Terri Schiavo's Parents Seek Divorce on Her Behalf - Page 19

breakingnews · 03-31-2005, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett's Honey

I don't know if cremation was always his (their?) plan, but I can see why it may be the best way for it to finally be really the end of this 15 year ordeal for Michael Schaivo.

I heard a rumor at work that the Schindlers' lawyers are going to argue against cremation because the parents see resurrection as a "potential" future treatment.

lookout123 · 03-31-2005, 03:56 PM

more likely it is because they are devout catholics (or at least they play them on tv). i think that catholics believe that the cremated will be left without a body when Christ returns and that would be a bad thing. i'm thinking that if Christ really is the Lord of all and everything in the Bible is true - He can probably get around the not having a body bit. IMO

Brett's Honey · 03-31-2005, 05:35 PM

Quote:

(lookout123] i think that catholics believe that the cremated will be left without a body when Christ returns and that would be a bad thing.

[/quote]My husband and I were discussing that belief yesterday. My problem with that is that some people (World Trade Center victims for example) are left without a body due to circumstances beyond their control, pretty much cremated against their wishes. And I don't think God would hold that against them...

Griff · 04-01-2005, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

more likely it is because they are devout catholics (or at least they play them on tv). i think that catholics believe that the cremated will be left without a body when Christ returns and that would be a bad thing. i'm thinking that if Christ really is the Lord of all and everything in the Bible is true - He can probably get around the not having a body bit. IMO

I'm not going to question their devotion to Catholicism, but I will question their judgement letting the likes of Randal Terry turn their difficulties into his circus. The "Culture of Life" that JP2 originally addressed bears only a passing resemblance to what some American Christians have whittled it down to.

Being cremated does not violate Catholic dogma. Traditional Christian burial is strongly encouraged for, from what I gather, historical reasons. Early enemies of Christianity had been known to burn Christians bodies as a psychological attack against believers. According to Catholic teaching the destruction of the body does not impact resurrection.

Lately, the Pope may be pushing his argument too far, pressing for extraordinary means to support life. At some point, you just have to put your life in Gods hands. For me, I think that feeding tubes are pretty ordinary but that personal decision making is why we can't let the nutters like Randal Terry make the call for us.

tw · 04-01-2005, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff

Being cremated does not violate Catholic dogma. Traditional Christian burial is strongly encouraged for, from what I gather, historical reasons. Early enemies of Christianity had been known to burn Christians bodies as a psychological attack against believers. According to Catholic teaching the destruction of the body does not impact resurrection.

Well, that is not what they told us - quite vehemently. We were told that if the body was not intact, then there would be no body to rise up to heaven after a second coming of Christ. There was to be no question about this even though some in the class had the nerve to ask.

Also a kidney transplant was a mortal sin as we were told in one kind of pronouncment from Rome. Somehow that is no longer a poltically correct sin.

Even back then, I was having trouble understanding how this could be a fair god. A kidney donated to save a life was a mortal sin? What happens to all those innocent civilians blown to bits by a bomb? They had no body to celebrate the second coming of Christ. How evil was this god?

Is one who is fictional then really evil? They called him doubting Thomas - an ideal we should all aspire to.

lizthefiz · 03-31-2005, 02:04 PM

I am just curious as to why Terri was eligible for Medicaid. Does anyone know why? I thought if you were married and your spouse had visible means of support you would be responsible for the bulk of expenses. Or, would have to re-imburse Medicaid.

Michael Schiavo is alleged to have received $1 million of a $2+ million settlement Terri got. But I have also heard that he got only $300,000. I don't know who to believe but I can't imagine that Michael Schiavo is in this for the money.

However, why would Terri not be covered by Michael's medical insurance?

Any thoughts?

wolf · 04-01-2005, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lizthefiz

I am just curious as to why Terri was eligible for Medicaid.

I don't know all the rules regarding medical insurance. I spend a lot of my time arguing with mental health insurance companies at work, though.

I will, however, as is my habit, make some guesses that may prove entirely wrong.

Medical Insurance plans have levels of coverage ... they will pay so much per incident, so much per year, and so much if treatment is provided within a particular period of time.

With a catastrophic illness (which can be anything from a condition like Mrs. Schiavo's to cancer to kidney failure) it's not unusual to exhaust private medical insurance benefits.

When a person is disabled by an illness, it becomes possible to seek disability benefits, which can include things like a person under the age of 65 filing for and receiving Medicare (federal) Insurance.

You can exhaust the lifetime benefit your medicare coverage. There is also something called being a 60/60 violator ... if you spend time in inpatient treatment, you have to be OUT for 60 days before you can have another covered event. For most folks this is not a big deal, but for someone with a chronic illness, you are SOL.

That's where Medicaid comes in ... you can file for state benefits as well.

There are other funding streams beyond that, but may not apply in this situation. There is a lot of unfunded care given in all kinds of hospitals. And the hospitals have to eat this. Some years nonprofits are more nonprofit than they should be. Unfunded care is different from Charity care .... these are people who are given services that can't get any kind of coverage or funding. Folks who exhaust their regular insurance benefits are a full billing liability (i.e., a true loss) to the hospital. But, interestingly, you can't refuse to admit someone, or toss them out on their asses just because they don't have insurance benefits remaining ... because if you don't provide the care anyway you risk no longer being able to bill for any medicare payments, even if that patient didn't have medicare to begin with.

Happy Monkey · 03-31-2005, 02:11 PM

Michael got $300000 and $700000 was put in a fund for her treatment. Michael's attempts to treat her ate up the $700000, and his legal bills ate up the $300000. I'm not sure about his health insurance/Medicaid situation, though.

Happy Monkey · 03-31-2005, 03:57 PM

They shouldn't worry. God can uncremate her if He wishes.

breakingnews · 03-31-2005, 04:07 PM

I was just kidding about that, btw.

Just gotta poke fun at the parents' repeated insistence that someday some sort of treatment will restore Terri's brain, life, spirit, soul and what have you.

Kitsune · 03-31-2005, 05:03 PM

This just in: Terri's death has caused the Pope's health to suddenly decline. God is very unhappy, today.

Happy Monkey · 04-02-2005, 09:17 AM

And here is the ultimate goal of the Shiavo hooplah:

DeLay Wants Panel to Review Role of Courts

vsp · 04-02-2005, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

And here is the ultimate goal of the Shiavo hooplah:

DeLay Wants Panel to Review Role of Courts

And whaddya know, there's already a bill in the <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.1070:">House</a> and <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN00520:@@@L&summ2=m&">Senate</a> that would remove all jurisdiction from federal courts (including the Supreme Court) on any and all cases involving religion!

More substantial rant on it <a href="http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php?p=154731#post154731">here</a>. It's a religious-right wet dream and rather unlikely to pass, but that it is even being _considered_...

(And it's not just DeLay calling for hearings and remedies like these. If we Pennsylvanians can't get Santorum out of office next year, we might as well close the state down, give the keys to Roy Moore and emigrate to neighboring areas. I have my eye on the suburbs of Wilmington, myself.)

xoxoxoBruce · 04-02-2005, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

And here is the ultimate goal of the Shiavo hooplah:

DeLay Wants Panel to Review Role of Courts

I think DeLay's mother needs a retroactive abortion.

Undertoad · 04-03-2005, 11:25 AM

One thing I don't get OC.

You say, if she DID want to be kept alive in a PVR state, but Michael said she DIDN'T, that's MURDER...

Why does that change if she DOESN'T want to be kept alive in a PVR state? If I sign a paper saying I want to die, and you kill me, that's still murder, right?

03-31-2005, 03:56 PM	#2
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	more likely it is because they are devout catholics (or at least they play them on tv). i think that catholics believe that the cremated will be left without a body when Christ returns and that would be a bad thing. i'm thinking that if Christ really is the Lord of all and everything in the Bible is true - He can probably get around the not having a body bit. IMO __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

03-31-2005, 02:11 PM	#8
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Michael got $300000 and $700000 was put in a fund for her treatment. Michael's attempts to treat her ate up the $700000, and his legal bills ate up the $300000. I'm not sure about his health insurance/Medicaid situation, though. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-31-2005, 03:57 PM	#9
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	They shouldn't worry. God can uncremate her if He wishes. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-31-2005, 04:07 PM	#10
breakingnews Q_Q Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: somewhere in between Posts: 995	I was just kidding about that, btw. Just gotta poke fun at the parents' repeated insistence that someday some sort of treatment will restore Terri's brain, life, spirit, soul and what have you. __________________ Gone crazy, be back never.

04-02-2005, 09:17 AM	#12
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	And here is the ultimate goal of the Shiavo hooplah: DeLay Wants Panel to Review Role of Courts __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-31-2005, 02:04 PM	#6
lizthefiz Resident-in-Training Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 7	I am just curious as to why Terri was eligible for Medicaid. Does anyone know why? I thought if you were married and your spouse had visible means of support you would be responsible for the bulk of expenses. Or, would have to re-imburse Medicaid. Michael Schiavo is alleged to have received $1 million of a $2+ million settlement Terri got. But I have also heard that he got only $300,000. I don't know who to believe but I can't imagine that Michael Schiavo is in this for the money. However, why would Terri not be covered by Michael's medical insurance? Any thoughts?

03-31-2005, 05:03 PM	#11
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	This just in: Terri's death has caused the Pope's health to suddenly decline. God is very unhappy, today.

04-03-2005, 11:25 AM	#15
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	One thing I don't get OC. You say, if she DID want to be kept alive in a PVR state, but Michael said she DIDN'T, that's MURDER... Why does that change if she DOESN'T want to be kept alive in a PVR state? If I sign a paper saying I want to die, and you kill me, that's still murder, right?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)