Here's another website that rivka recommended, which includes a timeline which may be helpful and tries to answer a number of points that you've raised.
I must correct an earlier misstatement of mine: apparently, Michael did not decide that the feeding tube should be removed. He said he believed that would be Terri's wish, but he asked the court to decide, and the court did, evaluating the statement of Michael, her parents, and other witnesses as well. The court decided that the evidence indicated clearly and convincingly that Terri would have wanted the tube removed.
Michael is afraid her parents will keep her alive unnecessarily and use up the money he won in the lawsuit. As explained on this site referenced above:
Recently, Michael received an offer of $1 million, and perhaps a second offer of $10 million, to walk away from this case and permit Terri's parents to care for her. These offers, assuming there were two, were based on a misunderstanding of the situation here. Michael lacks the power to undo the court order determining Terri's wishes and requiring the removal of her feeding tube. He did not make the decision and cannot unmake it. The court made the decision on Terri's behalf. Nonetheless, Michael apparently rejected each offer.
I really don't think he's in it for the money, but as the above website owner says, we can't know. I ran across a site yesterday which gave an accounting of how the money has been spent that was won in the malpractice lawsuit, but I can't find that link now. According to the Miami Herald here, taxpayers and a hospice are paying for her care now. The malpractice settlement is almost entirely used up; it was spent on her care and the various legal costs. Michael Shiavo does not have control over the guardianship fund. So he couldn't have raided it for his own use, anyway.
As for Terri, I notice that her family is Roman Catholic. I cannot help but wonder if this is not part of the problem. I believe this is certainly true, particularly based on statements they have made in the press.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Not as opposite as you think!
Date: 2005-03-21 08:42 pm (UTC)I must correct an earlier misstatement of mine: apparently, Michael did not decide that the feeding tube should be removed. He said he believed that would be Terri's wish, but he asked the court to decide, and the court did, evaluating the statement of Michael, her parents, and other witnesses as well. The court decided that the evidence indicated clearly and convincingly that Terri would have wanted the tube removed.
Michael is afraid her parents will keep her alive unnecessarily and use up the money he won in the lawsuit. As explained on this site referenced above:
I really don't think he's in it for the money, but as the above website owner says, we can't know. I ran across a site yesterday which gave an accounting of how the money has been spent that was won in the malpractice lawsuit, but I can't find that link now. According to the Miami Herald here, taxpayers and a hospice are paying for her care now. The malpractice settlement is almost entirely used up; it was spent on her care and the various legal costs. Michael Shiavo does not have control over the guardianship fund. So he couldn't have raided it for his own use, anyway.
As for Terri, I notice that her family is Roman Catholic. I cannot help but wonder if this is not part of the problem. I believe this is certainly true, particularly based on statements they have made in the press.