Schiavo clash is rooted in cash

I wonder if this would have never happened if the Schindlers got a portion of the monetary settlement. This is from an article in the St. Petersburg Times. The link follows the clip. The entire article is an interesting history of the factors that gave rise to the conflict


Once, the Schindlers and Schiavo were close. So close, in fact, that they lived together after Schiavo collapsed in 1990 from a potassium imbalance that stopped her heart, depriving her brain of oxygen.

Together, the Schindlers and Schiavo shared in financial difficulties and in the unending work of caring for her.

In some ways, Schiavo was treated as a son. He once brought a girlfriend home to meet the Schindlers, seeking their approval, and said they had encouraged him to date.

"I think I said he deserved to start a new life," Bob Schindler said in testimony in 1993.

He said he hoped his son-in-law eventually would divorce his wife and start a new life.

At the medical malpractice trial against doctors who treated Schiavo in 1992, Mary Schindler spoke with admiration about Schiavo's attentiveness to her disabled daughter.

"He's there every day," she said. "He is loving, caring. I don't know of any young boy that would be as attentive. ... He's just been unbelievable. And I know without him there is no way I could have survived all this."

In a jury verdict in that suit, Schiavo received more than $700,000, which was set aside for her continued care. Her husband received $300,000 for loss of consortium.

The Schindlers told lawyers they thought their son-in-law would share his $300,000 with them. Through the years, they said, they helped him financially. The Schindlers said they were owed more than $10,000.

Bob Schindler later testified that he vividly recalled Schiavo promising to give half of anything he won in court.

"I said to him we have to get something because of my tax situation," Schindler testified.

Mary Schindler also testified: "Michael would always talk to me about that. We were all in this together. We all had financial problems. Michael, Bob - we all did. It was a very stressful time. It was a very financially difficult time. He used to say, "Don't worry, mom. If I ever get any money from the lawsuit, I'll help you and dad."'

Schiavo denied making such promises.

The Valentine's Day argument erupted three months after the jury verdict. The Schindlers and Schiavo disagree on much of what was said.

Schiavo told lawyers that Bob Schindler entered the room and immediately asked about his share of the money.

Schiavo said he lied and told Schindler no one was getting any money because he had decided to funnel all of it into his wife's trust fund, where he couldn't get it.

According to Schiavo, Bob Schindler responded by pointing his finger at his daughter and saying, "How much money is she going to give me?"

In testimony, Schindler's account is different. He told the court that a few weeks before Valentine's Day, he had asked Schiavo if he remembered their "agreement" to share his part of the jury award. Schindler said Schiavo told him he'd get back to him on the matter, but never did.

Until Valentine's Day.

Schindler testified that he asked Schiavo: "Have you reconciled how we're going to settle this thing?"

When Schiavo told him that he planned to give all the money to the trust fund, Schindler said he responded: "Michael, you made an agreement with my wife and myself that you were going to share that money with us."

Schindler testified he also felt dissatisfied because he and his wife thought Schiavo was reneging on paying for continued therapy for their daughter.

The Schindlers said they thought Schiavo would buy a house where the Schindlers could stay with their daughter to care for her. They said he refused.

Within months, the Schindlers filed a challenge to replace Schiavo as their daughter's guardian, engaging a decade-long legal battle.




http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/23/Tampabay/Schiavo_clash_is_root.shtml

In 1998, Schiavo moved to have his wife's feeding tube pulled, saying she could not recover. Her parents disagreed, saying she might improve with therapy.

Pinellas-Pasco Judge George Greer concluded in a 2000 ruling ordering Mrs. Schiavo's feeding tube removed that the argument was about money.

"It is clear to this court that (the argument) was predicated upon money and the fact that Mr. Schiavo was unwilling to equally divide his ... award with Mr. and Mrs. Schindler," Greer wrote. "Regretably, money overshadows this entire case and creates potential of conflict of interest for both sides."

there seems to be a vendetta by the parents. Terri's award is hers for her care, and her husband's award is his for his loss of consortium -- her parents, evidently, got 10g's for their loss of companionship, or they never made the claim, and her husband gave them 10g's. Terri's husband has no legal reason to share the 300,000g's -- they got theirs and he got his. Unless there is an insurance policy floating that will cover more than her burial, I can't see where he has a conflict, or where the parents do. Neither will gain one way or the other.

of the court.

There is no money to be won any longer.

I'm personally very suspecious of the parents. I've always been since beginning into this case. Just a feeling.

The parents made a statement that they thought Michael would be splitting the "take". They said they thought he promised to buy them a house where they could live and take care of Terri.

This is a MONEY FIGHT between the Schindlers and Michael.

They are pissed off also because there is a question of fraud involved here. Apparently, because Terri wasn't terminal, she shouldn't have been in hospice paid for by Medicaid. The Schindlers felt Michael should have paid for "therapy" but Terri was put in hospice. They thought they'd get money to put her in "therapy" but in hospice she doesn't get any therapy and they don't get any money either for "her care". GET IT?

Are there witnesses?

And a GRUDGE match. Parents felt Michael didn't do the right thing--give them enough money, put Terri in therapy, etc. etc.

make now?

Or the state, for "therapy", if they can get consensus she can "recover".

Besides, for all we know, they got some payola from the RW to use her this way.

court on Terri's case.

HIS money.

Or, IF HE WON'T PAY FOR HER "THERAPY", then they can insist that THEY be the custodians.

therapy - this has already been addressed in court.

whackos who are no doubt rewarding them richly for their efforts.

I'm sure the Schindler's have gotten TONS of money from wackos visiting their "foundation".

Beyond that, they could sell Terri's story into movies, books, etc.

If they get "custody" of her, you can bet that within 2 yrs they'll be profiting....and saying "We're only doing this to raise money for Terri's care"....but will definitely "upgrade" their house, cars, etc.

This has been planed for a long time.

By heavily editing a video tape, so I guess they can make Michael say whatever they want as well :eyes:

that she said it!

No wonder I felt weird feelings with the parents. They don't care about her at all. And people giving poor Mr. Schavio all this nonsense stuff. :(

what a legal conflict of interest is -- and while I agree, that this started over money, and the judge gets the vendetta part, to have a legal conflict in a right to die case, regarding money, means someone gains financially from the death -- and from what we think we know, that doesn't appear to be the case.

I didn't read the link before, thinking it all had been reprinted, so I didn't understand that the 10g's paid to the parents were to cover living expenses when BOTH were living with them. I wonder why the Schindlers didn't sue for loss of companionship in the medical malpractice case -- most states give them that right.

As for the hospice Medicaid thing -- I haven't read about that, but I have read she is on Medicare, and that there is 50g's left of the settlement and that is what is keeping her (which if true, could cause a legal conflict of interest since the husband would get it,but since theres was a court appointed guardian ad litem , that issue is solved), and I've read the money has run out, and she's on Medicaid, and she's on Fla indigent care -- whatever that is -- who the hell knows the truth? She wasn't in hospice for 15 years -- in the beginning I thought both were living with the Schindlers. I heard the husband some time ago on Larry King detail all the various treatments and docs they had gone to. I think hospice is a fairly recent development.

The right of one spouse to the company, affection, and assistance of and to sexual relations with the other.

The money was awarded to Michael, not Michael and the parents,for loss of consortium.

...bank could handle all of the disbursements to the hospital and the medical personnel taking care of Schiavo's still-living corpse.

Surely the parents agreed with the bank handling the funds for Terri's benefit...or did they? Did they want their half to spend as they wished?

They insist that Michael did not provide her with adequate therapy and spend the money on it. Now the money has been spent, a large part of it on attorneys.