Spring Break
Schindler family attorney responds to columnist
Pat Anderson
Issue date: 5/6/05 Section: Ed-Op
I read Vivek Thuppil's column concerning the Terri Schiavo case ("Republicans use Schiavo case for political advancement," The Triangle, April 29, p. 15). It makes for compelling reading, assuming it is fact-based.
However, as the Schindler family attorney for a number of years, I can tell you Mr. Thuppil's fact-assumptions are not accurate.
Consider these assumptions, for which there is factual support: Terri collapsed in February, 1990 of unknown reasons. She did not have a heart attack. Her tox screen was negative. No doctor ever diagnosed her with bulimia. She collapsed in the early morning hours on a Sunday morning, alone with Michael. They had a big argument on Saturday afternoon before he went to work, because she had spent $80 at the hairdresser.
In March, 1991, just 53 weeks after her collapse -- slightly more than a year -- a total-body bone scan revealed numerous traumatic injuries to her skeleton, including a fractured lumbar vertebra and an unusual injury to her right thigh bone. The radiologist who read the scan concluded all of her skeletal injuries were presumably of traumatic origin.
Under oath, he said the right thigh injury could only have been caused by a sharp blow or kick. He also testified that these types of injuries were visible on a bone scan for 12 to 18 months. That is, on March 5, 1991, the date the bone scan was done, her injuries would have been sustained sometime in the period from September, 1989 to February, 1990.
During his testimony to a medical malpractice jury in November, 1992, Michael testified that he intended to honor his wedding vows (he did not tell the jury he was dating at least two other women at the time) and intended to take care of Terri the rest of his life. He presented an expert who testified that, in fact, Terri would have a normal life span. Michael did not tell that jury that Terri would rather be dead than disabled, curiously enough. Incidentally, contrary to Mr. Thuppil's assumption, traumatic brain injury is not a terminal disease. She had no terminal disease. Terri was simply brain-damaged.
However, as the Schindler family attorney for a number of years, I can tell you Mr. Thuppil's fact-assumptions are not accurate.
Consider these assumptions, for which there is factual support: Terri collapsed in February, 1990 of unknown reasons. She did not have a heart attack. Her tox screen was negative. No doctor ever diagnosed her with bulimia. She collapsed in the early morning hours on a Sunday morning, alone with Michael. They had a big argument on Saturday afternoon before he went to work, because she had spent $80 at the hairdresser.
In March, 1991, just 53 weeks after her collapse -- slightly more than a year -- a total-body bone scan revealed numerous traumatic injuries to her skeleton, including a fractured lumbar vertebra and an unusual injury to her right thigh bone. The radiologist who read the scan concluded all of her skeletal injuries were presumably of traumatic origin.
Under oath, he said the right thigh injury could only have been caused by a sharp blow or kick. He also testified that these types of injuries were visible on a bone scan for 12 to 18 months. That is, on March 5, 1991, the date the bone scan was done, her injuries would have been sustained sometime in the period from September, 1989 to February, 1990.
During his testimony to a medical malpractice jury in November, 1992, Michael testified that he intended to honor his wedding vows (he did not tell the jury he was dating at least two other women at the time) and intended to take care of Terri the rest of his life. He presented an expert who testified that, in fact, Terri would have a normal life span. Michael did not tell that jury that Terri would rather be dead than disabled, curiously enough. Incidentally, contrary to Mr. Thuppil's assumption, traumatic brain injury is not a terminal disease. She had no terminal disease. Terri was simply brain-damaged.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
grandmacollecta
grandmacollecta
posted 5/08/05 @ 9:10 AM EST
MS. ANDERSON'S RECITIATION OF THE "FACTS" IS MISLEADING:
While I have not represented any of the parties in this case, I am an attorney and I DID review the court pleadings and deposition testimony, and I have to say that Ms. (Continued…)
Post a Comment