A number of people around St. Blog's, following the lead of the conservative media, have pointed out that Michael Schiavo stands to make a nice lump of cash as soon as Terri is gone. This may be true -- he reportedly stands to make something -- but I personally question whether money is what is truly at stake with Mike Schiavo.
At least two friends of Terri's family alleged to me at the vigil that on the day she went into the coma she had decided to divorce Mike. Her family also maintains, if I understand correctly, that there had been a history of domestic violence between her and Mike. I know that at least one of Mike's former girlfriends alleges something simliar. In addition, the family's attorney has mentioned evidence that suggests Terri may have been the victim of domestic violence at the time she collapsed.
That being said, my job as a canonist is to examine and question evidence for inconsistencies. So doing so has simply become second nature for me. I have a few questions after reflecting upon recent events. These are: 1) if this is just about money, why does Mike appear to have refused the family's offer that he simply take the money in exchange for giving them back custody of Terri? 2) If Terri is really in a permanent vegetative state, why the strong objections to her parents videotaping her? Shouldn't the videotape in fact support his position?
Thus obviously some other motivation is at play here. At one extreme, the possibility is misguided love. In other words, he truly loves Terri and mistakenly believes that this is what is best for her. I don't think this is the case, however, since such behavior would appear to be inconsistent with his getting engaged to and having a child with another woman. Actions speak louder than words.
Other middle possibilities include the following. He wants the money, but taking it and running would make him look like an even bigger jerk, so pulling the feeding tube gets him what he wants while saving him much embarrassment. The only real objection I can think of to this scenario, which I admit is rather weak, is why would he engage in such lengthy and costly litigation if this was the case?
Another possibility is that he now wants to move on with his life and start over again with his present girlfriend. But in today's culture of marital instability, would the majority within society really fault him for throwing in the towel, turning Terri over to her parents, divorcing her and giving her parent what money remains? Again, if the issue is calling it quits, why the endurance on his part when it comes to lengthy and costly litigation? Why not just walk away?
Thus I'm left wondering whether there isn't another reason behind his actions. Given his reported history of domestic violence, is he now trying to beat the rap for something truly incriminating that would come to light if Terri recovered? I don't know the answer to this. I can only speculate, however, something simply isn't lining up here in my opinion.
Pete, I agree. Something is wrong with this picture. I spoke with a priest friend about this a few days ago and his response was "the husband doesn't want her to talk about what happened to her." Why did he keep the medical records sealed for 10 years if he was so concerned about her? Why won't he allow her to receive rehabilitative therapy? Something smells.
The Schindlers' attorney is seeking a criminal investigation.
On the darkest side, he may have something to hide. Being a little more charitable, her continuing life may be an affront to him that he may not fully comprehend himself - its a continuing testament that this woman, whom he supposedly loved unto death, he is now abandoning in her most needed hour - and her continual living keeps screaming that at him, much like John the Baptist and Herod.