Karen Weber: Another Terri Schiavo or Not?

by Carrie K. Hutchens


Terri Schiavo's world became one of isolation at the hands of her husband. He made the decisions of who could visit her, if any at all could at any given time. He made the decisions of what therapy she might receive, though he came to reject any therapy at all. He made the decisions about any stimulation that touched her day, including whether the curtains would be open or closed or even a sound of music or voice to touch her moment.

The husband of Terri Schiavo did not see her as a human being, especially after he found Jody and fathered children with her, it would seem. Yes, it would seem that after Jody and the money entered the picture that Terri Schiavo suddenly became a "vegetable", rather than the "wife" that Michael Schiavo was going to faithfully take care of for the rest of her life. (No hint given that he was going to shorten that life from a natural span of time to an ordained and court ordered forced ending of her life when he was seeking the settlement. Of course, that would have limited, or excluded, the initial court awarded judgment, would it not?)

With thoughts of Terri in mind, I do wonder about Karen Weber.

I know that Raymond Weber is supposed to have said that he didn't want his case to turn into a Schiavo one. And that means?

Does that mean that Karen Weber is being afforded every opportunity of recovery no matter how big or small the effort?

Is she receiving time?

Is she receiving therapy?

Is she receiving comfort and encouragement from family and friends?

Is she receiving stimulation to jump start those recovery cells?

Or ... is she laying there often alone, unless or until her husband, the court, or some appointed person decides that she has a right to the comfort of family and friends and the encouragement of hope and effort by medical and therapy staff (as well) to make her better?

It will be the actions that tells us, one and all, whether Karen Weber is being given a fair chance at recovery, or still another Terri Schiavo in the making. Indeed it shall be! Indeed, the world shall be watching both today and tomorrow!


Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.

Terri Schiavo Execution Sanctioned by Faulty Polls?

by Carrie K. Hutchens

The polls were often sited as the Schiavo case progressed. Pundits, George Felos, Michael Schiavo and pals used poll numbers to claim the American people believed it was acceptable to execute Terri Schiavo in a death by dehydration and starvation. Other polls indicated it was acceptable to remove "life support", without making it clear the so-called "life support" was in fact a mere feeding tube.

Fast forwarding to the Election of 2008, it became quite apparent that polls are faulty. Polls weren't representative of the results in many cases. Pundits seemed bewildered. Some said they were going to have to revisit the reliance upon polls when looking for an accurate prediction of outcome.

Finally, the inaccuracy of polls was utterly apparent to not only the pundits, news staff, candidates and the candidates' staff -- it was apparent to any who were watching as the election events unfolded. Finally, the obvious was made so obvious that no one could ignore it. But sadly, it was three years too late for Terri Schiavo and her family.

Prior to Terri Schiavo's agonizing death by court order, many tried to point out the problem with relying upon polls, but it didn't hit home with those it needed to hit home with. People were becoming comfortable with the judicial order for murder, because the polls were alleging the majority believed it was acceptable to remove Terri from "life support." The irony being, that even after Terri's death, many believed she had been "brain dead" and only kept alive by a respirator. Some said they believed the latter is what she was removed from, because that is what poll questions appeared to be referring to.

Absolute fact is: Terri Schiavo was neither "brain dead" nor on a "respirator."

It is good that the Election of 2008 threw the truth about the unreliability of polls into the face of the world. It's just too bad it didn't become so apparent in the Election of 2004. Had it, Terri Schiavo might still be alive today and still proving assumptions to be wrong!

Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.

Coma, PVS or Brain Death?

Brain death and coma are not the same. Often confused, even by health professionals and judges, a “persistent vegetative state,” such as that of Terry Sciavo implies neither cessation of brain function or irreversibility, both basic criteria of brain death. These criteria are codified in the Uniform Definition of Death Act, now recognized in all of the fifty states.

Coma is a neurologic condition in which much of the brain function is impaired and results in degrees of unconsciousness and loss of many basic reflexes and homeostatic activities, such as breathing. This condition may be caused by trauma, hemorrhage, biochemical abnormalities such as hypoglycemia or low blood sugar. Another common cause is intoxication with alcohol, barbiturates, opioids and numerous other substances. In most cases there remains some baseline brain activity detectable with an electroencephalogram (EEG)--most, but not all. So a flat-line EEG is not enough to establish brain death. Further, in all the above cases the condition is reversible, at least potentially.

In Terry Schiavo’s case, EEGs were found to be active in every instance. But, we didn’t need an advanced medical device to make the case that there was brain activity. We all saw the videos of her smiling at her family’s faces, reaching toward balloons, and following people about the room with her eyes. She most certainly suffered significant loss of cerebral function, but she did not lack brain activity and she was not shown to be in an irreversible state, i.e., she was not brain dead (and, she was not comatose). She was pronounced to be in a “persistent vegetative state,” a condition newly coined and nebulously defined. Wikipedia summarizes the conditions thus: “A persistent vegetative state (PVS) is a condition of patients with severe brain damage in whom coma has progressed to a state of wakefulness without detectable awareness.” You don’t have to be a medical ethicist or Harvard neurologist to see how subjective such a definition is.

Brain death is an important legal definition in light of modern technological advances in medicine where we can literally keep an individual’s heart beating indefinitely, long after the brain function has irreversibly ceased. The determination of brain death may include serial EEGs over several days, physical exam findings that demonstrate loss of brainstem function, and, most recently, nucleotide blood flow scans that can reveal the loss of bold flow to the brain. If there is no blood flow for even a short period of time there can be no life and thus no reversibility. I am reminded of a passage in Leviticus “…for the life of all flesh is its blood. (17:14)

Great strides have been made in medical therapeutics using tissues or organs from living or deceased donors. In some cases, such as the heart, organs for transplant can only come from donors determined to be “brain dead,” with the heart still beating, but all signs of brain function and hope of reversibility sadly lost.

There are wonderful and amazing stories of people in comas for years one day awakening and going on to complete or near complete recovery. For this reason, coma should never be a sole reason for discontinuing life support and must never be confused with the situation in which organs may be removed for transplant. It is literally the difference between life and death.