Posted on 10/19/2003 1:39:18 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife
The portion of Florida's civil rights law that allows people to decide in advance whether they want to be kept alive through artificial means remains intact after a series of appeals in the case of Terri Schiavo. But legal scholars watching the case suspect the emotionally charged battle over Schiavo's fate will spur lawmakers to act to prevent such disputes in the future.
Those emotions reached a climax last week when the 39- year-old St. Petersburg woman's feeding tube was removed on court orders.
``I don't see that this case itself is in any way groundbreaking in terms of the law,'' said Joseph Little, a professor at the University of Florida's Levin College of Law. The fact that Gov. Jeb Bush got involved after receiving tens of thousands of e-mails from people who want Terri Schiavo kept alive, however, catapulted the case in importance, Little said.
``It could result in the governor or Legislature moving to change the law,'' the professor said.
Michael Allen, a professor studying the Schiavo case at Stetson University College of Law, said he has reached the same conclusion.
``I don't think the Florida statute known as the `right-to- die law' has been changed,'' Allen said. ``I think what the courts did in this case is that they resolved the he-said, she- said dispute the best they could. ... A lot of people think the way the judge weighed the facts was improper. It is just that the factual history is so dramatic.''
Circuit Judge George Greer has endured repeated criticism for consistently ruling in Michael Schiavo's favor in a more than five-year battle with his in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler. Michael Schiavo contends his wife is in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery and would not want to be kept alive with the help of a feeding tube inserted into her stomach.
The Schindlers contend their daughter reacts to them and could improve with therapy.
Debate Had Already Begun
Terri Schiavo has been unable to speak since January 1990, when at age 26 she suffered unexplained heart failure that cut off the blood supply to her brain.
At the time she fell ill, the Florida Legislature and the state court system were embroiled in disputes over how to honor the wishes of people who do not want to be kept alive by artificial means. The landmark case that helped shape the Health Care Advance Directives Law involved a Dunedin woman kept alive with a feeding tube.
Estelle Browning died of natural causes in a nursing home while the Legislature and Florida Supreme Court wrestled with the issues raised by her case. The 89-year-old woman had drafted a ``living will'' in 1985 to prevent doctors from taking extraordinary measures to prolong her life in the event of terminal illness, specifically including feeding tubes among those measures.
After a 1986 stroke left her unable to speak or swallow, a nursing home refused a relative's request that Browning's feeding tube be disconnected.
In September 1990, more than a year after Browning's death, the Supreme Court ruled that Floridians have the right to refuse medical treatment, no matter what the treatment or the prognosis.
The court also upheld a state law that said people who can no longer communicate need only to have told friends or family of their wishes not to be kept alive by artificial means, said George Felos, the lawyer who argued that Browning's written advance care directive, or living will, should have been honored.
Felos is also Michael Schiavo's lead attorney.
The Schiavo case hinged on Michael Schiavo's contention that his wife made statements prior to her illness indicating she would not want to be kept alive in her current condition. The Schindlers dispute that.
After a January 2000 trial, Greer concluded evidence showed Terri Schiavo made those statements. His judgment has been repeatedly upheld on appeal, and both the Florida and U.S. Supreme Courts declined to get involved, as has a lower federal court.
Changes Might Come
Because Greer has been consistently upheld, the Health Care Advance Directives Law stands as both constitutional and enforceable, Felos and the law professors said.
But, they said, the Schiavo case could result in efforts to change the law.
``Other states require much more explicit evidence of a person's desires - written evidence, for example,'' Stetson's Allen said.
And Brown said right-to-life groups could push to have the advance directives law thrown out.
Lynda Bell, spokeswoman for Florida Right To Life Inc., said the Schiavo case shows the advance directives law goes too far.
``The Schiavo precedent is a very dangerous one,'' she said. ``We need protective legislation to protect people from the so-called right to die when it is becoming a duty to die.''
State Rep. Frank Peterman, D-St. Petersburg, stopped by the Pinellas Park hospice where Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed Wednesday to express his support for the Schindlers.
Afterward, Peterman said he intends to raise the issue during the 2004 session.
``What we need to do is take a look at the provision of the law that talks about withholding food and water,'' Peterman said. ``It is not an issue if the person said this is what they wanted, but if you don't know [for sure], you ought to err on the side of keeping them alive.''
I found this comment disrespectful.
(1) I would not consider Michael Schiavo to be Terri's husband. He has forsaken his vows for another woman with whom he has started a family. She has been reclaimed by her parents, and it is that relationship that I respect by law.
Perhaps I should have used the term "HINO" instead of hubby.
If Michael disagrees, I would ask him to show me the contract that bound him. Then I would show him where he breached his contract to "forsake all others" and to love his wife in sickness. You cannot enforce a contract on others that you are not upholding for them. Thus it is void.
Agreed 100%. (2) Terri's family wishes no harm or ill will toward Michael. They have offered to pay him whatever amount of money he would have received from life insurance. They have wished the best for him and his new family. I doubt that they would have taught Terri to be hateful or vengeful.
I happen to believe that Terri's husband has taunted her about how he intends to kill her and there's nothing she's going to do about it. And how her trust fund has bought a nice diamond for his new sweetie pie. And many other things too obscene to print.
I think Terri would also think more positive than negative.
I would say not wanting someone to get away with what I think she knows Michael was trying to get away with is more positive than negative.
(3) The family's absolute obedience to Christian teachings on loving one's enemies, even those who persecute and oppress, is part of the reason they were subjected to such injustice. I am appalled that their faith in Christian obedience to civil authority was abused in this case. However, Christians are taught to be thankful if their obedience serves as a witness to truth, and persecution will make them stronger. That is fine to believe, but in the end, I should think that the point is to find out how to correct the injustices to prevent them in the future.
If Terri's guardian works to expose what's been going on, I suspect he'll find things are pretty rotten. I strongly doubt that this is the first case where Felos and Greer have conspired to murder someone. IMHO, putting people like Schiavo, Felos, and Greer in prison is a very positive thing, in that it prevents them from continuing in their murderous ways and it helps show the world that certain things cannot be gotten away with.
My solution is to raise the standard, requiring consent of parties in religious disputes under law. That way the religious freedom of all parties is protected equally. If this case had been governed under the rule of consent, all this nonsense could have been nipped in the bud.
Even appointing a guardian ad litem would have probably been sufficient to save Terri from this ordeal.
If a joint solution were required, Michael Schiavo would not waste time trying to manipulate or hide facts, as he would know the Schindlers would never agree. The reason he tried to abuse the law to cover up, is that the court permitted one side to win over the other. If consensus were the standard, such tactics would only prolong the process and thus be discouraged.
Michael was trying to hide facts, I believe, because he was hoping to cover up earlier crimes. It he knew consensus would have been required, he might have determined beforehand the risks were too great. This was not a case, though, of competing legitimate interests; this was a case of a criminal wanting to get away with murder to cover his tracks.
This process could only work when both parties seek equal rights and freedoms for each other. The Schindlers never wished ill on Michael, but wanted to resolve this for the best. Thus, I believe Terri would think more like they do.
The Schindlers had to make sure their actions would be seen in a positive light. I think they wanted to make it abundantly clear to anyone who wasn't blind or corrupt that Michael did not have Terri's best interests at heart, and they could make that more clear by avoiding any appearance of vengefulness.
If Michael illegally looted Terri's trust fund, nothing the Schindlers could have done would have protected him from discovery if he ever lost guardianship, or if she'd been granted a guardian ad litem after the first one was fired for being too nosey. Therefore, no offer they could have make could possibly have led Michael to spare her life.
And that is why they are being honored and rewarded, as they have acted sincerely while Michael has not. This proves that in the end you get what you wish for yourselves and others equally. If you wish ill, that is what you reap.
I do not think it is wishing ill to want an attempted murderer to be tried and convicted for his crime, or for a couple of what may be actual murderers (Felos/Greer) to be tried for theirs. Call it a hunch, but I don't think Terri's the first person Felos/Greer have tried to 'off'. She may be the first to have resisted the attempt, however.
I wouldn't trust them near any such project.
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.