Posted on 03/27/2025 5:38:11 PM PDT by Morgana
Twenty years ago today, Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube was withdrawn with court approval, commencing a cruel deprivation of sustenance that resulted in her death by dehydration 13 days later.
For those who may not remember, the case became the most hotly contested bioethics issue since Roe v. Wade as Terri’s husband Michael fought in courts and in the media with her parents and siblings over his desire to remove all Terri’s food and fluids. In the end, he won — and Terri died.
Now, two bioethicists on the influential Hastings Center blog decry the case as wrongly brought. They get some facts wrong and omit crucial information — like that Michael was living with another woman with whom he fathered two children during the litigation — but let’s not relitigate the case here. (Read this post for a more complete discussion)
The authors, Arthur Caplan and Dominic Sisti, and I do agree that the Schiavo case was a cultural “canary in the coal mine,” but for diametrically opposing reasons. They complain that it has empowered the wrong cultural forces into political prominence:
In retrospect, Schiavo launched a new, emboldened prolife movement, one that would eventually lead to conservative rule in state houses across the U.S. and the election, twice, of Donald Trump. The seeding of a new ultraconservative judiciary would support a strategic assault on medical privacy that would eventually lead to the end of legal abortion protection in Dobbs.
The Schiavo case did not “embolden” the pro-life movement. It was thriving when the case hit the headlines. Moreover, some of the most vociferous opponents of dehydrating Terri to death were disability rights activists — who, generally speaking, are politically liberal and not pro-life on abortion.
Caplan and Sisti complain that the case led to intrusive health-care policies.
We hear the echoes of Schiavo’s death in today’s debates over reproductive rights, end-of-life care, transgender care, vaccinations, and medical privacy more generally. The end of Roe v. Wade, the continued attacks on gender-affirming care, and the looming threats to contraceptive access all stem from the foundational fight over Terri’s bodily autonomy. Today’s autocratic playbook remains unchanged from those days: intrude upon and weaponize deeply personal medical decisions, rally the support of a mob, enact draconian regulations, ignore what medicine and science have to say.
Few knew it then, but the case of Terri Schiavo was a canary in the coal mine, warning us of bad things to come. The fight to honor Terri’s values in death was won, but the broader battle over government intrusion versus health care privacy rages on.
Good grief, no:
The Schiavo case did not cause the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Rather, the key precedent was an assisted-suicide case called Glucksberg v. Washington.
“Gender-affirming care” for children is not supported by “what medicine and science have to say.”
Vaccine mandates impede the making of “personal medical decisions.” Indeed, Covid vaccine mandates (supported by Caplan) were “autocratic” and — as the thousands of fired members of the military, medical personnel, and others will attest — forced people to take jabs or lose their jobs. How’s that for “weaponized deeply personal medical decisions”?
And if closing schools for so long weren’t “draconian regulations,” I don’t know what were.
The Schiavo case was a tragedy, but not for the reasons Caplan and Sisti claim. Before Schiavo’s death, most people were shocked that feeding tubes could be removed from disabled people who can metabolize food and water. After the case, polling majorities supported doing so. With that, people with severe brain injuries became a disposable caste.
The case also elevated the culture of death into a conflagration. It boosted the passage of assisted suicide laws. Euthanasia groups and bioethicists now teach people who can eat and drink how to commit suicide by self-starvation and dehydration (VSED). It has gotten to the point that the usual euthanasia suspects even campaign for legalizing advance directives that force care givers to withhold orally received food and water from dementia patients even if the patient eats and drinks willingly.
Yes, Schiavo was a horrible tipping point. But because the family lost, not because they were supported by millions of people in “Terri’s fight.”
I just interviewed Terri’s brother, Bobby Schindler, on my Humanize podcast. He discusses his memories about the case and the good works engaged by the Terri Schiavo Life and Hope Network defending the medically vulnerable. To listen, hit this link.
LifeNews.com Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture and a bioethics attorney who blogs at Human Exeptionalism.
Those threads were awful. And a court clerk for the death judge signed on FR to tell us how stupid we were, I remember him well, daylate-dollarshort.
2003.
That thread was before Terri was murdered, not euthanized.
‘ what I found hard to swallow is that starvation was the method of execution.’
What other choice is available?
That’s how my mother died. Alzheimer’s, she had a do not resuscitate order for 15 years at least and an order to not be kept alive artificially.
The only other option would have been a drug cocktail to end her life.
Instead, we had to watch her fade away slowly on drugs to keep her as comfortable as possible.
There’s really no good way to go, but damn, it was torture for all involved.
This was the most abhorrent disturbing cases I can remember.
Her “husband” just wanted her dead, and horrifically would NOT allow her parents to take her, and care for her!
After this case, I truly saw the most base human beings imaginable!
Makes me wanna vomit !!!!!
Yes. I incorrectly wrote 2005 not 2003.
Thanks.
Of course you’re for euthanasia and death.
Why do you always support evil?
There were posters here whose pro-death vitriol was shocking. They thought her murder was the best thing in the world, and held her husband up to be a hero. Unbelievable.
‘ Of course you’re for euthanasia and death.
Why do you always support evil?’
I’m not pro death. Death isn’t evil. It happens to all of us. I wish my mother was still with us.
Don’t be stupid.
Battle for the ages here back then
Whew!
How old was your mom? Were her organs all still intact?
You do realize that they starved and dehydrated Terri without any painkillers of any kind, right?
You got to watch your mom “fade away slowly on drugs to keep her as comfortable as possible.”
Terri was not allowed to get one thing that would relieve pain. She wasn’t even allowed to have lip balm put on her cracked lips by her mom.
What Terri went through was absolute torture. Very, very different than your mom. Terri moaned and cried (no tears…not enough moisture in her body).
I guarantee you, the torture you think you felt with your mom, wasn’t even a fraction of what Terri and her parents and siblings went through.
Making direct comparisons is useless. Every case is different.
I’m not about to give all of my mother’s medical history to you, or anyone else as it’s none of your business.
What I shared is enough.
These situations are depressingly horrible, but inevitable.
I hope you have someone you trust and that loves you enough to make the decisions you approved of when your time comes.
That’s so hard to watch when hospice dehydrates your parent or loved one. Maybe it’s better that it speeds everything up but it’s not right. If that person is in pain, it’s probably better.
What the poster is trying to tell you is that your Mom was loved and made as comfortable as possible. Terri was not. The feeding tube was pulled out without any pain killers. As she starved and dehydrated, Michael Schiavo and his lawyer sat eating pizza and watching Terri. A nurse did try to put salve on her lips and wet her tongue but was chased out of the room.
I believe I do, and if that changes, I will be writing more things out.
I don’t need to know your mom’s details. The big difference here is that your mom was given drugs to keep her comfortable as you let her go. That’s honorable.
Death without painkillers isn’t painless. Anyone who tries to tell you that it is doesn’t know anything.
It would’ve been more humane to kill Terri in any number of ways than what they did. It was more barbaric than putting her in a cage and lighting it on fire.
Don’t support evil.
‘ That’s so hard to watch when hospice dehydrates your parent or loved one. ‘
It is. It’s even worse when others with little to no information accuse you of being evil, for something out of their control.
‘Maybe it’s better that it speeds everything up but it’s not right. If that person is in pain, it’s probably better.’
Right? What would be right? The person is no longer the person you loved. There is no possibility of them ever coming back. Unconscious, can’t eat or drink, can’t communicate. Death is inevitable.
Keeping them alive doesn’t benefit anyone except the selfish person who can’t let go or face the reality of the situation and the hospice provider.
I’m speaking of my experiences, not Schiavo.
‘ Don’t support evil.’
You too.
And don’t accuse others of evil with little to no information because not once did you see me do that and not once did I comment on the Schiavo case directly.
‘ I believe I do, and if that changes, I will be writing more things out.’
Good for you. Hopefully your wishes will be carried out and no one judges you as evil for them.
A good friend's father was hospitalized a few years ago with a heart attack and hooked up to machines. The attending doctor didn't think the old man would make it.
My friend, respecting Dad's wishes to not be on machines, signed a paper approving the de-machining and putting the Dad on "comfort care" which (IN GENERAL) is basically no curative care.
That was ok - that was the Dad's wishes.
The old man pulled through, but the hospital refused to put Dad back on fluids or nutrition because - you guessed it - "comfort care" IN THAT HOSPITAL and for THAT DOCTOR is effectively Terri Schaivo-style starvation and dehydration.
They said, food and water was a medical treatment and thus "curative" and AGAINST the rules of "comfort care."
My friend was stunned. And the attending and her team wouldn't budge - ”you signed the document giving consent.”
For the next few days, my friend and siblings heard from scores of nurses etc that withholding fluids was effectively "the right thing to do"....very Terri Schaivo-like. They also threw in “Dad live a good long life” and “he will never come back the way he was.”
It took a virtual miracle whereby a different doctor intervened, said the father clearly wasn't terminal, and put the old man back on nutrition and fluids.
While my friend's Dad passed away peacefully in his sleep a few weeks later, it was on the Dad’s terms.
It’s also worth noting that the siblings were split on “comfort care.” There WAS a view that it was ok for Dad to dehydrate to death. Someone even said that dehydration is painless; I hear the total opposite during the Schaivo murder.
Euthanasia is, technically, illegal. And I know many people would be OK if fluids were withheld when it is THEIR time to go. Fair enough.
But euthanasia can be made legal if you're not careful with the Fine Print or vetting the "mercy killing" mindset of the attending.
Terri’s wishes were never written out.
As I said, it would’ve been more pleasant to have been lit on fire inside a cage that you couldn’t escape from, than what Terri endured for several WEEKS, not days. WEEKS.
Btw, I never called you evil.
But people who think Terri died in a pleasant, peaceful way have no idea what they’re talking about. Pure torture, and worse than any other way to go.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.