Should Feeding Tube Be Removed?
Posted on 03/21/2005 7:30:53 AM PST by Dog Gone
Mar. 21, 2005 - Americans broadly and strongly disapprove of federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo case, with sizable majorities saying Congress is overstepping its bounds for political gain.
The public, by 63 percent-28 percent, supports the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, and by a 25-point margin opposes a law mandating federal review of her case. Congress passed such legislation and President Bush signed it early today.
That legislative action is distinctly unpopular: Not only do 60 percent oppose it, more -- 70 percent -- call it inappropriate for Congress to get involved in this way. And by a lopsided 67 percent-19 percent, most think the elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved.
This ABC News poll also finds that the Schiavo case has prompted an enormous level of personal discussion: Half of Americans say that as a direct result of hearing about this case, they've spoken with friends or family members about what they'd want done if they were in a similar condition. Nearly eight in 10 would not want to be kept alive.
Intensity
In addition to the majority, the intensity of public sentiment is also on the side of Schiavo's husband, who has fought successfully in the Florida courts to remove her feeding tube. And intensity runs especially strongly against congressional involvement.
Included among the 63 percent who support removing the feeding tube are 42 percent who "strongly" support it -- twice as many as strongly oppose it. And among the 70 percent who call congressional intervention inappropriate are 58 percent who hold that view strongly -- an especially high level of strong opinion.
GOP Groups
Views on this issue are informed more by ideological and religious views than by political partisanship. Republicans overall look much like Democrats and independents in their opinions.
But two core Republican groups -- conservatives and evangelical Protestants -- are more divided: Fifty-four percent of conservatives support removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, compared with seven in 10 moderates and liberals. And evangelical Protestants divide about evenly -- 46 percent are in favor of removing the tube, 44 percent opposed. Among non-evangelical Protestants, 77 percent are in favor -- a huge division between evangelical and mainline Protestants.
Conservatives and evangelicals also are more likely to support federal intervention in the case, although it doesn't reach a majority in either group. Indeed, conservative Republicans oppose involving the federal courts, by 57 percent-41 percent.
Conservatives and evangelicals hold these views even though most people in both groups -- 73 percent and 68 percent, respectively -- say that if they personally were in this condition, they would not want to be kept alive.
Should Feeding Tube Be Removed? |
|||
| Support | Oppose | ||
| Non-evangelical | 77% | 18 | |
| Evangelical | 46 | 44 | |
| Catholics | 63 | 26 | |
| Liberals | 68 | 24 | |
| Moderates | 69 | 22 | |
| Conservatives | 54 | 40 | |
| Democrats | 65 | 25 | |
| Independents | 63 | 28 | |
| Republicans | 61 | 34 | |
| Conservative Reps. | 55 | 40 | |
|
|||
Regardless of their preference on the Schiavo case, about two-thirds of conservatives and evangelicals alike call congressional intervention inappropriate. And majorities in both groups, as in others, are skeptical of the motivations of the political leaders seeking to extend Schiavo's life.
Should Federal Government Intervene? |
|||
| Support | Oppose | ||
| Non-evangelical | 26% | 71 | |
| Evangelical | 44 | 50 | |
| Catholics | 38 | 56 | |
| Liberals | 34 | 62 | |
| Moderates | 29 | 67 | |
| Conservatives | 48 | 49 | |
| Democrats | 34 | 63 | |
| Independents | 31 | 61 | |
| Republicans | 39 | 58 | |
| Conservative Reps. | 41 | 57 | |
|
|||
Preference and Experience
Public views on this issue are informed in part by Americans' preferences for their own care if they were in a similar situation: Sixteen percent would want life support; as noted, 78 percent would not. While still a very large majority, that's down from 87 percent in an ABC News/Washington Poll last week.
Among people who favor removing Schiavo's life support, 94 percent say that's also what they would want for themselves. By contrast, people who oppose removing the feeding tube in Schiavo's case divide about evenly on what they'd want for themselves: Forty-five percent would want life support, 41 percent would not.
Some speak from experience: A third of Americans say they've had friends or family members who passed away in a hospital or other care facility after life support was removed; nearly two in 10 say they were personally involved in that decision. People who've been personally involved in such a decision are more apt than others to support removing Schiavo's feeding tube and to say they personally would not want life support.
Age and Attention
There are differences among age groups. Senior citizens are more apt than others to strongly support removing Schiavo's feeding tube, and also more apt to oppose federal intervention. And young adults are less likely to say that, as a result of the Schiavo case, they've discussed their own wishes with family or friends.
Just under six in 10 Americans are closely following the Schiavo case, including 16 percent who've been following it very closely -- a respectable albeit not overwhelming level of public attention. Young adults, age 18 to 29, are less than half as likely as their elders to be following the case closely -- just 27 percent are doing so. There's an irony in that result: Schiavo herself was stricken at age 26.
Methodology
This ABC News poll was conducted by telephone March 20, 2005, among a random national sample of 501 adults. The results have a 4.5-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS Intersearch of Horsham, Pa.
Where life begins and ends is a very tough subject for me....
Ah yes-- well, it's a stupid question, but what do you expect from the media? The coverage of this whole Schiavo case has been distinctly Orwellian.
I have to say, though, that given the attitudes of vast segments of the American public, when the "right to die" morphs into the obligation to die, I'll just shake my head sadly and murmur a bit about how what goes around comes around, and isn't it too bad that all those folks are being offed. Meanwhile, I will care for my loved ones and they will care for me, and we'll stay the hell away from the death-dealing court system.
"Where life begins and ends is a very tough subject for me...."
It is for me as well, which is why I choose to err, if I err, in favor of life.
"Frist told reporters yesterday that he did not see the memo circulating among Senate Republicans laying out how they could benefit politically from this situation, but the memo exists."
HELLO Where exactly in these words did Frist say that the GOP leadership sent this memo out. NICE TRY.
Keep ranting...you're proving my points.
The same folks who are demanding even today that the national guard be called out will undoubtedly blame the GOP if the effort to save Terry falls short.
Sickening.
...Are insane.
Got a cite?
"I'm not even sure the GOP will benefit politically from this. It might blow up in their faces.
The same folks who are demanding even today that the national guard be called out will undoubtedly blame the GOP if the effort to save Terry falls short."
There is always the potential for anything to blow up in their faces. Some who disagree with Congress themselves are making political accusations. Thus far I see Congress, Constitutionally acting as a response to the people. There has been no denial of the memo, however, some seek to gain themselves politically claiming things they cannot prove.
The key to this whole case for me has been that fact that "IF" this gal did not want to live like this, why has she hung on for so long with nothing more than a feeding tube? Yes, I know she has been tested and tested and tested, however, the past few years nothing has been done for her, other than a feeding tube, and she is warehoused in a place for dying.
Yup. Politics is pay-for-play. If you demand and receive a quid, you'd better come up with the pro quo.
I am sorry I do not have the time to "RANT" to you.
You have been on the loosing side of this debate, you need the evidence you go find it, I'll be watching your method of operation.
There's more to being a Republican/conservative than being pro-WOT. I'm certainly not what one would classify the "religious right". I think prostitution should be legal, favor ending the federal drug war, and don't really care one way or the other about gays marrying. However, I cannot fathom how one could be cognizant of the facts of this case and still favor starving Terri to death. If one were to make a case for euthanasia legalization, while I would not agree with it, I could at least respect it as a logical argument. But as a human being, I am at a loss to understand the pro-death contingent.
"Yup. Politics is pay-for-play. If you demand and receive a quid, you'd better come up with the pro quo."
I thought the speech 'god' Mccain took the money out of politics.
From a previous post of yours. Thanks for admitting that you were wrong.
"You have been on the loosing side of this debate..."
Not according to the polls. But by all means, keep dreaming and ranting.
" you need the evidence you go find it, I'll be watching your method of operation."
No need, you yourself admitted above that they didn't deny the memo. You must have simply forgotten to apologize for the misstatement.
Please see my post #176. This is not a "religious right" thing at all. I'm as libertarian as they come, and I find the mindset of the anti-Terri people to be disgusting. All of my friends and acquaintences who are familiar with the facts of this case feel the same way I do about it and none of them are even remotely "religious right".
C'mon Paulsen. That's 100% wrong. You're better than that.
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.