Medical Ethics
“Medical ethics is the discipline of evaluating the merits, risks, and social concerns of activities in the field of medicine” (Kinzbrunner). Many methods have been evolved to analyze the ethical considerations surrounding a situation. Based on the methods several principles can be applied in the process of decision-making in any medical case involving ethical considerations. Medical ethical values include principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-malfeasance, social justice and distributive justice. The removal of feeding tube from Terri Schiavo can be considered from the medical angle.
Case of Terri Schiavo
Since Terri Schiavo has not left a written advance directive, the alternative available was to understand from the closest family members what she would have wanted under the medical conditions prevailed at that point of time. Michael Schiavo, husband of Terri was designated as the decision maker above other family members since Terri has become irreversibly incapacitated and has not designated a healthcare proxy. Informed consent is the implementation of the ethical principle of autonomy, which accords individuals the option of accepting or refusing medical treatment.
Since Terri was not in a position to take a decision in this case on her, own the decision of her husband has to be considered as the best decision taken by her in the prevailing conditions. In the case of Terri Schiavo, the action of removing the feeding tube can be considered as both ethical and legal in the light of evidences as found by the courts, where there was no hope of recovery by enforcing life-prolonging treatment against what is agreed to be the will of the patient (Quill, 2005).
The central issue in the case of terminating the treatment of Terri is not the feelings and desire of the family members or the treatment the family would like to extend to the loved one who is incapacitated. It is rather the course of action, the patient would have wanted for her considering the medical situation she was. In the absence of specific data or information on the wishes of the patient, it would be an error to continue to provide the medical treatment, which would be of no avail.
Right of Husband versus Parents
If Terry was competent enough to take a decision, there existed a fundamental right of self-determination as the continuance of the medical treatment. She could have chosen either to continue to get or discontinue the treatment. Since she lacked the ability to take such a decision, the rights become exercisable by the husband only, who is the guardian on both ethical and legal grounds. For all practical purposes, Terri could not be continued to be considered as a “natural person” and legislatively or judicially the basic rights of these individuals be removed as they have forfeited personhood (DawnOntario, 2005).
These rights invariably are vested with the legal guardian who is the husband in the present case. The parents in any case do not get any preferences in making the important decisions on her behalf. In addition, the legal guardianship was granted to the husband without any objections from Terri’s parents. This implies that the parents have agreed to whatever decision the Michael Schiavo would take in connection with the treatment of Terri. Since it became clear to Michael that the condition of his wife was permanent and would not improve, and he believed that she would not have wanted to live in a persistent vegetative state he decided that the feeding tube be removed. He had the preference to take such a decision over the parents of Terri (Kinzbrunner).
Bibliography
DawnOntario. (2005). The case of Terri Schindler Schiavo. Web.
Kinzbrunner, B. M. (n.d.). Introducion to Medical Ethics: Informed Consent & Advanced Directives. Web.
Quill, T. E. (2005). Terri Schiavo – A Tragedy Compounded. The New England Journal of Medicine , 352, 1630-1633.