IHP 420 6-2 Milestone Three Terri Schiavo Case
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
IHP 420
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by ChefMorning9005
1
Milestone Three
The Terri Schiavo Case
Denise Malone
The Bachelor of Science in Nursing Program, Southern New Hampshire University IHP-420-J3161 Ethical & Legal Considerations 23EW3
Professor Brandy Robinson
February 12, 2023
2
The Terri Schiavo Case
The Terri Schiavo case was a high-profile right-to-life and right-to-death dispute in the
United States in the early 2000s revolving around Terri Schiavo, a woman who suffered a
cardiac arrest in 1990 and was left in a persistent vegetative state (Nora, 2020). The patient's
husband, Michael Schiavo, believed that she would not have wanted to be kept alive in such a
state and sought to remove her feeding tube so that she would pass away naturally. Terri's
parents, on the other hand, Bob and Mary Schindler, held the view that Terri was not in a
persistent vegetative state and could recover with proper medical treatment and believed that
removing her feeding tube was equivalent to actively ending her life and went to court to prevent
it from being removed. This case raised critical bioethical issues concerning the right to life,
patient autonomy, the definition of death, and the state's role in end-of-life decision-making.
Intense debates, legal battles, political intervention, and media scrutiny also marked it. Numerous
courts and appeals heard Terri Schiavo's case, leading to a series of legal decisions, court orders,
and legislative actions. Despite several attempts to intervene by state and federal governments,
the courts ultimately ruled in favor of removing Terri's feeding tube, and she passed away on
March 31, 2005.
Bioethical Analysis
The bioethical issue in the Terri Schiavo case was whether or not to continue providing
life support to a person who could no longer make decisions for themselves and had no chance of
recovery (Nora, 2020). Terri's family was divided on the issue, with her husband advocating for
removing life support and her parents advocating for keeping her on life support. A key issue, in
this case, was the question of who had the authority to make end-of-life decisions on behalf of
Terri Schiavo. On the one hand, Terri's husband argued that he had the right to make the decision
3
as her legal guardian; on the other, her parents argued that they were the rightful guardians
tasked with making this life-changing decision for their daughter (Wolf-Meyer, 2020). A vital
issue that emerged from this case and ultimately led to the multiyear court battle was whether it
was ethical to continue providing life support to someone who was in a persistent vegetative
state and had no chance of recovery. In the end, the case was brought before the courts and went
through several appeals before deciding to remove life support. According to Wolf-Meyer
(2020), the case sparked a national debate about end-of-life decision-making and the right to life,
with many people weighing in on both sides of the issue.
Conclusion
One example of the influence of the bioethical issue on healthcare professionals was the
role played by the medical examiner. According to Mukherjee, Tarsney, and Kirschner (2022),
the medical examiner was responsible for determining whether Terri was in a persistent
vegetative state and whether life-sustaining treatment should be continued. Despite conflicting
opinions from family members and other healthcare professionals, the medical examiner, in the
end, concluded that Terri was in a persistent vegetative state proposing and supporting the idea
that life-sustaining treatment should be withdrawn. Another example was the role of the courts,
whereby throughout the case, the courts faced the daunting task of balancing the interests of
Terri's family members, the healthcare professionals involved in her care, and the broader
community. Ultimately, the courts ruled in favor of removing Terri's feeding tube based on the
principle of patient autonomy and the right to die. In a few words, the case highlights the
complex and challenging bioethical issues that arise in end-of-life care. Healthcare professionals
often face tough decisions from time to time as they navigate these issues. Importantly, this case,
in particular, is a reminder of the importance of respect for patient autonomy, transparency in
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
decision-making, and the need for ongoing dialogue and reflection on ethical questions in
healthcare.
References
Mukherjee, D., Tarsney, P. S., & Kirschner, K. L. (2022). If Not Now, Then When? Taking Disability Seriously in Bioethics.
Hastings Center Report
,
52
(3), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.1385
Nora, G. J. (2020). Disorders of Consciousness: Terminology and Prognosis.
Ethics & Medics
,
45
(12), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.5840/em2020451221
Wolf-Meyer, M. (2020). Neurological disorders, affective bioethics, and the nervous system: reconsidering the Schiavo case from a materialist perspective.
Medical Humanities
,
46
(3), 166-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2018-011568