Michael Schiavo Weds 10 Months after Terri's Death
 

Michael Schiavo married his long time concubine a mere ten months after his legitimate wife's death. The Tallahassee Democrat reports:

A man whose brain-damaged wife was at the center of a contentious end-of-life battle that played out on a worldwide media stage has remarried, family members said.

Michael Schiavo and Jodi Centonze were married Saturday in a private church ceremony, said John Centonze, the brother of the bride.

Schiavo's former wife, Terri Schiavo, died March 31, 13 days after her feeding tube was removed. Terri Schiavo suffered irreversible brain damage after collapsing at age 26 in 1990.

Her parents and siblings fought to keep her alive for years, arguing that she had some level of consciousness. Gov. Jeb Bush, the U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, the White House, and even the Vatican became involved in the case. [...

Because of the attention attracted by the Schiavo saga, family members kept the location of the ceremony secret and reporters were not allowed inside the church in Safety Harbor, about 15 miles northwest of Tampa.

"It was very emotional," John Centonze said after the noon ceremony. "It's been a long time coming. A lot of things happened in between."

The bride and groom did not make any public comment. They had applied Friday for a marriage license.

The couple met in a dentist's office and began a relationship after Terri Schiavo was already in a nursing home. Michael Schiavo has called Centonze his fiancee for more than five years, relatives said. They have two young children.

Mikey's new wife better be sure that her life insurance is in a trust fund for someone other than her husband.

More on Schiavo's nuptials here.

Lets Leave Michael Alone
 

This is not a news piece. This takes a news piece and turns it into a nasty and vicious editorial by a person without the ability to walk in another man's shoes. It belongs on a kook, extreme fundamentalist site. The only important point covered was the reminder that Terry was, as 13 judges and all reasonable people knew, brain dead.

Kooks? What Kook?
 

Pardon me, Russ, but are we talking about the same news item? Simply reporting the fact that someone got married is small news. The fact that, in this case, the person getting married was at the center of a controversy regarding his now-deceased wife is big news.

Much of the media coverage surrounding the original story revolved around speculation regarding Mr. Shaivo's motives, including the fact that he had become romantically involved with another woman. He has now married that women. Reporting on that fact is not making a value judgement. Readers can make that decision for themselves.

Are you saying that once a court makes a ruling, a subject is now history and no longer worthy of press coverage? Or should the media blackout rule apply only if YOU happen to agree with the court's decision?

Please help us understand why this news item, which was reported in the mainstream media, is not fit for inclusion on a free-thinker's site such as Newsback? Surely you have reasons for making these kinds of comments beyond your own personal viewpoints? Readers might be interested in knowing why you feel the way you do.

Words and phrases like "concubine", "a mere ten months", "better be sure that her life insurance is in a trust fund" changes this piece from a straight news item into an opinion piece, and it should be presented as such. Mr. Skinner is entitled to his opinion.

Points well taken, Mr. Wilcox. Thanks for your elucidation.