Charter Member of the Sub-Media

June 15, 2005

Terri Schiavo Autopsy « Social Issues »

So the information has now been released.

No signs of abuse, massive brain damage, therapy wouldn't have worked, brain deterioration...


But did she really have to be dehydrated to death to find these things out?

And why couldn't two more experts (one chosen by Terri's family, and one chosen by a separate court) participate? All these assessments were made by an expert hand-picked by Michael Schiavo and/or his attorneys...isn't there a good chance of conflict of interest in that?

Final point: while the reports say the autopsy "report" was released, all I've seen are the autopsy "conclusions". That can be considered a "report", yes...but will other doctors be allowed to see and investigate the actual photos and samples? Somehow, I doubt it. Somehow, I doubt the MSM will mention that aspect.

UPDATE: Someone smarter than me (which leaves out pretty much no one) says:

Terri Schiavo, a profoundly disabled woman who was not terminally ill and who had an army of family members ready to care for her for the rest of her natural life, succumbed to forced dehydration at the hands of her spouse-in-name-only.

Posted by Nathan at 01:42 PM | Comments (2)
» The Roost links with: For those that care

Full report (PDF)

Posted by: Sharp as a Marble at June 16, 2005 05:36 AM

Well, that's better than I expected. Not as much as I would wish. But probably enough that other experts can check his work.

Posted by: Nathan at June 16, 2005 09:15 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?