« Ark. Health Dept. Director Killed | Main | Schiavo Update »
March 21, 2005
On Dying
Like most of you, I've been following the Schiavo case....with increasing dismay. From a legal standpoint, I have a huge problem with the apparent fact that she's never had a guardian ad litem and an attorney appointed to represent her in any of the legal proceedings. Instead, the judge appointed himself as ad litem. That may be legal in Florida (and I have no idea, I'm not licensed there), but it's just wrong. A judge's duty in this case is to decide whether or not she wanted to be kept alive by feeding & hydration. An ad litem's duty is to investigate & represent her wishes/best interests. No one person can adequately do both. The duties are too disparate.
Secondly, as Jim said, there isn't any clear indication of what she wanted. She left no 'living will', and isn't able to communicate what she wants now. Absent that, I don't believe anyone should be 'unhooked'. Otherwise, it's too easy for someone to exploit the system for their own interests, not those of the incapacitated. I know this will come as a great shock to you, but some witnesses lie in court. Some don't even realize they're lying. They've just convinced themselves that how they want things to be is the way that it happened. I don't know if that's what's happening in the Schiavo case (and neither do you), but it's always a distinct possibility.
Another problem I have is that even if Terry Schiavo did tell her husband & the other witnesses that she didn't want to be kept alive by artificial means, that doesn't necessarily mean that she completely understood what that meant. It's been my experience that people don't understand that this also includes providing nutrition & hydration to an otherwise functional body. In fact, I can't ever remember having a client who didn't blanch and protest that "No, no no! I don't want to be starved to death" when I've explained the full ramifications of that part of an advanced health care directive.
For those reasons, I don't believe food & water should be stopped in the Schiavo case....unless and until it can be proved otherwise, with adequate legal protections in place.
And probably unlike most of you, I've had a beloved relative who wanted to die refuse food and drink. A few years ago, my grandmother, who'd been ill with a stomach virus, decided she was sick & tired of being sick & tired and was ready to move on to the other side. She missed my grandfather and was just tired of living. Nothing we or the doctors said could change her mind. She was alert and competent....and communicated her wishes quite emphatically. We, as a family, finally came to terms with it and allowed her to do as she wished. It wasn't what we wanted, but it was what she wanted. And we loved her that much. It wasn't easy, but allowing (or causing) someone to die shouldn't be.
But unlike the Schiavo case, there wasn't a question about what my grandmother wanted. Absent any clear indication, we should never presume to know what another would wish in this situation.
With that said, may I make a suggestion? Get your thumb out of your butt and visit your attorney to have an advanced health care directive drawn up. Don't put your family and loved ones through something like this.
Because there, but for the grace of God, go all of us.
Posted by Rita at March 21, 2005 08:45 AM