Terri Schiavo
The first issue to be debated is the case of Terri Shiavo. The conflict had started when her husband, Michael Schiavo, wanted to get Terri's feeding tube removed because he believed that Terri would not want to live in a vegetated state for the remainder of her life. Her family lost many battles with the court to reinsert Terri’s feeding tube and she died on March 31st, 2005, of dehydration and/or starvation.
This dispute has been going on for a little over seven years and the feeding tube was removed before, but placed back in after several appeals were made by Terri's family. The first time this case happened goes as follows:
April 24, 2001… Terri's feeding tube is removed for the first time
April 26, 2001… Terri's parents file motion asserting they have new evidence regarding Terri's wishes
April 26, 2001… Trial court denies Terri's parents' motion as untimely
April 26, 2001… Terri's parents file new legal action against Michael Schiavo and request that the removal of Terri's feeding tube be enjoined; the case is randomly assigned to Judge Quesada
April 26, 2001… Judge Quesada grants the temporary injunction, orders Terri's feeding tube restored
(qtd. in Abstract Appeal)
She was originally hospitalized in February of 1990 for a potassium deficiency that triggered the heart failure. She was reported to have had bulimia which had caused this heart attack to take place initially. Never has she been deemed “brain dead”, though her comprehension of the world around her has been disputed by court officials and doctors. Family video tapes from 2002 have shown that she has responded to emotional stimuli, such as when she smiled because her mother stepped into the room.
Brother Paul O’Donnell, an adviser to the Schindlers, said the parents and their two other children “were denied access at the moment of her death" and were only allowed into her hospice room after she died. Another Schindler adviser, the Rev. Frank Pavone, said Schiavo’s blood relatives were sent from her room just 10 or so minutes before she died because her condition was to be assessed and Michael Schiavo was going to visit. (qtd. in MSNBC) It is a dispute whether Mr. Schiavo denied the blood relatives of Terri to visit her during her remaining hours, or if her deteriorating condition really was being assessed by doctors.
Michael Schiavo can be seen as a loving husband who wants the best for his wife, or a cruel and unkind monster for letting her suffer such a death. He was reported to have been with her for the duration of her malnourishment (March 18th- March 31st). Many wonder if that was because he wanted to show he would be there with her to the end or to monitor family and doctors to ensure that her death would be timely. Michael is known to have started a family of his own, so it is questionable that he wanted to “rid” himself of Terri so could could continue his new life or if he really believed that Terri would have wanted to have died. There are no legal documents supporting his claim that she would have prefered to have not lived through this state.
For those who aren't familiar with this case that has been brought to national attention, this website below is a perfect example of both views on this situation:
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html
The overall debate remains:
a) Was the removing of Terri's feeding tube "an unconstitutional deprivation of Terri Schiavo's constitutional right to life." (qtd. in CNN)
OR
b) Should the removal of Terri’s feeding tube be justified as a “moral act” (using the feeding tube as a means of life supprt) to save her years of vegetation?
Certain questions of morality haved sparked many debates about this:
- Is it right for a court to decide who deserves to live or die?
- Why should an innocent person be sent to death when murders wait on death row for many years before facing their sentence?
- Should the custodial rights have been given to Terri’s parents once Mr. Schiavo started a new family?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/31/schiavo/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7293186/
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html