Terri Schiavo was a 27-year old who suffered cardiac arrest on February 25,1990. Terri was anorexic which caused her to suffer from extreme hypokalemia, which is an imbalance of potassium. The hypokalemia caused the cardiac arrest, which led to a coma due to anoxia, a lack of oxygen in her brain. Terri had brain damage and was in a vegetative state “ during the subsequent months, she exhibited no evidence of higher cortical function. Computed tomographic scans of her brain eventually showed severe atrophy of her cerebral hemispheres, and her electroencephalograms were flat, indicating no functional activity of the cerebral cortex. Her neurologic examinations were indicative of a persistent vegetative state, which includes periods of wakefulness alternating with sleep, some reflexive responses to light and noise, and some basic gag and swallowing responses, but no signs of emotion, willful activity, or cognition” (Quill, M.D., 2005)
At the hospital to buy time and keep her alive doctors had inserted a feeding tube.

Two months later, her husband Michael transferred Terri from the hospital to a rehabilitation center. The following month her husband with no objections from her parents became her legal guardian. Her parents tried taking her home and caring for her but later sent her back to the rehab center because it was too much work to take care of her at home. Terri needed round the clock care “For months 13-18 into her coma, three shift of workers worked 24 hours a day trying to rehabilitate Terri” (Pence, 2011)

For five years, Terri received intensive rehabilitation efforts to try to get her to regain consciences. Michael in the meantime received money from the malpractice suit brought against the obstetrician who failed to diagnose Terri potassium level. Some money went to a fund to care for Terri the rest went to Michael. Terri’s parents felt they were due money also and fought with Michael over It and tried remove him as her guardian but the judge did not allow it.

After years in a vegetative state. Michael believed that his wife would not want to be kept alive indefinitely in her condition and asked the courts to allow the removal of the feeding tube, which was keeping Terri alive. Michael recalled her mentioning not wanting to be in a vegetative state but her parents fought that Terri would want to live “recalling prior statements that she had made, such as “I don't want to be kept alive on a machine.” The Schindler family, however, did not accept the diagnosis of a persistent vegetative state, believing instead that Ms. Schiavo's condition could improve with additional rehabilitative treatment.” (Quill, M.D., 2005)

In 2000, two years after the request to remove the feeding tube Judge George Greer approved it because he felt that Michael had shown enough proof but her parents appealed because they said Terri did not have a living will. “The relevant Florida statute requires “clear and convincing evidence that the decision would have been the one the patient would have chosen had the patient been competent or, if there is no indication of what the patient would have chosen, that the decision is in the patient's best interest.” Since there is no societal consensus about whether a feeding tube is in the “best interest” of a patient in a persistent vegetative state, the main legal question to be addressed was that of Terri Schiavo's wishes.” In 2001, the trial court judge ruled that clear and convincing evidence showed that Ms. Schiavo would have chosen not to receive life-prolonging treatment under the circumstances that then applied (Quill, M.D., 2005)

Her parents appealed the decision in Federal court. They said that Terri could swallow and felt that with hypobaric chamber therapy should could get better. Three neurologists testified that Terri was in PVS and that her swallowing was merely a primitive function of her brain stem.

In the fall of of 2003, Florida legislation passed a special bill called Terri’s Law. “Terri’s law allowed the governor to issue a one-time stay of a judges order to remove a feeding tube in certain cases where a patient is in PVS. After, its passage, Governor Bush immediately issued a stay.” (Pence, 2011) The feeding tube was again reinserted. This law was subsequently ruled an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers

On March 18, 2005, Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for a third time. The U.S. Congress then passed an “emergency measure” that was signed by the President in an effort both to force federal courts to review Ms. Schiavo's case and to create a legal mandate to have her feeding tube reinserted yet again. The U.S. District Court in Florida denied the emergency request to reinsert the feeding tube, and this decision was upheld on appeal. Thirteen days after her feeding tube was removed Terri died.

Michael and the Schindlers saw the situation from two very different way and they were all trying to do what was best for Terri. In the end I do believe Terri was well served because Michael tried fro a long time to rehabilitate her even going as far as to become a licensed respiratory therapist but when he realized there was no hope he made the choice that she would have wanted The Schindlers on the other hand were more influenced by not being able to let their daughter go “the Schindlers testified that, even if Terri had asked them to do so, they would not remove Terri’s feeding tube under any circumstances. They said that even if she developed gangrene an all her limbs had to be amputated, they would still keep her alive” (Pence, 2011)

After her death and autopsy was done, “the coroner implied that Terri Schiavo was not in a minimally conscious state. It said she had massive brain damage. Her brain weight was approximately half of the expected weight. Her remaining brain regions show sever hypoxic injury and neuronal atrophy/loss” (Pence, 2011) The autopsy I believe shows that her husband made the best choice for Terri.

Bibliography

Quill, M.D., T. E. (2005, April 21). Terri Schiavo -A Tragedy Compounded. The New England Journal of Medicine , 1600-1633.

Pence, G. E. (2011). Medical Ethics: Accounts of Ground-Breaking Cases (6th ed.). (M. Ryan, Ed.) New York, NY: McGraw Hill.