THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD

9/13/2006

Terri Schiavo: Forever the Exception

By Carrie K. Hutchens

It's quite exciting reading about the new and advanced technique that measures brain activity in unconscious patients. It's a ray of hope for many who may have been, or maybe would have been, misdiagnosed and therefore put to sleep. Of course, everyone seems quick to bring up Terri Schiavo and appear to insist -- no matter how stated -- that unlike her (and people such as she)..., as though she was hopeless and this new technique would have had no benefit in her case. And they would know this because why?

Hello! They didn't think this research subject was in their either. She supposedly showed no outward signs. Surprise!

What might have happened to this young woman had they not used her in a research project? Might her family have "let her go"? Would she have layen dormant forevermore due to lack of stimulation and, therefore, a chance at the awakening that would open the door and eventually let her out?

Yes, what might have happened? It gives reason to wonder. Gives reason just like in the Terri Schiavo case.

No one can know that Terri's brain was liquefied at all, or to the extent claimed. Tests to verify were not allowed.

No one can know what Terri could have accomplished through stimulation and therapy. It wasn't allowed.

No one can know what was going on in Terri's brain. Tests weren't allowed.

With all this in mind, just how can anyone immediately insist that Terri was unlike the young woman in the research project? How do they know? They don't. The best they can do is hope (if they have a conscience) or hope the public doesn't get to wondering, if they don't and happen to just be a person with an agenda. This is a test they can't fail Terri on because to fail her would mean she would first have to have taken the test. She wasn't allowed.

In one of the articles that made it seem as though Terri was hopeless and not a candidate of being in there, she was put in the category of having a heart attack? Excuse me?

How many times do people have to be told that Terri did not have a heart attack before it registers that Terri DID NOT have a heart attack? Wrongly claiming a heart attack a million times will no more make it the truth than it was the first time the lie was uttered.

Terri not having a "heart attack" is verifiable.

Terri not being bulimic is verifiable.

Terri not being in there and not feeling every second of it all, as she was slowly and horrendously starved and dehydrated to death IS NOT verifiable.

Assumptions were wrong with the recent research subject. That's being accepted as fascinating and a glimmer of hope. However, would that have been so readily and delightfully accepted if the results came out after she had been sentenced to die and after she was then starved and dehydrated death?

Reality is that Terri Schiavo was starved and dehydrated to death! That is an absolute!

Her not feeling it, is not!

The research subject supposedly didn't feel or process either. Wrong! And since it was all wrong then, just how much was wrong in the Terri Schiavo case?

Why is Terri Schiavo always considered the exception?

Terri Schiavo, the first person openly sentenced to death in the USA for being a victim and damaged goods. The one that was "assumed" to be less than acceptable without any of the proofs that would be required had she been a convicted serial killer. The latter being given mercy and never allowed to die by a lethal injection that might hurt for a "few minutes", compared to Terri Schiavo's DAYS that were drawn out and merciless.

Terri forever the exception? So might the young woman of the research project have been, had they not picked her. Turns out she was aware. Can anyone prove that Terri wasn't?

Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.