Case Overview
The case in question is that of Terri Schiavo, whose life was cut short after her husband requested that a court approve the removal of her feeding tube. The stakeholders in the case were Terri, her parents, siblings, her husband, physicians, the media, the court, and Jeb Bush, Florida’s governor. The incident occurred in 2003 when the court ordered that Terri’s feeding tube needed to be removed since she had experienced a persistent vegetative state since 1990 (Herring, 2016).
Terri was also awarded $1 million because she had experienced medical malpractice. Significant media attention was accorded to the case, with a picture of Terri smiling at her mother appearing on the front page of popular newspapers. With the support of Florida’s legislature, Bush ordered the feeding tube to be reinserted, but this was permanent since the tube was later removed.
Bioethical Issues and End-of-Life Decisions
The bioethical issue in the case is that Terri’s husband contested the tube’s removal, indicating that he wanted to fulfill her wishes since she would not have liked to live in a vegetative state. However, Terri’s parents had a different opinion, suggesting she was not comatose since she could smile, blink, and follow various movements. Medical professionals had also indicated that Terri was not in a persistent vegetative state based on examinations carried out on her.
At one time, she had instructed a speech pathologist to stop carrying out a medical procedure on her. This indicates that Terri was responsive and not in a continuous vegetative state. The patient only survived for thirteen days after the feeding tube was removed as instructed by the court. Failing to remove the tube would have allowed Terri to live longer, even though it would have been against her wishes.
The bioethical issue for the role end-of-life issues played in the case is that the court had to decide whether to fulfill her wish not to remain vegetative. The court also had the option to consider the information her parents and health professionals provided. Terri’s parents insisted she was not comatose since they observed her smiling while following their movements in a room (LaPeter, 2019). The parents also contended that her husband, Michael, had chosen to continue his wife’s therapy so that he could afford attorney fees for the case. Different medical professionals had also given an opinion indicating that the patient was not in a vegetative state since she could respond to triggers.
The court ended up ordering the tube to be removed, which hastened Terri’s death. Terri had survived 15 years after she collapsed from cardiac arrest, but died seven years after the court battle to have her feeding tube removed was initiated. She only lived for thirteen days after the elimination of the feeding tube.
This indicates that Terri could have lived longer if she had been fed through a tube, but the court chose to respect her end-of-life decisions. However, advocates of the right to die would argue that it was necessary to allow Terri to die with dignity rather than keep her alive in her condition. Continuing to feed her through the tube is associated with prolonged suffering, which was not consistent with her wishes.
Role of Medical Professionals and Conflicting Opinions
The bioethical issue did not influence the decisions of healthcare professionals involved in the case since they gave an honest opinion about Terri’s medical state. Physicians who had cared for Terri since she had collapsed from cardiac arrest indicated that she responded to pain by blinking her eyes or shaking her legs when requested. A speech pathologist who had interacted with Terri indicated she had requested that a medical procedure being carried out on her be stopped. Another doctor had suggested that she was not in a persistent vegetative state based on evidence gathered from medical examination. The differing opinions indicate that medical professionals were not inclined to remove the feeding tube since they believed her health would likely improve.
References
Herring, J. (2016). Medical law and ethics (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
LaPeter, L. (2019). Inside the Terri Schiavo case: Judge who decided her fate opens up. The Herald News. Web.