The death of Terri Schiavo is first and foremost a terrible personal tragedy for her parents and siblings. But, viewed from a broader context, it is also a moral travesty and a frightening attack on our democratic sovereignty.
Ms. Schiavo was not terminally ill, and was not dependant on life support. Just as she used a wheelchair for mobility, she used a tube for eating and drinking. She was a living human being, even though her state of consciousness and awareness was disputed among medical experts. One thing is certain: She had loving parents and siblings who desperately wanted her to continue to live, hoping that one day her condition will improve.
One need not be religious to realize that the Florida court decision to forcibly remove her feeding tube, which was tantamount to killing her through starvation and dehydration, lacked the basic essential due process safeguards. A blatant example was the fact that throughout the proceedings in the State courts, she was not appointed ad litem counsel, an attorney to represent her own interests. Considering the fact that she didn’t leave a living will, and that her husband had abandoned his marriage in 1995 by cohabiting with and having two children by another woman, appointing her independent counsel would have been essential to protect her rights.
Moreover, her parents’ right to care for their daughter should have taken precedence over her husband’s allegation, which was pure hearsay, that she preferred to be left to die in such a situation. The principle of the sanctity of life, and the legal prohibition to kill another human being, should have resulted in allowing the parents to continue to tend for their daughter, and afford her the newest and most up-to-date medical treatment and therapy.
These principles were the driving force behind the extraordinary bi-partisan Congressional bill which mandated a review of her case from anew in a Federal court. It is important to understand the constitutional meaning of the Act For The Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo, passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President. Once it became the law, it was the manifestation of the democratic sovereignty of the American people. Through their democratically-elected representatives, the American people decided to prevent the killing of Terri Schiavo, and guarantee that she receives a proper trial with due process of law.
However, certain judges from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals prevented that review from being conducted, by refusing to resume her nourishment. These judges effectively frustrated Congress’ intent, and shattered our democratic sovereignty. Once Congress passed the law, it was the judges’ obligation to uphold that law. The undisputable fact was that Congress enacted a law to protect a right guaranteed by the Constitution – the right to life being the most fundamental constitutional right. There was absolutely no legal justification for the judges’ reprehensible decision to obstruct a Federal law, and cause the killing of Terri Schiavo.
By refusing to keep her alive until her case is reviewed from anew in a Federal court, these non-elected judges executed a heads-on attack on our legislative branch. They abused their powers by letting Terri Schiavo die from starvation, violating her constitutional right to life without due process of law.
This unprecedented judicial attack on the sovereignty of the American people should not have been tolerated by fair-minded citizens. We, the people, had both the right and the obligation to disobey this court decision and prevent this travesty through direct-action civil disobedience.
The doctors at the hospice should have refused the illegal court order and given her sustenance. Policemen stationed at the hospice should have stood up for democracy and let the protestors come inside and give her food and water. There were some 50 brave protesters who tried to do just that, but if there were many more – it may have changed the outcome of this tragedy. Governor Jeb Bush could have ordered his state police to save Terri Schiavo. In the proud tradition of Henry D. Thoreau and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, he should have ignored the judicial tyrants and saved Terri Schiavo’s life.
A properly coordinated campaign of civil disobedience could have prevented the immoral and undemocratic killing of a living human being. By refusing to reclaim our democratic powers from judicial tyrants who hijacked them in a blatantly undemocratic way, all of us are at fault for the killing of Terri Schiavo.
There are so many problems with this peice that I can not even begin. It’s analysis of the constitution and our democratic system is so wrong that it is laughable. Bush and the Congress, were, in fact acting unconstitutionally. “Judicial tyrants” — what a bold-faced lie. We are a nation of laws, and that is exactly what the courts were doing — ever single judidicial body ruled in favor of the husband. You think it should be different, then you have to pass a law that says the spouses’ rights are superceded by the parents in situations like this.
We live in a world which is vastly overpopulated with human beings. It seems certain groups are focussing in on keeping as many of them breathing as possible and ignoring the global consequences caused by our growing numbers. The US government is one of the worst institutional offenders here. Now I’m not saying the decision in this case was right or wrong – I don’t know what was in Terri’s mind – & I don’t particularly care, but I am concerned that so many people are getting so uptight over things of really minute consequence.