Schiavo e-mail

[Lorarose]

I received this e-mail regarding the Schiavo case today.
How would you respond to this?
--------------------
Congressman Maurice Hinchey
United States Congress
New York, 22nd District

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding the Terri
Schiavo case. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to
respond.

As you may know, Terri Schiavo passed away on March 31, 2005 after
struggling for fifteen years in an unresponsive coma. Because of her
debilitating condition, her family was forced to make difficult and personal
decisions in hopes of improving her quality of life and alleviating her
suffering. However, they disagreed as to what they thought her final wishes
were, and so their case proceeded to court.

After numerous appeals and the refusal by the Supreme Court to intervene
on six separate occasions, the judicial process was exhausted and the court
system had made a final and legally binding decision. Unfortunately, some
members of Congress, with the president's support, attempted to redefine their
legislative authority by intruding into the lives of a grieving family and
defying a court's ruling. By involving themselves in this issue, they
politicized what is inherently a private, family matter.

In a blatant disregard of the Constitution and the separation of powers,
an ideologically extreme faction of Republicans, acting without the full
participation of Congress, passed a law to force a federal court to review the
case. The bill was an unprecedented attempt by Congress and the president to
influence the judicial system and bypass the institutional safeguards that are
in place to protect American citizens.

I believe that Congress and the president overstepped their constitutional
bounds by intervening in the court case of Terri Schiavo. They set a dangerous
precedent by blurring the lines between the legislative, executive, and judicial
branches of our government and interfered in what should have remained a family
decision. I was not able to vote on this hastily written legislation, because I
already returned to New York. Had I been here, however, I would have voted
against this legislation and opposed the president's attempt to intrude on a
family issue and thwart the judicial system.

Thank you again for contacting me. Your comments and concerns are always
welcomed. I also encourage you to visit my web site: www.house.gov/hinchey,
where you can sign up for e-mail updates on the topics you're most interested
in. Click on "Issues and Legislation" to learn more about my positions on a
variety of issues. You'll also see how I voted on prominent legislation and
find links to other legislative resources.

Best regards.


Sincerely,

Maurice Hinchey
New York, 22nd District

[Dredgemate]

I recommend responding point by point;

As you may know, Terri Schiavo passed away on March 31, 2005 after
struggling for fifteen years in an unresponsive coma.

In point of fact, Terri did not die as a result of her debilitating condition. She died as a result of starvation and dehydration caused by the deliberate withholding of nutrition. Terri's condition was not terminal, she was severely disabled. The food and water she was being provided was necessary for life in the same way that it is necessary for you, me or a nine month old infant.

Because of her
debilitating condition, her family was forced to make difficult and personal
decisions in hopes of improving her quality of life and alleviating her
suffering. However, they disagreed as to what they thought her final wishes
were, and so their case proceeded to court.

It amazes me that the remedy for improving quality of life is death. An attempt to use 'quality of life' as a rationalization for murder is futile. The fact of the matter is that all life is sacred, and deserves the utmost respect and reverence. This case has opened the door to the marginalization of those who are deemed to not be contributing or are a burden to society. This is the same tactic employed by fascist and communist regimes to keep a society weak.

After numerous appeals and the refusal by the Supreme Court to intervene
on six separate occasions, the judicial process was exhausted and the court
system had made a final and legally binding decision. Unfortunately, some
members of Congress, with the president's support, attempted to redefine their
legislative authority by intruding into the lives of a grieving family and
defying a court's ruling. By involving themselves in this issue, they
politicized what is inherently a private, family matter.

In a blatant disregard of the Constitution and the separation of powers,
an ideologically extreme faction of Republicans, acting without the full
participation of Congress, passed a law to force a federal court to review the
case. The bill was an unprecedented attempt by Congress and the president to
influence the judicial system and bypass the institutional safeguards that are
in place to protect American citizens.

I believe that Congress and the president overstepped their constitutional
bounds by intervening in the court case of Terri Schiavo. They set a dangerous
precedent by blurring the lines between the legislative, executive, and judicial
branches of our government and interfered in what should have remained a family
decision. I was not able to vote on this hastily written legislation, because I
already returned to New York. Had I been here, however, I would have voted
against this legislation and opposed the president's attempt to intrude on a
family issue and thwart the judicial system.

I will agree with you that on the surface, the legal system appears to have been executed to the best of its ability. A closer examination of the case, however, will show that it failed Terri. I question the judgement of the Florida courts to keep Michael Schiavo as Terri's legal guardian when in fact he had an obvious conflict of interest in his girlfriend and their children. The fact of the matter is that any judicial or legislative decisions that permits murder is morally bankrupt and therefore must be reevaluated.

Congressman, we are on a slippery slope of moral relevatism that cannot be allowed to continue. The trust that the good people of New York have put you must be upheld. You have a chance to stand up for those Americans that society has deemed 'less'. I urge you to introduce and/or support legislation that upholds the sanctity of life and protects every human's right to live.

[Fitz]

Here is one that my Congressman Jerry Weller (R) IL. wrote to me. It is quite a contrast. It was also written before Terri's death.

Dear Ms.
Thank you for contacting me regarding Ms. Terri Schaivo and the controversy surrounding the removal of her feeding and water tubes. I appreciate your comments.
I understand your concerns and the fact that there are reasonable people on either side of the this matter. As you may know Ms. Schiavo's feeding tubes were recently removed by the order of Florida State courts. This removal will slowly kill her by means of starvation and dehydration; a process thqt can take up to 14 days. The House and Senate had already acted separatley to transfer the case to Federal jurisdiction, and I was cosponsor and strong supporter of the original House bill. The House convened an emergancyi session and passed a joint measuer with the Senate, which the President signed into law.
While the case regarding Terri Schiavo is unique and tragic in many ways, it would have been a much greater tragedy for those in power to do nothing to save an innocent woman from a slow, agonizing death. I have a strong track record on right-to-life issues and I believe it is important to defend those individuals who do not have a voice to defend themselves. Ms. Schiavo is neither brain dead nor dependent on articicial life support; she simply needs a feeding tube to eat as do many incapcitatied people.
Unfortunately, on March 22, Federal U.S. District Judge James D. Whittemore ruled against Terri Schiavo's parents' request for a temporary restraining order that would restore nutrition and hydration to Ms. Schiavo. This decision is now being appealed to the 11th Federal Circuit Court of Appeals where I hope that Judge Whittemore's ruling will be overturned, thereby returning the feeding and hydrating tubes to Ms. Schiavo, along with her life.
I remain hopeful that new techniques and therapies may be applied to Terri, and others in similar situations, that she may live out her life n the most productive and peaceful manner possible.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please continue to keep me informed on matters of importance to you. If you would like to receive further information on issues important to the 11th District, please visit my website at www.house.gov/weller.

Sincerely,
Jerry Weller
Member of Congress :

[Fitz]

I also received a letter from Senator Durbin. His was so horrible and it stressed making a living will so that we won't have to go through this. I think I threw it out. I never got a response from Senator Obama. I have written to him several times about issues and he never responds. I think that is rude. As much as I don't like Durbin's responses, at least he makes the effort.

[Lisa4Catholics]

Originally Posted by Lorarose

I received this e-mail regarding the Schiavo case today.
How would you respond to this?
--------------------
Congressman Maurice Hinchey
United States Congress
New York, 22nd District

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding the Terri
Schiavo case. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to
respond.

As you may know, Terri Schiavo passed away on March 31, 2005 after
struggling for fifteen years in an unresponsive coma. Because of her
debilitating condition, her family was forced to make difficult and personal
decisions in hopes of improving her quality of life and alleviating her
suffering. However, they disagreed as to what they thought her final wishes
were, and so their case proceeded to court.

After numerous appeals and the refusal by the Supreme Court to intervene
on six separate occasions, the judicial process was exhausted and the court
system had made a final and legally binding decision. Unfortunately, some
members of Congress, with the president's support, attempted to redefine their
legislative authority by intruding into the lives of a grieving family and
defying a court's ruling. By involving themselves in this issue, they
politicized what is inherently a private, family matter.

In a blatant disregard of the Constitution and the separation of powers,
an ideologically extreme faction of Republicans, acting without the full
participation of Congress, passed a law to force a federal court to review the
case. The bill was an unprecedented attempt by Congress and the president to
influence the judicial system and bypass the institutional safeguards that are
in place to protect American citizens.

I believe that Congress and the president overstepped their constitutional
bounds by intervening in the court case of Terri Schiavo. They set a dangerous
precedent by blurring the lines between the legislative, executive, and judicial
branches of our government and interfered in what should have remained a family
decision. I was not able to vote on this hastily written legislation, because I
already returned to New York. Had I been here, however, I would have voted
against this legislation and opposed the president's attempt to intrude on a
family issue and thwart the judicial system.

Thank you again for contacting me. Your comments and concerns are always
welcomed. I also encourage you to visit my web site: www.house.gov/hinchey,
where you can sign up for e-mail updates on the topics you're most interested
in. Click on "Issues and Legislation" to learn more about my positions on a
variety of issues. You'll also see how I voted on prominent legislation and
find links to other legislative resources.

Best regards.


Sincerely,

Maurice Hinchey
New York, 22nd District

First Terri was not in a coma Second she was NOT unresponsive!Her family that made that decision had a girlfriend and two children with another woman and her origional "colapse"was highly suspect in and of itself Oh,and he only remebered her so called wish after receiving alot of money that was supposed to be used to care for her and instead used to put himself through school and pay a lawyer to kill her The so called reviews did not review the facts of the case only the procedures.While you are point fingers at congress,you might want to look at the courts who apparently have the right to starve and dehydrate a disabled person at the word of someone who had a conflict of interest I would suggest you use the smileys for emphasis

[Lorarose]

Where DO you get your smilies Lisa4?

[Lisa4Catholics]

Originally Posted by Lorarose

Where DO you get your smilies Lisa4?

I will send you a link

[gnjsdad]

Originally Posted by Lorarose

I believe that Congress and the president overstepped their constitutional
bounds by intervening in the court case of Terri Schiavo. They set a dangerous
precedent by blurring the lines between the legislative, executive, and judicial
branches of our government and interfered in what should have remained a family
decision.

It's unfortunate that a member of Congress has such a lack of understanding of the Constitution.

When it comes to the three branches of the Federal government, there are no "constitutional bounds" to cross, let alone, "overstep". The Constitution is silent as to which branch has primacy over the others. If the history of the ratification process is any guide, the legislative branch was given pride of place. The founders asumed the legislative branch would take priority, since the will of the people was most easily determined through the actions of that branch.

The notion that Congress somehow "interfered" in "what should have been a family decision" is insidious, because it assumes that the judiciary ought to be beyond the control of the other branches. The judiciary killed Terri Schiavo. The judiciary is a branch of government, so it is disingenuous to argue that those who wanted to save Terri somehow "interfered" in a private family matter.

[Lorarose]

It's unfortunate that a member of Congress has such a lack of understanding of the Constitution.

When it comes to the three branches of the Federal government, there are no "constitutional bounds" to cross, let alone, "overstep". The Constitution is silent as to which branch has primacy over the others. If the history of the ratification process is any guide, the legislative branch was given pride of place. The founders asumed the legislative branch would take priority, since the will of the people was most easily determined through the actions of that branch.

The notion that Congress somehow "interfered" in "what should have been a family decision" is insidious, because it assumes that the judiciary ought to be beyond the control of the other branches. The judiciary killed Terri Schiavo. The judiciary is a branch of government, so it is disingenuous to argue that those who wanted to save Terri somehow "interfered" in a private family matter.

Thank you for this input - as this is the part of the letter I am the most confused about.
It is also my understanding the bill passed by the president was not an attempt to interfere - but rather a request to review the merits of the case based on the evidence.
Courts do this all the time for capital punishment cases don't they?
Why doesn't Terri receive the same care and consideration offered to criminals?

[BobCatholic]

In a blatant disregard of the Constitution and the separation of powers,
an ideologically extreme faction of Republicans, acting without the full
participation of Congress, passed a law to force a federal court to review the
case

Translation from liberal-speak to English: How dare they believe that Terri Schiavo still has human rights? Shame on them! We believe that she has no human rights so therefore KILL HER NOW.

The bill was an unprecedented attempt by Congress and the president to
influence the judicial system and bypass the institutional safeguards that are
in place to protect American citizens.

The same safeguards which protect criminals from "cruel and unusual punishment" didn't exist for poor Terri. Thank you CIVIL COURTS.

[BOBKAT]

I received one for Allyson Schwartz from Philadelphia, it had me so mad that I sent her an email and told her that is the reason I didn't vote for her and never will. And that for someone representing the people she had a rather narrow view and didn't deserve the office she had. I live in Philadelphia what else can you expect from the land of the corrupt. Anyhow I never got a response.


God Bless
Kathleen

[harveyc]

About six hours after Terri died, I received the following e-mail from my liberal senator. With timing like this, can anyone believe she really cared?

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the ongoing legal proceedings concerning Terri Schiavo. I appreciate your thoughts on this subject and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I do understand your concerns about the case of Terri Schiavo, and I thank you for sharing your opinions with me.

Recently, Congress passed what is known as a private relief bill, giving Terri Schiavo's parents standing to sue in Federal court.

This legislation was a compromise, and was far better than the original legislation which would have made a federal court inquiry possible for virtually any patient in this situation. Instead, this bill affects only the parents of Terri Schiavo, and does not dictate to the court what it must do. Further, the compromise bill's language also specifically points out that it provides no changes in 'substantive rights' not otherwise secured by the Constitution or federal or state law; has 'no effect' on assisting suicide; 'no precedent' on future legislation; and has 'no effect' on the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990.

Once again, thank you for your letter. Please know that I will continue to monitor legal proceedings concerning Terri Schiavo. Should you have further questions on this or any other topic, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. office at

(202) 224-3841.



Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

[Lorarose]

She sure is on top of things isn't she?