Spring Break
Keeping woman alive disregards her personal rights
By: David Shackelford
Issue date: 10/14/03 Section: Opinion
With the court's recognition of Schiavo's right, her wishes and dignity were preserved. Now, however, the state has picked a side.
This isn't the governor's first attempt to subvert the rights of legal proxies to make decisions. Bush, an abortion opponent, asked a court in April to appoint a guardian for the fetus of J.D.S., a developmentally disabled rape victim, infuriating women's rights groups. The court denied his request, saying a separate guardian for the fetus would conflict with the rights designated to J.D.S.'s guardian. Critics interpreted Bush's action as an effort to reinforce his good standing with conservative groups.
The euthanasia debate remains contentious surrounding what role physicians may take to end the life of a willing patient. Medical experts and the courts, however, agree on the right to refuse treatment. The Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association stated in 1989, "The social commitment of the physician is to sustain life and relieve suffering. Where the performance of one duty conflicts with another, the preferences of the patient should prevail." It went further to state: "Even if death is not imminent but a patient is beyond doubt permanently unconscious ... it is not unethical to discontinue all means of life-prolonging medical treatment."
Despite expert consensus and court rulings, Bush wants to drag this case out further. His brief argues the possibility that Schiavo could be trained to eat and drink on her own, but this possibility has been explored during her 13 years of care. These attempts have failed.
Arrogantly presuming that a state knows better than those appointed to make crucial decisions inhibits due process of law. In Florida this attitude combined with Bush's political aspirations has sparked the idea of a fetal guardian and is now behind the degradation of a patient.
An executive official should not attempt to make things right when a judicial decision doesn't agree with his views or the views of his conservative constituents. Values dictate decision-making and action, but those in power must not let ideology trump a citizen's right to privacy and liberty.
This isn't the governor's first attempt to subvert the rights of legal proxies to make decisions. Bush, an abortion opponent, asked a court in April to appoint a guardian for the fetus of J.D.S., a developmentally disabled rape victim, infuriating women's rights groups. The court denied his request, saying a separate guardian for the fetus would conflict with the rights designated to J.D.S.'s guardian. Critics interpreted Bush's action as an effort to reinforce his good standing with conservative groups.
The euthanasia debate remains contentious surrounding what role physicians may take to end the life of a willing patient. Medical experts and the courts, however, agree on the right to refuse treatment. The Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association stated in 1989, "The social commitment of the physician is to sustain life and relieve suffering. Where the performance of one duty conflicts with another, the preferences of the patient should prevail." It went further to state: "Even if death is not imminent but a patient is beyond doubt permanently unconscious ... it is not unethical to discontinue all means of life-prolonging medical treatment."
Despite expert consensus and court rulings, Bush wants to drag this case out further. His brief argues the possibility that Schiavo could be trained to eat and drink on her own, but this possibility has been explored during her 13 years of care. These attempts have failed.
Arrogantly presuming that a state knows better than those appointed to make crucial decisions inhibits due process of law. In Florida this attitude combined with Bush's political aspirations has sparked the idea of a fetal guardian and is now behind the degradation of a patient.
An executive official should not attempt to make things right when a judicial decision doesn't agree with his views or the views of his conservative constituents. Values dictate decision-making and action, but those in power must not let ideology trump a citizen's right to privacy and liberty.
Be sure to include your name, major, and class year. Submissions without this information are subject to deletion.
By submitting a comment, you agree to thebatt.com's Terms of Use.
You may also send a Mail Call to The Battalion at mailcall@thebatt.com