March 18, 2005
On Medical Facts About Terri SchiavoTopics: Terri Schiavo's Life Counts
This is a very important post for all who want to be informed about Terri's true medical condition!
Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy posted on this very informative piece from NRO at BlogsForTerri earlier this evening, and it helps to clarify some folks(including the media's) misconceptions about the diagnosis Judge Greer accepted as PVS.
She begins her post by calling to mind that many people have referred to the "medical evidence" that Terri has little to no brain matter remaining, something I've heard refered to by several news reporters and of course, George Felos and Michael Schiavo.
But the truth is that there is only one way to determine such a thing accurately, and that is with an MRI or PET scan. Neither have been done, and they have been disallowed in her case per Michael Schiavo's instructions.
Further, many people have spoken of the doctors who have "evaluated" Terri.
FACT: The primary evaluator, Dr. Ronald Cranford is a board-certified neurologist who specializes in PVS cases; he is a physician that is very close to the euthanasia community. Why mention him? Because he has also been on the board of the Euthanasia Society of America and has ties to the Hemlock Society. He is called as an expert witness for euthanasia in "Right to Die" cases. Dr. Cranford has also advocated denial of SPOON-FED feeding.
These are just basic facts. Please continue reading--this is CRUCIAL to this debate on whether or not she's "brain dead" or whether she has been accurately diagnosed.
EXCERPT FROM OP-ED AT NRO, 3/16/05.
And, quite apart from the question of Terri's therapy and care, it is entirely likely that Terri has never been properly diagnosed. Terri is usually described as being in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS), and indeed Judge Greer ruled as a finding of fact that she is PVS; but this diagnosis and finding were arrived at in a way that has many neurologists expressing surprise and dismay.
I have spent the past ten days recruiting and interviewing neurologists who are willing to come forward and offer affidavits or declarations concerning new testing and examinations for Terri. In addition to the 15 neurologists' affidavits Gibbs had in time to present in court, I have commitments from over 30 others who are willing to testify that Terri should have new and additional testing, and new examinations by unbiased neurologists. Almost 50 neurologists all say the same thing: Terri should be reevaluated, Terri should be reexamined, and there are grave doubts as to the accuracy of Terri's diagnosis of PVS. All of these neurologists are board-certified; a number of them are fellows of the prestigious American Academy of Neurology; several are professors of neurology at major medical schools.
So how can Judge Greer ignore the opinions of so many qualified neurologists, some of whom are leaders in the field? The answer is that Michael Schiavo, his attorney George Felos, and Judge Greer already have the diagnosis they want.
Terri's diagnosis was arrived at without the benefit of testing that most neurologists would consider standard for diagnosing PVS. One such test is MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging). MRI is widely used today, even for ailments as simple as knee injuries -- but Terri has never had one. Michael has repeatedly refused to consent to one. The neurologists I have spoken to have reacted with shock upon learning this fact. One such neurologist is Dr. Peter Morin. He is a researcher specializing in degenerative brain diseases, and has both an M.D. and a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Boston University.
In the course of my conversation with Dr. Morin, he made reference to the standard use of MRI and PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans to diagnose the extent of brain injuries. He seemed to assume that these had been done for Terri. I stopped him and told him that these tests have never been done for her; that Michael had refused them.
There was a moment of dead silence.
"That's criminal," he said, and then asked, in a tone of utter incredulity: "How can he continue as guardian? People are deliberating over this woman's life and death and there's been no MRI or PET?" He drew a reasonable conclusion: "These people [Michael Schiavo, George Felos, and Judge Greer] don't want the information."
Dr. Morin explained that he would feel obligated to obtain the information in these tests before making a diagnosis with life and death consequences. I told him that CT (Computer-Aided Tomography) scans had been done, and were partly the basis for the finding of PVS. The doctor retorted, "Spare no expense, eh?" I asked him to explain the comment; he said that a CT scan is a much less expensive test than an MRI, but it "only gives you a tenth of the information an MRI does." He added, "A CT scan is useful only in pretty severe cases, such as trauma, and also during the few days after an anoxic (lack of oxygen) brain injury. It's useful in an emergency-room setting. But if the question is ischemic injury [brain damage caused by lack of blood/oxygen to part of the brain] you want an MRI and PET. For subsequent evaluation of brain injury, the CT is pretty useless unless there has been a massive stroke."
Other neurologists have concurred with Dr. Morin's opinion. Dr. Thomas Zabiega, who trained at the University of Chicago, said, "Any neurologist who is objective would say 'Yes'" to the question, "Should Terri be given an MRI?"
But in spite of the lack of advanced testing, such as an MRI, attorney George Felos has claimed that Terri's cerebral cortex has "liquefied," and doctors for Michael Schiavo have claimed, on the basis of the CT scans, that parts of Terri's cerebral cortex "have been replaced by fluid." The problem with such contentions is that the available evidence can't support them. Dr. Zabiega explained that "a CT scan can't resolve the kind of detail needed" to make such a pronouncement: "A CT scan is like a blurry photograph." Dr. William Bell, a professor of neurology at Wake Forest University Medical School, agrees: "A CT scan doesn't give much detail. In order to see it on a CT, you have to have massive damage." Is it possible that Terri has that sort of "massive" brain damage? According to Dr. Bell, that isn't likely. Sometimes, he said, even patients who are PVS have a "normal or near normal" MRI.
So why hasn't an MRI been done for Terri? That question has never been satisfactorily answered. George Felos has argued that an MRI can't be done because of thalamic implants that were placed in Terri's skull during the last attempt at therapy, dating back to 1992. But Felos's contention ignores the fact that these implants could be removed. Indeed, the doctor who put them in instructed Michael to have them removed. Michael has never done so.
The most obvious possible explanation for what would otherwise be inexplicable behavior is that Michael Schiavo, George Felos, and Judge Greer don't want to admit any information that would upset the diagnosis they already have. Dr. Morin, when told that Michael had refused an MRI, and that Judge Greer had confirmed the decision, said: "He refused a non-invasive test? People trying to do the right thing want the best and most complete information available. We don't have that in Terri's case." Dr. Bell agreed with this assessment, saying, "It seems as though they're fearful of any additional information."
THE CRANFORD DIAGNOSIS
Doctors for Michael Schiavo have said that an MRI and PET are not necessary for Terri because PVS is primarily a "clinical" diagnosis, that is, one arrived at on the basis of examination of the patient, rather than by relying on tests. And the neurologists I have spoken to agree on the clinical nature of the diagnosis, while insisting that advanced tests nonetheless are a necessary part of it. But the star medical witness for Michael Schiavo, Dr. Ronald Cranford of the University of Minnesota, has repeatedly dismissed calls for MRI testing, and his opinion has prevailed.
Dr. Cranford was the principal medical witness brought in by Schiavo and Felos to support their position that Terri was PVS. Judge Greer was obviously impressed by Cranford's résumé: Cranford travels throughout the country testifying in cases involving PVS and brain impairment. He is widely recognized by courts as an expert in these issues, and in some circles is considered "the" expert on PVS. His clinical judgment has carried the day in many cases, so it is relevant to examine the manner in which he arrived at his judgment in Terri's case. But before that, one needs to know a little about Cranford's background and perspective: Dr. Ronald Cranford is one of the most outspoken advocates of the "right to die" movement and of physician-assisted suicide in the U.S. today.
In published articles, including a 1997 op-ed in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, he has advocated the starvation of Alzheimer's patients. He has described PVS patients as indistinguishable from other forms of animal life. He has said that PVS patients and others with brain impairment lack personhood and should have no constitutional rights. Perusing the case literature and articles surrounding the "right to die" and PVS, one will see Dr. Cranford's name surface again and again. In almost every case, he is the one claiming PVS, and advocating the cessation of nutrition and hydration.
In the cases of Paul Brophy, Nancy Jobes, Nancy Cruzan, and Christine Busalucci, Cranford was the doctor behind the efforts to end their lives. Each of these people was brain-damaged but not dying; nonetheless, he advocated death for all, by dehydration and starvation. Nancy Cruzan did not even require a feeding tube: She could be spoon-fed. But Cranford advocated denying even that, saying that even spoon-feeding constituted "medical treatment" that could be licitly withdrawn.
In cases where other doctors don't see it, Dr. Cranford seems to have a knack for finding PVS. Cranford also diagnosed Robert Wendland as PVS. He did so in spite of the fact that Wendland could pick up specifically colored pegs or blocks and hand them to a therapy assistant on request. He did so in spite of the fact that Wendland could operate and maneuver an ordinary wheelchair with his left hand and foot, and an electric wheelchair with a joystick, of the kind that many disabled persons (most famously Dr. Stephen Hawking) use. Dr. Cranford dismissed these abilities as meaningless. Fortunately for Wendland, the California supreme court was not persuaded by Cranford's assessment.
Expert witnesses in court are supposed to be unbiased: disinterested in the outcome of the case. Part of the procedure in qualifying expert witnesses is establishing that they are objective and unbiased. But given Dr. Cranford's history of advocacy in the "right to die" and euthanasia movements, and given his track record of almost always coming down on the side of PVS and removal of nutrition and hydration, one might question his objectivity. Indeed, the Schindlers' attorneys attempted to do so in the 2002 evidentiary hearing at which Cranford testified, but went unheard. Organizations such as the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide submitted amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in the appellate proceedings in Terri's case, demonstrating Cranford's bias in detail. But these arguments also seemed to fall on deaf ears.
Some neurologists who also consult in legal cases were not surprised at the handling of Dr. Cranford's expert testimony. In theory, they said, the expert witness is supposed to be objective, but, as Dr. Bell explained, "the way it really works is that an attorney carefully selects an expert that will give him the outcome he desires." He related that he has been asked by attorneys to serve as an expert. "I have looked over medical records," he said, "and told attorneys what I thought." But on occasion, he said, his opinion was "obviously not what they wanted to hear" and "they moved on to another expert." Bell acknowledged that Cranford is "a highly accomplished and experienced speaker," but said that in him the court "likely found a highly prejudiced expert."
Neurologists who are familiar with diagnosing and treating PVS and other brain injuries have told me that PVS is a notoriously difficult diagnosis to make. It requires a great deal of time spent with the patient over several days or weeks. The reason for this, as Dr. Bell explained, is that brain-injured patients have severely disrupted sleep/wake cycles. Dr. Mack Jones, a neurologist in Ft. Walton Beach, Fla., added that patients with severe brain injury will have greatly varying levels of alertness: "Two independent examiners may get an entirely different impression depending on when and how long he/she has spent performing the examination. For example, one examiner may unknowingly attempt to evaluate the patient during a stage of sleep. Another examiner, by chance, may find a more responsive patient simply because [the patient is] now more aroused." Dr. Morin concurred, saying that in his experience "the attention of brain-injured patients is very erratic," and that because of this he has "seen inadequate assessments even by experienced neurologists." Because of these difficulties, the American Academy of Neurology has made it clear that it can take months for a physician to establish with confidence the diagnosis of PVS. A 1996 British Medical Journal study, conducted at England's Royal Hospital for Neurodisability, concluded that there was a 43-percent error rate in the diagnosis of PVS. Inadequate time spent by specialists evaluating patients was listed as a contributing factor for the high incidence of errors.
So, did Dr. Cranford, or any of the doctors testifying for Michael Schiavo, spend months evaluating Terri? No. To be fair, none of the doctors appearing for the Schindlers spent months with Terri either. But it is hardly coincidental that the doctors who spent the most time with Terri came to the conclusion that she is not PVS. The doctors brought in by the Schindlers spent approximately 14 hours examining Terri over more than two weeks; their conclusion was that Terri is not PVS, and that she may benefit from therapy.
In marked contrast, Dr. Cranford examined Terri on one occasion, for approximately 45 minutes. Another doctor for Michael Schiavo, Dr. Peter Bambikidis of the Cleveland Clinic Foundation in Ohio, examined Terri for about half an hour. When Dr. Bell learned of the cursory nature of these exams, he said: "You can't do this. To make a diagnosis of PVS based on one examination is fallacious." In Cranford's examination, described by one witness as "brutal," he discounted evidence under his own eyes of Terri's responsiveness. At one point, Dr. Cranford struck Terri very hard on the forehead between her eyes. Terri recoiled and moaned, seemingly in pain. In his court testimony, Cranford dismissed the reaction and moan as a "reflex."
I asked Dr. Bell if he thought a moan uttered after a painful blow could be a reflex. "It's highly unlikely," he replied. He qualified his answer by noting that he had not actually seen the video of the exam, but he believes that the description of Terri's reaction is not consistent with a reflex. "A moan is not a reflex," Bell said. "A wince or grimace is not a reflex."
By the very definition of Persistent Vegetative State, the patient must exhibit no "evidence of awareness of self or environment" or "ability to interact with others." As one neurologist put it, if a patient shows "any response to the outside world, the patient isn't in a PVS." All it takes, according to Dr. Jones, is "only one examiner to discover the presence of higher brain function and the naysayers' opinions are, by the very definition of PVS, null and void."
Posted by Hyscience at March 18, 2005 11:31 PM
To all involved in the starvation of Terri Schiavo:
When did you ever get the ideal that you have the right to end the life of this woman. The life of all who are disabled have the right to life, and for all of you to start playing GOD and have this woman die of starvation has really shown me that America is not free, when you have the right to dicitate who lives and dies. Apparently you have forgotten who put you in office to begin with, because we assumed you would have our best interest in heart, but you have all deceived us in what your true intentions are.
How many of you have talked about not being kept alive with machines, and how many of you have a living will to make your wishes known. I am not all that convinced that the conversation happened between Terri and Michael, and if he did, why didn't Terri have a living will done. I do know that Catholics hold life to be a precious gift, and for you to turn your back on the beliefs that you were raised with in preserving life I find that Terri still fighting to be here is a sign that GOD is not ready for her yet. Michael has his motives in waiting her to die and that needs to be taken into consideration when you decide to starve Terri.
If any of you are a believer of GOD, you know this is not what he wants for his children. Are you willing to die for your beliefs in putting this women through what we all know is a horrific way to die. If you think this is the best thing for Terri, I hope that I don't have you deciding my fate.
The Value of Life can only be estimated by its Spiritual Relationship to GOD.
The Great test of a man's Character is his Tongue.
Carelessness in Spiritual Matters is a Crime.
When does the Law start benefiting man, women and children and not at the discretion of the people in the government that presume to do this on our behalf. You need to start listening to the very people that put you in office, and start doing what you know in your heart is right for Terri. LET HER LIVE!!!!
3202 Cantabrian Dr.
Killeen, Texas 76542
Posted by: Rebecca at March 18, 2005 11:47 PM
Posted by: Beth at March 19, 2005 1:30 AM
Neil Bortz was claiming that Shiavo did have an MRI and the article is thus wrong. This is my understanding: The determination of a liquefied cortex was made based on the CAT scan, which would be an inadequated or erroneous basis, but MRI's were also taken, and those results are sealed and were not specifically cited in papers/arguments by the husband's attorney--which means they are probably inconclusive or may even contradict the CAT scans.
Posted by: observer at March 19, 2005 3:17 AM
Is there a way to go on the offensive (beyond blogging) to push the message that the MRI and PET results are prerequisite to diagnosing PVS, and that no such results were used? Isn't there any media group that is willing to report this? Maybe someone bring big posters to the hospice campers that says "WHERE ARE THE MRI & PET RESULTS? HOW DO YOU KNOW SHE'S IN PVS?"
Too many people have taken the initial diagnosis at face value, not knowing that they were lacking the MRI and PET results.
Posted by: Jeff Tan at March 19, 2005 8:28 AM
Isn't it a conflict of interest for Judge Greer to be on this case? This is a pro-life & pro-death case and he, (Greer) is on pro-death panels and organizations. How in the world can he be fair and impartial? Of course he is going to shoot down every single issue that is not pro-death.
Feeling helpless in California.
Posted by: Susan Orefice at March 19, 2005 11:44 AM
I will not give you the respect of calling you "your honor" there is no honor in your life. You are no better than a murderer. Put your children or your wife in the position of Terri!! Would you then be so biased? You need mental health services as you have ideas that you are the ultimate authority, Are you God? Do you really believe that you are qualified to make this decision? Only time will tell, YOU, Mr. Greer will be judged eventually ....are you prepared?
Posted by: Pamela Stauffer at March 19, 2005 12:50 PM
What I get from this article, is we have no real idea of what her case is. As far as the right wing screaming murder, not everyone agrees with you, in your opinion its murder, in my opinion being braindead is not a way to live. I would want the right to die if I had the misfortune of being braindead. Now, unlike some people I do not force my opinion on everyone. I feel the family should have the right to decide.
Posted by: Andrew at March 25, 2005 6:55 PM
I agree with you Pamela, being brain dead is no way to live. Sadly, that is the way you are able to rationalize murder. Having worked with the mentally handicapped, for over two years in college, I was responsible for the care of many individuals in worse condition than Teri.
You people like to use terms that you don’t understand but that are commonly used in the herd. Teri was not brain dead, she never was. And as far as brain damaged, what is that supposed to mean? Millions of people sustain brain damage from head trauma, drug or alcohol use, illness like Parkinson or Alzheimer diseases, or tumors and the like. If we were to classify all brain damage as brain dead, a lot of people would be having a bad day right now. And, be advised, that once you start pulling at that thread it will some day unravel to where you are.
Pamela, I’ve also heard your side describe Teri as a ‘drooling shitbag’. That probably pinpoints your position in the herd more than anything. It’s got nothing to do with her disability, it has everything to do with the liberal left’s propensity to isolate the weak, dehumanize them, and place them into the searing arms of Moloch. It’s for their own good of course. This behavior is what gives the liberal left, as with Hitler, their power. You are always willing to sacrifice someone else because you don’t have the courage to stand against evil.
You fear being shouted down by the same cowards you are joining ranks with because you want to believe the same lie everyone else over there is trying to believe: that somehow you do matter.
By seeking to save yourself, by chanting the same lies that the rest of your herd chants, you have become that same useless person. You, Pamela, will someday be selected by your herd to rest in the searing hot arms of Moloch—for your own good.
Posted by: Brent at April 3, 2005 8:26 PM
Articles Related to Terri Schiavo's Life Counts:
- On Medical Facts About Terri Schiavo - Mar 18, 2005