Gov. Bush Requests Custody of Schiavo

FOXNews reports:

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. — Florida Gov. Jeb Bush filed a request to take custody of Terri Schiavo on Thursday after the U.S. Supreme Court once again refused to order the severely brain-damaged woman’s feeding tube reinserted.

Circuit Court Judge George Greer, who has consistently ruled that Schiavo did not want to be kept alive artificially, is expected to decide by noon on Bush’s request. He also barred the Department of Children & Families in an emergency order from taking custody of the woman.

Can he even do that?

“Absent of kidnapping, Terri Schiavo will remain in this hospice,” said Bob Felos, an attorney for Michael Schiavo, Terri’s husband and legal guardian.

And death, Bob. Remember that?

“The governor is disappointed [at the Supreme Court decision] and will continue to do whatever he can within the law to save Terri’s life,” Bush spokesman Jacob DiPietre said.

At least someone is attempting to defend the Florida Constitution. BlogsForTerri.com brings us an excerpt:

Article I Section 2: All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty…No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.

Whoops.

More updates on BlogsForTerri.com

2 Responses to “Gov. Bush Requests Custody of Schiavo”

  1. Simon Says:

    come on, elle. I completely understand your position and you have a basis for it — but let’s not kid ourselves into thinking that the issue is obviously settled by that paragraph in the florida constitution.

    it says every person has an inalienable right to enjoy and defend life and liberty. that is 100% consistent with a right to refuse certain medical interventions to keep oneself alive. the premise of this case is that terri would have wanted to exercise her right to refuse medical interventions to keep herself alive in this physical state. Now there may be good reason to disagree with that — that is the premise of your opinion. Fine. I respect that. But don’t pretend that the result follows from an *easy* application of that paragraph.

  2. Elle Says:

    Clearly, Simon, that one paragraph isn’t significant enough to settle this matter. If it was, a woman wouldn’t be dehydrating and starving to death right now.

    The application of law when it denies people the right to convenience in this country is never easy. It wasn’t easy to convince slave owners their “property” wasn’t theirs. It isn’t easy to convince women the child in their body isn’t just a chaotic mass of cells. And obviously, it isn’t easy to convince an unfaithful husband not to kill his disabled wife when he is legally being permitted to do so.

    My opinions don’t pretend ease, Simon. That much should be clear to my readers by now.

Leave a Reply

 
 

This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots. (see: www.captcha.net)

You must read and type the 5 chars within 0..9 and A..F, and submit the form.

  

Oh no, I cannot read this. Please, generate a