Sociology

Experimentation, Research and Consent
Shoul Terri Schiavo s life and death decision belong to her husband or her family members and was it ethical to remove her feeding tube that kept her alive

Terri Schiavo, after suffering from cardiac arrest was left in a vegetative condition. Artificial nutrition and hydration kept her alive by a feeding tube for fifteen years. A very popular legal battle between Terri s husband Michael Schiavo and her parents and family members continued in a court debate where the serious question was brought to the forefront. Should Terri Schiavo be kept alive by the feeding tube requested by her parents and family members or should she be left to die by removing the feeding tube requested by her husband, Michael. (Atac, 2005)

Different interest groups, the television media and a videotape was the center of this legal case while the court debated whether she was considered a human being in this tragic state. Under Florida law, Terri Schiavo was under the legal custody of her husband who would normally make all medical decisions concerning his wife. (Dickman, 2000) Under this law, Michael Schiavo should make all necessary decisions if his wife were to become unable to voice her own opinion such as in her vegetative state that she would never recover from. There was no documentation left behind by Terri Schiavo in the event that she became unable to make her own medical decisions, so the next person in line of authority concerning her life became the duty of her husband who was her nearest family member. Michael Schiavo would make Terri s decisions for her based on what he thought his wife would have wanted which is called substituted judgment.

Terri s parents, along with other of her family members didn t agree with Terri s husband. With Terri being diagnosed after three years of undergoing experimental and traditional therapies (Mossman, 1997) with irreversible persistent vegetative state, Michael Schiavo said that his wife wouldn t want to live in this condition. He stated that he had heard his wife say that she wouldn t want to be kept alive if she were ever to be faced with this dilemma but the rest of her family members argued that Terri didn t believe the doctor s diagnosis and fully believed that she would, one day recover. (Thompson, 2005)

Both a legal and ethical issue in the U.S., the patient s right to die is decided in court. Michael Schiavo s case was considered and the court agreed with him that he did have the right to make his wife s decision based on what she had told him. On March 31, 2005 Terri Schiavo s feeding tube was removed after the United States District Court in Florida refused the emergency request to keep her alive with the feeding tube.  The tube was never placed back after Terri s parents requested an appeal. The rights of Terri s parents and family members were seriously taken into consideration by the court system but in the end, the court thought her husband should have his request to allow his wife to die be fulfilled. The ethical question does a person deserve the chance to live even if they will never be out of a vegetative state does remain.  For many, the right to die is humane while for others, watching their loved ones die, they feel is humane.  Terri Schiavo could have lived longer with the feeding tube but to her husband who believed it wasn t his wife s wishes, he fought in court against the very people who also claimed to love her.  Each party believed they were correct in voicing their opinions concerning Terri Schiavo but ultimately it was left up to the court system to make the final and agonizing verdict on her life.

In the end, Terri s life and death decision lay in the hands of her husband who thought the most logical and ethical decision for his wife was to allow her to die by removing the feeding tube.