Saying No to the Culture of Death

Whilst the Schiavo case has been my focus, I have been learning more and more about how the men and women who are appointed to the judiciary or who are elected to the role, have become less ethical and more biased since the 1960s. It could be that the trend about which I speak was present in earlier years, but there has been a very unwelcome spike in the bias of judges.

Once again the Schiavo case is the catalyst as far as bias and discrimination is concerned. The way in which George Greer behave was definitely not the way of a professional and unbiased judge. In this case the bias concerned:
(a) Greer's attitude to helpless women unable to defend themselves against murderous husbands;
(b) Greer's pro-euthanasia beliefs;
(c) Greer's disregard for the civil rights of another human being.
(d) Greer's illegal action of making himself guardian ad litem over Terri.

As time has gone by since the forced death by starvation and dehydration - a death sentence handed down by an untrained probate judge - we are beginning to see the hidden biases during the height of the fight for Terri's life. I refer, of course to the fact that George Greer chose to speak at a pro-euthanasia conference on this case, and how he ridiculed the Schindler family and their attorneys. I am also talking about the fact that he was talking alongside Jay Wolfson, who was also supposed to be unbiased as a man who was asked to do a report for the governor of Florida. My focus, here is not on Wolfson, who has now compromised himself by freely standing alongside Schiavo, but it is on the way in which the judiciary are thumbing their noses at the whole idea of ethics.

The Schindler family have pointed out that it is not ethical for George Greer to appear at a conference that is so one sided in that it is about being pro-euthanasia. I think that what Bobby Schindler had to say on the subject is correct because his appearance, and his speech proves without a doubt that he did not approach his handling of the Schiavo case without bias with regards to the civil rights of the woman that he sentenced to death.

It is people like George Greer who should be removed from the bench. He is in Pinellas county in Florida, but he is not the only judge who has rubber stamped guardianships that have ended the life of the ward. Such a situation is not satisfactory because the role of any judge is to review what is placed before him or her and to act with justice. When a judge, such as George Greer is presented with information that suggests that the guardian is doing the wrong then, then that judge is obligated via fiduciary duty to remove that guardian and to at least appoint a temporary guardian as a replacement or where there has been a request for relief then that request should be granted.

The problem that people who are placed under guardianship, or conservatorship face, is that once they have been placed in that situation it is difficult to remove the guardian. The Schiavo case has highlighted the difficulty that is faced by so many who are placed in the same unfortunate situation. If one independently examines the evidence that was placed before Greer in the first place, and especially in the case that was presented in 2000, there should have been sufficient evidence to come to the conclusion that Terri should have been handed over to her parents, and that Michael Schiavo should have been removed as guardian. There was evidence of abuse in the intervening years that was ignored by Greer. He ignored the affidavits of people who had worked with Terri that indicated that she was capable of some form of communication. Greer made an error regarding the facts about Karen Ann Quinlan and as a result he dismissed the evidence of a reliable witness. Instead he accepted the coached evidence of Brian and Joan Schiavo who conveniently came forward at a time when there was an indication that Michael Schiavo had screwed up regarding evidence that he had given. The decisions made by Greer in the Schiavo case were unconsionable.

There is another reason that Greer has behaved in an unethical way for his attendance at a conference that includes several of the chief witnesses, that is Dr. Quack Cranford, is a further indication that he had a pro-euthanasia bias. The decision making in this case was so very bad because a lot of facts were ignored. The quack neurosurgeon, Cranford had examined Terri for 45 minutes. That was not enough time to come to any conclusion regarding her condition. On the other hand, another two doctors were ignored by Greer, yet they had spent ten hours with Terri. He also ignored the last of the reports that had in effect negated the evidence of Jay Wolfson.

This form of bias, whether it is George Greer or some other judge, means that the person who is seeking relief from what is a death sentence, is not getting justice. There are judges who do behave ethically, and yes they even recuse themselves when they find themselves getting caught up in a controversy. This happened in the case of Mae MacGourick, and the judge concerned worked for the benefit of Mae, even though Mae died from natural causes, but at least she was not starved and dehydrated to death which is what her granddaughter had sought to do to her. The other case that deserves a mention is that of Scott Thomas. The judge has been acting in the best interests of Scott Thomas and he is to be congratulated for his lack of bias towards the facts that have been placed before him. Scott continues to improve because he was allowed to receive the kind of treatment that was denied to Terri Schiavo. It makes a real difference when the judge is in fact one who acts without bias.

There are many reasons to remove George Greer from the bench. His actions regarding the conduct of guardianships need an urgent review. His pro-euthanasia bias is yet another reason why he should not be acting as a probate judge. He has behaved in an unethical manner and he deserves to be censured and removed from the bench.