Terri Schaivo: Euthanasia or Mercy Killing?

If I had to make the decision on what to do in Terri Schaivo’s case I would do what Michael Schiavo had done, I would fight to have the feeding tube removed. I believe that if a person has no quality of life and is in a PVS state, they have no feelings, they feel no pain, and they are not aware of their surroundings. According to the article Terri Schiavo and End-of-Life Decisions “Terri could not continue both to be alive and be free from invasive medical procedures” (Mathes, 2005) I feel keeping them alive is unfair to them and to their loved ones. I also believe that the surrogate decision maker should follow the “best interest” standard, which is, given the medical facts and prognosis, make decisions that would be in the best interests of the patient. (Hook & Mueller, 2005) There was a lot of evidence and proof from the doctors in regards to the fact that Terri was not going to get better, there were no medical interventions left that could help her. Prolonging treatment for Terri would not have changed her quality of life or made it better. In my opinion, Michael Schiavo acted properly as a surrogate decision maker because first of all, he followed her previously spoken wishes and views and, second of all, he acted in her

Does a written document such as a living will decide when someone should die or should the verbal wishes of the incapacitated person be followed if known? Such as the controversy over when life begins, we now face the ultimate question of when does life end. In 1990, Terri Schiavo, a young Florida woman suffered a heart attack caused by bulimia leaving her brain without oxygen for six minutes. According to medical opinions, she has limited involuntary physical movement. She has remained in a persistent vegetative state ever since. Terri did not have a living will or medical directive in place at the time of her heart attack.

Nurses are healers by nature, and most nurses would by no means ever suggest ending a patient’s life. When a patient is expiring from a terminal, debilitating disease, he/ she may beg for a rapid and painless death. This concern will raise a very complicated moral dilemma for a nurse. This type of situation aids the nurse to second-guess the ethical traditions she has obtained in the nursing profession, leaving us with the uncertainty “what is a nurse’s role in assisted suicide?” (Kozier & Erb, 2010). In spite of this, assisted suicide should not be confused with ethically warranted end-of-life decisions and actions. The case was based on family and the physician’s individual beliefs. According to her husband, Michael Schiavo, Terri did not want to live life in a vegetative state. Her wishes needed to be heard, valued, and fulfilled. Possibly if the healthcare team offered education to the family then the individuals this could have kept their autonomy. Many times all it takes an explanation what the patient is going through and assisting the family with making the best ethical decision for their loved one. Nurses, play a major role in end-of-life care by advocating for patient’s needs and making certain that the quality symptom management and support at the end of life. In the case of Terri, the patient autonomy was taken from them and their wishes were not granted.

On February 28, 1990, twenty six-year old Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain damage when her heart stopped for five minutes. Terri's condition was the subject of intense debate and media scrutiny over the subject of euthanasia and guardianship. Given the circumstances of Terri's vegetated condition, and no physical proof of her wishes, the last word on whether or not Terri would stay alive was given to her husband Michael Schiavo, by the state of Florida. Michael's argument was that he was carrying out her wishes to not be kept alive in that state. Terri's family challenged Michael's claims saying she is responsive and in no discomfort, that her condition does not meet the medical definition of

Hampson, L. A., & Emanuel, E. J. (2005). The prognosis for changes in end-of-life care after the schiavo case. Health Affairs, 24(4), 972-5.

Michael Schiavo believes that his wife is being made to suffer, and that her present status has robbed her of any remaining dignity. Terri’s parents believe that their daughter has been denied the opportunity to recover, and that with treatment she can enjoy a reasonable quality of life. The legal battle continues today with doctors disagreeing about Terri’s medical status, prospects for recovery and appropriate interventions. In the meantime, Terri remains attached to a feeding tube, spending her life in a medical institution totally incapacitated and unable to participate in the decisions concerning her very life.

In the year of 1990 on February 25, a presumably healthy young women by the name of Theresa Marie Schiavo better known as Terri suffered a massive heart attack in her Florida home which left her with serve brain damage. At the age of 26 she found herself unable to speak, or move, and unfortunately without a living will in place. How can she have told them what she really wanted if unable to talk in a vegetative state? Terri, although able to breathe on her own, found herself unable to eat or use the bathroom without the aid of a machine or person she was literally a prisoner in her own body. By law her husband Michael Schiavo was in charge of making treatment decisions for her , and after two years of therapy he wanted to disconnect the feeding tubes that helped keep her alive.

I have chosen to discuss the case of Terri Shiavo which was a very big ethical case back in 2005. She had been left on a ventilator for 15 years. So let’s start from the beginning. On February 25, 1990 Terri Schiavo had a cardiac arrest that was causes by extreme hypokalemia (low potassium) brought on by an eating disorder (Quill, 2005). As a result of this cardiac arrest Terri developed severe hypoxic – ischemic encephalopathy which is another way of saying lack of oxygen to the brain (Quill, 2005). During this period she exhibited no evidence of brain function and eventually scans of her brain showed severe atrophy of her cerebral hemispheres (Quill, 2005). Her electroencephalograms were fat, indicating no functional activity of the

Terri Schiavo suffered a heart attack which caused severe brain damage due to lack of oxygen to the brain. According to doctors, she was in an irreversible persistent vegetative state. Terri was on life support and unresponsive for years. Terri’s husband believed Terri wouldn’t have wanted to be on life support if there were no chances of her recovering so he ordered for them to remove her feeding tubes. Unfortunately, her parents weren’t on the same page. They believed there was a possible chance of recovering even though she showed absolutely no signs of recovery. Terri’s husband later petitioned the Sixth Circuit Court of Florida to remove her feeding tubes. The court then determined that Terri wouldn’t have wanted to pro-long her life under

The ethical principles for nurses to practice with beneficence and no maleficence. This legal battle between Terri Schiavo’s husband and her family was an ethical debate between continuing artificial life or remove her feeding tube by the request of her husband. Using the theories of utilitarianism and deontology can be applied or considered in making the most ethically correct resolution. The cases are very complex and raise many moral and ethical issues. The cases have brought awareness to society of “the importance of discussing end-of-life issues with family members and underscores how an advance directive, a living will and/or durable power of attorney for health care, are a healthcare proxy clarifies and provides evidence of the wishes of an individual regarding end-of-life decisions. Terri Schiavo should impress upon laypersons and professionals alike the uncertainty of the context in which issues of continuation and termination are argued ethically. Nobody knows what Mrs. Schiavo would have wanted. She left no advance directive and in its absence her husband says one thing and her parents

Terri Schiavo was 26 years old when she collapsed in her home and suffered acute hypoxia for several minutes. Slightly shy of a year after her injury, it was clinically determined that she was in a persistent vegetative state (Perry, Churchill, & Kirshner, 2005). There were no legal documents, such as an advance directive or living will, specifying the wishes for care under such circumstances. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, was designated as her legal guardian. The Schiavo case caught the public’s attention when her husband elected to remove her feeding tube in the mid 1900’s. He understood that there has never been a case of recovery after a year of being in a persistent vegetative state. One of the moral issues surrounding the case centered on the appropriateness of removing the life-sustaining feeding tube or maintaining it. Throughout the case, there has

They were the subjects of public disputes with family members, court systems, medical professionals, the media, and society at large. Terri Schiavo, Nancy Cruzan and Karen Ann Quinlan; their names are synonymous with permanent vegetative state (PVS). The amazing technological advancements in modern medicine has been credited with keeping persons alive who in times past would have died, therefore this is remarkable for countless families. In the cases of the Quinlan’s, the Cruzan’s and many like them, families members find it unbearable to witness loved ones who linger indefinitely in PVS with little or no chance for recovery. There are many like Terri Schiavo’s parents, who value the lives of their love ones no matter how limited their

Also, it is obvious that Rachel has not take the criminla law and homicide procedures into concedration. He suggests that there will be no one to follow the murder case as guardians will give consent positively, and therefore he ignores the role of the state and police . He confuses criminal trial with civil trial. The further complication appears that not many physicians would be ready to face trials after mercy killing in absence of any guidelines and legalized procedures. The biggest problem which the proposal fails to deal with is that on one side Rachels refuses any committees which could decide the euthanasia, whereas on the other side he leaves the matter to doctors that they could defend themselves on ignorance or commonsense of fact,

The controversy of a doctor assisting their patient who is already dying, end their life sooner to save them from continuous unnecessary pain and agony has been the topic of controversy for years. The practice of euthanasia is in my opinion a mercy and should not be banned because in reality it doesn’t physically hurt anyone. You could say it hurts the patient but then again that patient is already in tremendous pain or in an incapacitated state of no recovery, as in paralyzed or brain damage etc., so in reality it would actually help them by assisting ending their pain by assisted suicide. A doctors job is also always help their patients and the practice of assisted suicide in many ways is actually helping the person. However there has and probably always will be people who do not agree with the idea of a dying person end their life for sooner than nature had intended. This demographic would suggest that by dying by your own hand or assisted by a physician for medical reasons is still considered plain suicide. And for the religious people it is a sin by their beliefs. The people could also argue that it is not a person’s right to make that decision.

People deserve to die a humane death. By denying a person of a humane death and destroying the hope for quality of life, we deny ourselves of our own humanity. The story of Mary Bown Hall, a mystery writer in California, was a tragic one recorded by photojournalist and physician Lonny Shavelson. Hall was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1989, and by 1994 the disease had spread; she was so sick that she needed oxygen and sedation. Soon after she hugged her son, Paul, she ingested 30 Secanol capsules that she had hidden. She died only a few hours later. If an active euthanasia system existed, Hall could have died with dignity and in the presence of whomever she chose (Times