US Federal Court Reviewing Right-To-Die Case

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The fate of a brain-damaged Florida woman went back to the courts early on Monday after President Bush (news - web sites) signed emergency legislation aimed at prolonging the life of Terri Schiavo.

Bush signed the legislation at 1:11 a.m. (0611 GMT) after extraordinary intervention by lawmakers that drew Congress back from Easter recess and into a bitter family dispute as it tried to circumvent years of state court rulings.

A federal judge in Tampa was considering early Monday morning whether to reinsert the feeding tube that had been removed from the 41-year-old woman Friday, CNN reported.

David Gibbs, a lawyer for Schiavo's parents, filed a lawsuit and a request for a restraining order with the federal court as soon as Bush signed the bill in Washington, CNN said.

Bush had cut short a Texas vacation and flown back to Washington to be available for an immediate signing.

"Today, I signed into law a bill that will allow federal courts to hear a claim by or on behalf of Terri Schiavo for violation of her rights relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life," Bush said in a written statement.

The House of Representatives passed the measure 203-58 shortly after midnight following three hours of debate. The Senate cleared it unanimously Sunday.

"We are very, very thankful to have crossed this bridge," Suzanne Vitadamo, Terri Schiavo's sister, said after the House vote. "We are hopeful, we are very hopeful, that the federal courts will follow the will of Congress and save my sister's life."

Schiavo's husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo, said he was outraged by the government's intervention.

"It's a sad day for Terri and it's a sad day for everybody in America because the government is going to trample all over your personal and private matters," he said on NBC. "This is an outrage. They have no business in this matter."

The measure gives U.S. District Court in Tampa, Florida, jurisdiction on a case that has been taken up by Republican congressional leaders and galvanized activists on both sides of the emotional end-of-life issue.

Several Democrats objected, calling the legislation a political exploitation of a tragic family matter that undermines Florida courts and states' rights.

But House Republican leader Tom DeLay of Texas said: "This is not a political issue. This is life and death, and this is a bipartisan attempt to save this life."

Schiavo has been fed through a stomach tube since a heart attack starved her brain of oxygen in 1990, leaving her in what the courts declared was a persistent vegetative state.

Michael Schiavo has long argued -- and has been supported by the courts -- that his wife would not have wanted to live in such a condition.

The tube feeding has twice been halted and resumed in the past amid legal wrangles. Until now, federal courts have turned the case back to state courts.

Schiavo was expected to survive for one to two weeks without it at the Florida hospice that cares for her.

Schiavo's parents say she is responsive and can be rehabilitated. Her father, Bob Schindler, told CNN he spoke with her about going out to breakfast after the vote.

"I got a big smile out of her face, so help me God," he said. "She seemed to be very pleased. And we're pleased."

House members who scattered for a two-week recess were called back to Washington for the late-night session.

Despite the sudden notice, 261 of the House's 435 members voted, and gave the measure well over the two-thirds majority required under the streamlined procedure.

In the House debate, Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Judiciary Committee (news - web sites) chairman, said Florida's courts were "enforcing a merciless directive to deprive Terri Schiavo of her right to life."

But Rep. Barney Frank (news, bio, voting record), a Massachusetts Democrat, said lawmakers were voting according to their own ideological bias, not necessarily in Schiavo's interest.

You are exactly right. I don't like the fact that a Clintoon appointee got the case. I fear that Terry's life may be coming to an end this week. This judge likely won't take any action The pro-death RATs (and a few FR members....ugh) want this innocent woman dead - even though the medical evidence, and eyewitness sworn affidavits point to the fact that she is not in a PVS or brain dead as the media and left would have us believe.

I feel that the only viable option left is to bump up the prayers.

The 23rd Psalm --- Translated to Terri's Present Reality !!!
The Lord is Terri's Shepherd --- That's Relationship !!!
She shall not want --- That's Supply !!!
He maketh her to lie down in green pastures --- That's Rest !!!
He leadeth her beside the still waters --- That's Refreshment !!!
He restoreth her soul --- That's Healing !!!
He leadeth her in the paths of righteousness --- That's Guidance !!!
For His name sake --- That's Purpose !!!
Yea, though Terri walks through the valley of the shadow of death --- That's Testing !!!
She will fear no evil --- That's Protection !!!
For Thou art with her --- That's Faithfulness !!!
Thy rod and Thy staff they comfort her --- That's Discipline !!!
Thou preparest a table before Terri in the presence of her enemies--- That's Hope !!!
Thou annointest her head with oil --- That's Consecration !!!
Her cup runneth over --- That's Abundance !!!
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow Terri all the days of her life --- That's Blessing !!!
And she will dwell in the house of the Lord --- That's Security!!!
Forever --- That's Eternity !!!
Congressional Subpoena & President Signs Schiavo Bill --- That's Deliverance !!!
Face it ---- The Lord is crazy about Terri !!!
Otherwise --- Why else would He continuously deliver her from
the evil hands of her attempted murderers ???

Legacy media bias strikes again. Terri has never asked to die. That doesn't make it a "right to die case". People have presumed she must die and that presumption is without a scintilla of evidence.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

Hasn't the Supreme Court ruled that denying prisoners food and water is "cruel and unusual punishment?"

I dunno. There are a potload of cases out there. I haven't read any of them. But another sort of case is interesting too, that being a person who goes on a hunger strike. Those folks are often force fed against their wishes!

Anyway, the SCOTUS has ruled that NY State's law prohibiting doctor assisted suicide is not unconstitutional. Vacco v. Quill. 521 US 793 (1997)

There is also the Cruzan case. CRUZAN v. DIRECTOR, MDH, 497 US 261 (1990) <-- Link.

In Cruzan, a young woman was in a PVS, and her parents wanted to have her starved to death. The state of Missouri require clear and convincing evidence that the PVS person would have voluntarily starved to death under the circumstances, and SCOTUS, in a 5-4 ruling, upheld that state requirement. Apparently the parent met the threshold, becuase Cruzan's feeding tube was removed after a second state trial.

I'm hoping for the best, but my concern is that the federal courts will show the same measure of callousness and indifference that the state courts have. When the judicial system is steeped in the culture of death that we have now, it's hard to have any confidence that they will decide a case justly. But one can always hope.

What troubles me in this case is the lack of irrefutable documentation as to the wishes of the individual. The assumption all along, and all the decisions to date, seem to be based on hearsay, the word of one individual who obviously has serious conflicts of interest, as to what Terri's wishes are/were. I know when I was appointed my mother's legal guardian when she fell ill with Alzheimer's, I had to present to the court a legal document attesting to her wishes regarding "heroic measures" of life preservation. The document was drawn up (previously) by her attorney, signed by the individual and witnesses, and notarized. Lacking that, it was my understanding that the default assumption by the court and the caregivers was that the individual would have wished to live, and actions taken would be based on this assumption.

What is most troubling to me is the role of judicial activism in this. The law in Fla. is that the court can order that extraordinary lifesaving measures be ceased, if she's in a persistent vegetative state. The judge basically expanding the definition of persistent vegetative state so that he could order that she be euthanized. And then he was faced with another problem, namely that she was not receiving extraordinary lifesaving measures anyway. So he ordered that she be denied food and water. I don't see how food and water could be considered an "extraordinary" lifesaving measure. But then, that's what judicial activism is about.

There have been many posts on FR arguing, convincingly so, that a feeding tube is not necessarily a "heroic measure", either. Certainly receiving food and water isn't, as you note. Nor would therapy to teach the individual how to swallow be so considered by a reasonable person. There is certainly nothing extraordinary about learning to swallow.

The culture of death has come to encompass an extraordinary range of concepts, all geared towards assuring that the death of individuals, typically those who are unable to defend themselves or make their wishes known, or who are deemed "inconvenient" or "unproductive", occurs. Not the least of which are the tortured legal interpretations regarding "privacy", as extended to any number of barbaric and heinous practices. The creeping, incremental introduction of the concept of the default assumption that death is preferable to life, is probably the most dangerous threat we as a people face today.

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.