Terri Schiavo Ethics Essay

When Terri Schiavo collapsed in her home in February of 1990, her life changed forever. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, made the decision to have her medically euthanized 13 years later. This case sparked a national debate over the ethical implications of end-of-life decision making.

Many people argue that Terri Schiavo’s husband had the right to make the decision to end her life. They believe that he knew her better than anyone else and was therefore in the best position to make the decision about what she would want. Others argue that because Terri was unable to communicate her own wishes, her family should have been involved in the decision making process.

The Terri Schiavo case highlights the importance of having a conversation about end-of-life care with your loved ones. It is important to make your wishes known in advance, in case you become unable to communicate them yourself. You may also want to consider appointing a healthcare proxy, someone who can make decisions on your behalf if you are unable to do so yourself.

The Terri Schiavo case also raises important questions about the role of government in end-of-life decision making. Many people believe that the government should stay out of such personal decisions. Others argue that because Terri was unable to speak for herself, the government had a responsibility to protect her interests.

No matter what side of the debate you fall on, the Terri Schiavo case is a reminder of the importance of having these difficult conversations with your loved ones.

When a patient is unable to decide on his or her own, his or her caregivers and others who are familiar with them are assigned the job of making decisions based on what the patient would have preferred. This is known as surrogate decision-making. “When surrogate decision makers and caregivers cannot agree upon what that choice would have been, they may turn to the courts to determine either what the now-incapacitated patient would have chosen or who is best suited to choose as the patient would have” (Terri Schiavo and End-of-Life Decisions).

The Terri Schiavo case was a highly publicized legal battle that spanned over a decade in the United States. Terri Schiavo was a woman who suffered from severe brain damage and was in what is called a “persistent vegetative state”. This means that she was unable to communicate or make decisions for herself. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, argued that Terri would not have wanted to be kept alive in this state and that she would have wanted to die with dignity. Terri’s parents disagreed and fought to keep her alive, arguing that she could still improve with therapy. The court ultimately sided with Terri’s husband and she was removed from life support and died 13 days later.

This case brought up a lot of ethical questions surrounding decision making, surrogacy, and end-of-life care. It also showed how difficult it can be to make these decisions when there is disagreement among those involved. Terri’s case also highlights the importance of discussions about end-of-life care and advance directives. Advance directives are “legal documents that allow you to express your wishes about medical treatment in advance of a time when you may not be able to communicate them yourself”. These can be incredibly helpful in cases like Terri’s, where there is disagreement about what the patient would have wanted.

While Terri’s case was a tragic one, it did bring to light some important ethical issues that are relevant to many people. It is important to have discussions about end-of-life care and advance directives with your loved ones so that they know your wishes in case you are ever in a situation where you are unable to communicate them yourself.

In 1990, Terri Schiavo suffered a cardiac arrest at the age of 27 as a consequence of hypokalemia resulting from an eating problem. As a result of insufficient oxygen getting to her brain, Terri became severely comatose. To provide hydration and nutrition, Terri was put on a feeding tube.

Terri’s husband, Michael, petitioned the court to have the feeding tube removed, stating that Terri would not want to be kept alive in her current state. The courts ruled in favor of Terri’s husband and the feeding tube was removed. Terri died 13 days later.

The Terri Schiavo case sparked a national debate on end-of-life decision making and medical ethics. Many people questioned whether or not it was ethical to remove Terri’s feeding tube, effectively causing her death. Some argue that Terri’s husband had the right to make the decision on her behalf, as he knew what she would want. Others argue that Terri should have been kept alive, as she was not terminally ill and could have potentially recovered.

The Terri Schiavo case highlights the importance of making advance directives, such as a living will or durable power of attorney for healthcare. Advance directives allow people to state their wishes for end-of-life care in the event that they are unable to make decisions themselves. This can help avoid difficult situations like the Terri Schiavo case, where there is disagreement about what the person would want.

If you are faced with a decision about end-of-life care, it is important to consider the ethical implications of your decision. What values and beliefs guide your decision? Would the person affected by the decision want this? Taking the time to consider these questions can help you make an ethical decision that you can be confident in.

Terri was found to be in a Persistent Vegetative State (P.V.S), which is “a permanent and irreversible condition of unconsciousness in which there is an absence of voluntary or cognitive behavior and an inability to interact purposefully with one’s environment,” according to reallove.net (reallove.net). Terri’s husband, Michael Schiavo, became her legal guardian after she was diagnosed.

Terri’s parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, were opposed to Michael’s decision to have Terri’s feeding tube removed which would cause Terri’s death. The court ruled in favor of Michael and Terri’s feeding tube was removed on March 18, 2005. Terri passed away 13 days later on March 31st (Schiavo).

The Terri Schiavo case has raised ethical implications that are still being debated today. One of the main ethical implications is the role of family members in decision making. In Terri’s case, her husband was appointed as her legal guardian and he made the decision to have her feeding tube removed. Terri’s parents were opposed to this decision.

The question is, who should have the final say in Terri’s medical care? Her husband or her parents? According to the American Medical Association’s (AMA) Code of Ethics, “In general, family members or others closest to the patient should be consulted about decisions regarding the patient’s care… In cases where there are disagreements among family members or others close to the patient about what constitutes appropriate medical treatment, the physician should consult with other physicians and consider referral to an ethics committee” ( AMA).

It is clear that there was a disagreement between Terri’s husband and her parents about what Terri would have wanted. Terri did not have a living will or any other type of advanced directive. If Terri had a living will, her wishes would have been clear and there would have been no need for a debate between her husband and her parents.

The Terri Schiavo case also raises the ethical implications of “quality of life”. Terri was in a P.V.S and she was not able to interact with her environment. Some people argue that Terri’s quality of life was so poor that she should have been allowed to die.

Leave a Comment