4/99 issue of "Elder Update", the newsletter for the FL Dept. of Elder Affairs. This is a portion of a column by Gema Hernandez, the DOEA secretary, on the 1999 legislative session:
One HAS to wonder what (if?) those legislators were thinking! Does anyone know the history? We know that Felos petitioned to have Terris feeding removed in 5/98, ie PRIOR to this bill being filed.pg 20 “Bills on the fast track at press time”
In the area of advance directives, HB 2131 and its companion bill CS/SB2228, would eliminate the current requirement that persons who have made advance directives or designated a health care surrogate be terminally ill before life-prolonging procedures could be removed. Civil liability protection would be extended to health care facilities and staff who honor do-not-resuscitate orders (DNROs).
What changes have occurred in the FL house and senate since '99 to the current legislature that PASSED Terri's law (essentially trying to undue their 4/99 bill)? THIS is Sen. Kings legacy??
"WHY DOES THIS COURT OBJECT to the legislature changing laws in 2003 affecting an active case (to SAVE Terri)...
BUT the SAME COURTS WELCOMED the legislature changing laws in 1999 affecting this SAME ACTIVE case (to DESTROY Terri)?
Why, indeed?
ArgumentTerri does not have a terminal ilneess, is not brain dead, and is not comatose. Other than some future intervening illness or accident, it is only lack of food and water that would cause her death. She is in a persistent vegetative state ("PVS"), which in itself will not cause her death. [NOTE: that Terri is PVS is disputed by physicians]
Florida law defines PVS separately from terminal illness . . . However, the state court inexplicably concluded that Terri is “terminal,” [RIGHT! and wrongly placed her in hospice care!] Schindler v. Schiavo (In re: Guardianship of Schiavo) 792 So. 2d 551, 560 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (Schiavo 11) The fact that she is unable to give herself nourishment is not a symptom of a dying body; it is the result of severe injury and disability.