Jun. 21st, 2005

fpb: (Default)
Having a severely disabled person in my family, and having been involved in disabled organizations, I know a thing or two about disability: enough to know that the mass media's reading of the Schiavo autopsy was ignorant and prejudiced bullshit (a functioning brain mass of half the whole represents severe disability, but certainly not brain destruction). And by the same token, I have a personal stake in the struggle against the increasingly-popular, increasingly-encouraged murder of the old and sick: my reaction to all promoters of euthanasia must be, quite simply, get your filthy hands off my family, or I will duff you up. But I am no doctor, much less a specialist in brain functions. So here is what one such person had to say about the evidence for the loathsome judicial murder of a disabled woman:

Physician Who Examined Schiavo for Over 10 Hours--Critical of Autopsy Report
Insists that based on clinical evidence and autopsy results, “an aware woman was killed”


CLEARWATER, Florida, June 20, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A neurologist who spent 10 hours examining Terri Schiavo while she was alive has issued a release criticizing the autopsy conclusions drawn by the independent medical examiner.

Dr. William Hammesfahr, nominated for a Nobel Prize for his work in Medicine, and a patent holder for a medicine to help people with brain injuries and stroke, released the following statement in response to the independent medical examiner’s autopsy conclusions:

“We have seen a lot on the autopsy of Terri Schindler Schiavo in recent days that I feel needs to be addressed,” Dr. Hammesfahr began. “To ignore these comments will allow future ‘Terri Schiavo's’ to die needlessly after the wishes of clinicians and family are ignored.”

“The record must be set straight. As we noted in the press, there was no heart attack, or evident reason for this to have happened (and certainly not of Terri's making). Unlike the constant drumbeat from the husband, his attorneys, and his doctors, the brain tissue was not dissolved, with a head of just spinal fluid. In fact, large areas were ‘relatively preserved.’”

“I have had a chance to look at Dr. Nelson's analysis of the brain tissue, and essentially, as a clinician, these are my thoughts. (Neuropathologist Dr. Stephen Nelson performed the autopsy on Mrs. Schiavo's central nervous system.) The autopsy results confirmed my opinion . . . that the frontal areas of the brains, the areas that deal with awareness and cognition were relatively intact.”

“To use Dr. Nelson's words, ‘relatively preserved.’ In fact, the relay areas from the frontal and front temporal regions of the brain, to the spinal cord and the brain stem, by way of the basal ganglia, were preserved, thus the evident responses which she was able to express to her family and to the clinicians seeing her or viewing her videotape. The Spect scan confirmed these areas were functional and not scar tissue, and that was apparently also confirmed on Dr. Nelson's review of the slides.”

Terri Schiavo “was a woman trapped in her body, similar to a child with cerebral palsy, and that was born out by the autopsy, showing greater injury in the motor and visual centers of the brain,” Hammesfahr continued. “Obviously, the pathologists comments that she could not see were not borne out by reality, and thus his assessment must represent sampling error. The videotapes clearly showed her seeing, and even Dr. Cranfoed, for the husband, commented to her that, when she could see the balloon, she could follow it with her eyes as per his request.”

“That she could not swallow was obviously not borne out by the reality that she was swallowing her saliva, about 1.5 liters per day of liquid, and the clinical swallowing tests done by Dr. Young and Dr. Carpenter. Thus, there appears to be some limitations to the clinical accuracy of an autopsy in evaluating function.”

“With respect to the issue of trauma, that certainly does not appear to be answered adequately,” Hammesfahr added. “Some of the types of trauma that are suspected were not adequately evaluated in this assessment. Interestingly, both myself and at least one neurologist for the husband testified to the presence of neck injuries. The issue of a forensic evaluation for trauma, is highly specialized. Hence the wish of the family to have observers which was refused by the examiner.”

“Ultimately, based on the clinical evidence and the autopsy results, an aware woman was killed.”
fpb: (Default)
1. Love Pairings. Pick all that you think apply:
The obvious ones. Hermione/Ron, Harry/Ginny. JKR is not in the habit of being subtle about these things.

2. Who will die. Pick all that you think apply:
Pettigrew, saving Harry somehow.

3. Should Dumbledore trust Snape?
Dumbledore has this nasty habit of being right. The only times when he makes mistakes is when he fails to heed his own better self (case in point, failing to tell Harry about the prophecy in spite of his own urgent misgivings). We are not told he has any misgivings about Snape, he seems quite clear about him, ergo he is in the right. This does not mean that Snape is trustworthy, but if he ever betrays the Order, it may be that Dumbledore has already foreseen his betrayal and is going to make use of it. Remember, the hippogriff episode in PoA suggests that Dumbledore can see into the future to some extent.

4. Will Percy redeem himself?
No. He is there to show that there is no such thing as a perfect family, and that a Weasley is as corruptible as the next guy. In fact, the downfall or at least humiliation of Fudge is going to embitter him and harden his animus. Molly is just going to have to live with her broken heart, like many mothers of unworthy children.

5. Will Draco redeem himself?
Don't be ridiculous. This is JKR, not Cassandra Clare and all her fanon followers.

6. How will Sirius re-appear: Ghost? Mirror? Painting? Other?
I wonder. I am reminded of Marvel's character Adam Warlock, who came back from the dead to destroy his murderer. If any of you are comics fans, you might like a look at that brilliant story.

7. Who will be Head Boy? Harry, Ron, Neville, Draco?
Someone we never heard of.

8. Who will be the next Minister? Arthur Weasley, Umbridge, Dumbledore, Other?
Wouldn't put it past them to vote in Umbridge.

9. Could Neville have been the chosen one or was Harry pre-destined?
Predestination becomes manifest in events; or, in other words, the future and the present seize the past and re-shape it. The fact that Harry was predestined is shown by the fact that he became the hero.

10. Is Harry an animagus?
Why should he be?

11. Will we see Umbridge again?
Yes. Her defeat will have made her even angrier and more poisonous. I would not rule out her becoming Minister, as I said, or joining forces with Voldemort out of anger.

12. Is Umbridge a Death Eater?
No. But she may become one.

13. Who (if anyone) will betray Harry? Ron, Hermione, Neville, Luna, Ginny, None of the above?
None of the inner circle. Remember Marietta Edgecombe. JKR has a habit of sneaking villains and traitors up on you from wherever it is that you were not looking. How many of us thought that the traitor in that instance was Zachariah? If I felt nasty, however, I might suggest Cho Chang. Humiliating break-ups can do strange things to people.

14. Who (if anyone) will betray the Order? Dumbledore, McGonagall, Lupin, Snape, Tonks, Kingsley, Real Moody?
If anyone does, Snape is the likeliest. Moody is also a possibility.

15. Is Petunia a squib?
She certainly is something more than she seems, according to JKR.

16. Will there be a third prophecy?
Yes. Prophecies go in threes.

17. Will Voldemort die?
The obvious point to kill him off is in the last book, but it might be a superb surprise to kill him off in book six and have some completely different situation assert itself in book seven.

18. Will Pettigrew betray Voldemort?
Of course. He was born to betray people. And let's face it, Voldemort does not exactly treat him in such a way as to encourage loyalty, does he? The question is rather, will he manage to fool him? Considering that Voldemort regards him as a traitor by nature, he really ought to be preternaturally stupid not to keep a weather eye on him.

Profile

fpb: (Default)
fpb

February 2019

S M T W T F S
     12
345 6789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2025 05:34 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios