Home

Whose Wife Is It, Anyway?

Submitted by Staff on Fri, 2005-04-01 12:31.


The personal tragedy of Terri Schiavo's demise and its surrounding political farce

When I saw the Terri Schiavo tragedy go national, my first thought was "Why this case?"  Surely, hundreds, if not thousands, of controversies over ending life support have been aired and resolved in the states in the last few years.  Why did Terri's case?

Some background (ref. this excellent Florida law blog):

In February 1990, Terri suffers a cardiac arrest and loss of oxygen to her brain.  For two years, Terri is moved to various care facilities and given aggressive therapy on several occasions to restore brain function; she winds up in a Largo nursing home in March 1994.  In May 1998, husband Michael files a petition to remove the Terri's feeding tube, citing Terri's expressed wishes that she would not want to continue life under these circumstances.

Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, oppose the removal of the feeding tube, citing prospective new therapies.  In February 2000, the district court (Judge Greer) finds "clear and convincing evidence shows Terri would choose not to receive life-prolonging medical care," and that the feeding tube be removed.

The Schindlers begin to promote their cause among various national so-called pro-life groups.

Schindlers appeal to Florida appeals court, heard and denied.  Appeal to Florida Supremes, denied hearing.  April 24, 2001, tube removed for first time.  Schindlers file new motion at district level, denied as untimely.  Schindlers file new action against Michael, random selection of judge (Quesada) at district level, Quesada enjoins removal and tube is reinserted April 26, 2001.

Very hectic at this point, motions going up, down, and sideways: appeals court ultimately orders trial on question of potentially life-saving technology.  Trial held before Greer October 2002, court rules November 2002 "that no new treatment offers sufficient promise of improving Terri's cognitive functioning and that Terri is, in fact, in a persistent vegetative state."  Appeals court hears appeal and will not change verdict.  Florida Supremes will not hear appeal.

August 30, 2003, Schindlers file in federal district court.  Federal court dismisses.  October 15, 2003, Terri's tube removed for second time.  Florida House and Senate—the notoriety obviously due to Florida's "Right to Pain and Misery (RPM)" lobby (and I recall this being national news at this point)—pass bill to enable Governor to issue a "stay" (i.e. not to remove life support) in cases such as this.  Known as "Terri's Law."

Feeding tube reinserted October 21, 2003.  Michael sues Governor in Florida court on grounds Terri's Law is unconstitutional.  May 2004, district court judge (Baird) declares Terri's Law unconstitutional on several grounds.  Appeals court certifies case to Florida supreme court.  Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment based on Pope John Paul II speech.  (!)  September 2004, Florida Supremes declare Terri's Law unconstitutional.

December 2004, Governor Jeb asks US Supreme Court to review Florida supreme court decision.  January 2004, US Supreme Court denies hearing.  February 2005, Schindlers issue "endless" series of motions, Judge Greer grants no more stays, sets March 18, 2005, as date for removal of feeding tube.  Schindlers file in federal district court; federal district court denies citing lack of jurisdiction.

March 18, 2005, US Congressional committee issues subpoenas for Michael, Terri (!), and Terri's caregivers to be held at Terri's hospice.  Committee files motion to intervene and deny removal of tube.  Judge Greer denies congressional committee motion, ruling no grounds exist for intervention.  Tube removed for third time.  Florida Supremes and Florida appeals deny congressional motion as without jurisdiction and merit, respectively.

March 21, 2005, Congress enacts Terri's Law II, authorizing Terri's parents to seek federal court review of whether Terri's federal rights have been protected.

As I sit here today, the federal district court denied the motion, the federal circuit court (appeals) agrees with the federal district court, and as this is being written, the morning of March 24, 2005, the US Supreme Court refuses to hear case.  The tube remains out, and soon the ordeal will be over.(1)

Unfortunately, this isn't the last we'll be hearing from the RPM [Right to Pain and Misery] folks.

But, for normal psychologically healthy people, a good thing to come from this experience is the desirability of having a living will, a document spelling out your intentions for care upon incapacitation.

— the Five Wishes has more information.

It would be nice to have the alternative of quickly and painlessly ending Terri's life according to her wishes—as opposed to letting her go through starvation.  But the RPM folks have effectively prevented any humane Kevorkian option, indeed Dr. Jack sits in a Michigan prison for going outside the system to carry out the request of a dying man.

The malevolent absurdity of the RPM movement has been laid bare by these events.  The US Congress intervenes on one side in a legal battle, abrogating the Constitution, and violating state jurisdiction.  The pretender in chief scurries back from Crawford—he never shortens his vacations, even for tsunamis—to sign their preposterous bill.  What are their motives?  [On a satirical note, hasn't George W. heard of FedEx?  —Ed.]

Obviously, they're grandstanding to the RPM crowd.  None of them has the slightest feeling toward the former person, Terri Schiavo.  Else, they'd respect her wishes… as painstakingly determined by the Florida courts.  The federal courts had already ruled on the state action!

Consider this: When was the last time Congress held a special session to halt the execution of a wrongfully convicted man in Texas?  Further consider, when Bush was governor of that currently murderous state he refused to reprieve the execution of a born-again Christian woman.  So much for any "pro-life" motives.

In Michigan, a Democratic state representative shows bipartisan lunacy on the Schiavo issue by initiating a bill to prevent adulterers—presumably Michael Schiavo had sexual relations with the woman he's been living with while remaining legally married to Terri—from being executors of the wishes of incapacitated persons.

Polls show 75% of the American public believe the Terri Schiavo case should have been left in the hands of the Florida courts (and her feeding tube removed); the RPM people have been perhaps chastised, though not subdued.

So, what makes a person hysterical about life in any condition at any price?(2)


  1. Terri Schiavo died on March 31, 9:05 EST.  Husband, Michael, was at her bedside as she drew her last breath.  We extend our heartfelt condolences to Michael and to all the other people who truly knew, loved, and respected the wishes of this wonderful person.  Terri's condition was judged to have been brought on by chemical imbalances due to bulimia.  Thus, a fitting memento would be to donate time or money to the Eating Disorders Coalition. back to text

  2. A tentative theory: back to text
    One grows up without questioning faith in God, and then a representative of that faith tells you human life in any condition is "the good."  Not only the good, but also this undifferentiated loyalty to the frozen abstraction of life should become the entire measure of your own moral worth.  It's like being a loyal white man in the Old South.  Your subconscious tells you that the public embodiment of "hating niggars" isn't enough, that for you to be a good human being you must think independently and achieve individual virtue.  Like the old southerner, you evade and accept this holy mantra of "life," anyway.  Then when someone points out such blind intellectual obedience is an error, you react in rage as he has identified your evasion of reality and it makes you feel morally unfit as a human being.  Hence the hysteria.

Bookmark/Search this post with:
»