The Terri Schiavo Case
Bill sets rules for all like Schiavo
The proposed law says the terminally ill must get food and water unless a living will says otherwise.
By STEVE BOUSQUET, Times Staff Writer
Published March 10, 2005
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/10/State/Bill_sets_rules_for_a.shtml
TALLAHASSEE - The Legislature's first attempt to keep Terri Schiavo's feeding tube connected was a law tailored to her case, but the Florida Supreme Court struck it down unanimously.
Now, lawmakers are pushing a broader proposal that could affect thousands of Floridians lying incapacitated in hospitals, hospices and nursing homes.
The new bill would require that food and water be given to terminally ill people unless they specified in a living will that they did not want to be kept alive that way. A verbal declaration to relatives or loved ones would not necessarily be recognized.
And the bill says the Legislature, not a judge, has the final say in an end-of-life case. It also would apply retroactively, to cover the Schiavo case.
"I certainly hope that whatever error I make is on the side of allowing someone to live rather than to die," said Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, who sponsored the bill. "I have an intimate respect for human life, for the special gift that it is, and I hope that this is a defining moment for our culture."
Critics, including doctors and lawyers who deal with terminally ill patients, called the bill "antifamily" and say it would allow the state to step in and override the wishes of relatives and loved ones.
"This is one of the most antifamily bills that I've ever seen come across this Legislature," said Larry Spalding of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. "The key unit of society is the family, and you're taking away the rights of the family."
After two hours of emotional debate and much critical testimony, a House committee approved the bill Wednesday 7-4. It was a party-line vote with Republicans voting in favor of the bill (HB 701) and Democrats voting against.
Republican Reps. Gus Bilirakis of Palm Harbor and Ed Homan of Tampa voted yes. Democrat Bob Henriquez of Tampa voted no.
"We're passing a bill that is based on one terrible, tragic situation," said Henriquez, one of the few Democrats who voted for the initial Schiavo bill.
Baxley told reporters that while his bill was motivated by the Schiavo case, it is designed for all people in end-of-life situations. He said his goal was to prevent any guardian from deciding for someone without that person's permission.
But despite the determination of Baxley and others, the legislation may not take effect in time to impact Schiavo.
A judge has ordered the severely brain-damaged woman's feeding tube removed by March 18, in accordance with what her husband, Michael, has said was her wish not to be kept alive by artificial means. Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, insist their daughter is not in a permanent vegetative state.
Legislative leaders, stung by criticism of last year's hastily passed law, are moving a lot slower.
"I just don't think we're doing a service to Terri by ginning up a bill and getting it out quickly in helter-skelter fashion. That doesn't work," House Speaker Allan Bense, R-Panama City, said Wednesday.
Senate President Tom Lee, R-Brandon, said his goal was to be "fair to all the people who have feelings about end-of-life issues."
Dr. Howard Tuch of Hospice of Southwest Florida in Sarasota, a member of a state commission on end-of-life care, warned that the bill would force thousands of patients in nursing homes and assisted living centers to have feeding tubes surgically attached.
Those patients may not have wanted to be kept alive artificially, Tuch said, but they did not write it down in advance. He cited the case of his mother, who's dying of Alzheimer's disease.
Tuch has authority to make end-of-life decisions on her behalf.
"Are you going to force her to have a feeding tube?" Tuch asked legislators. "Who is going to provide consent for that medical procedure? I'm not."
Lawyer Twyla Sketchley predicted a "gold mine" for lawyers who would tell clients to rewrite their living wills. She called it "extremely disheartening" that Baxley crafted his bill without seeking input from medical experts.
In his closing statement to the committee, Baxley's voice trembled as he spoke of how it's a crime to starve a dog to death.
"We treat an animal in our society with at least the respect that you get food and water," Baxley said. "Let it be that we let somebody live."
Published Thursday, March 10, 2005
Forced Feeding Bill OK'd In Panel
Proposed law would be retroactive to apply in the case of Terri Schiavo.
By Joe Follick
Tallahassee Bureau
TALLAHASSEE -- With eight days remaining until Terri Schiavo's feeding tube can be legally removed, Florida lawmakers approved a bill Wednesday that would require "nutrition and hydration" for all incapacitated individuals unless they've previously, explicitly refused.
The next week seems certain to be a reprise of a heated special session in 2003 when lawmakers hastily passed "Terri's Law" to reinsert her feeding tube after courts ruled her husband said she expressed a wish to die if she reached a vegetative state.
This time, Republican legislators are avoiding personalizing their bills to specifically mention the Schiavo case. In fact, bill sponsors almost denied it was intended for her at all, mindful of the 2004 Florida Supreme Court decision that found "Terri's Law" illegal, in part because of its focus on one person.
But lawmakers inserted at least three amendments Tuesday that made it clear the law would apply retroactively, and keep Schiavo's tube in, regardless of previous court decisions.
"If somebody is alive when this bill passes, they should benefit from that," said Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, the sponsor of House Bill 701. The bill was approved by the House Health Care Regulation Committee on Wednesday with a 7-4 vote.
If passed, both sides predicted yet more legal battles in a litigious saga that has drawn international attention.
For 14 years, Schiavo has been in a persistent vegetative state after suffering heart failure from a potassium imbalance. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, said his wife had told him she did not wish to be kept alive artificially and courts have largely agreed.
Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, have argued that she could improve and is responsive. But Pinellas Circuit Court Judge George Greer ruled that Schiavo will have her feeding tube removed March 18.
Detractors said the bill would require thousands of Floridians near the end of their lives to have surgical feeding tubes inserted if they hadn't explicitly stated they didn't want them.
"That's thousands of people you can't kill now," said Baxley, dismissing the criticism.
"(The bill) makes the assumption that guardians or proxies are cold-hearted individuals with nothing more in their vision than to terminate the life of the individual," said Twila Sketchley, a Tallahassee lawyer. "I assure you that's absolutely false in every sense of the way."
Beyond the constitutionality of making such changes retroactive, detractors ripped a portion of the bill that would require anyone charged with the "end of life" decisions for another person to spend at least two hours per week over a 12-week period with that person or an average of 10 hours each month over a threemonth period.
"If you are going to withdraw hydration or starve them to death," said Rep. John Stargel, RLakeland, "you should spend some time with them."
Requiring that much time could be torture for someone suffering, said Scott Solkoff, chair of the elder law section of the Florida Bar.
"Twelve weeks (in near-death and pain) is an extremely cruel punishment," he said.
Many lawmakers and witnesses talked about their own dealings with the death of loved ones.
Larry Spalding of the ACLU of Florida said he'd never seen his father cry until a feeding tube was inserted in him against his will.
"Larry, Larry. Please don't let them do that to me," Spalding said his father told him. Spalding said the bill would put the Legislature's intent in place of family's decision-making. "I think this is one of the most anti-family bills I've ever see," he said.
Baxley disagreed.
"If I'm doing something wrong . . . I certainly hope that whatever error I make is on the side of allowing someone to live," he said. "I hope this is a defining moment in our culture."
Michael Schiavo's lawyer, George Felos, called the bill "the worst spectacle of political grandstanding" and said its aim at overriding families' wishes meant that "no one's rights are protected."
Rex Sparklin, a lawyer for the Schindler family, said the "the very nature of the horror of the nightmare for both families on both sides" pointed to the need for the bill. He said it was constitutional and would save Schiavo's life.
House Speaker Allan Bense, RPanama City, said he hoped to get the bill passed by the March 18 deadline, but only if it was legally sound.
"I just don't think we're doing a service to Terri by ginning up a bill and getting it out quickly in a helter-skelter fashion," Bense said.
On Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Dave Weldon and U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez, both Republicans from Florida, introduced legislation in Washington that could give the Schindlers access to federal courts in the effort to save their daughter's life.
Information from The Associated Press was used in this article.