expertise whatsoever.