Florida court rejects Bush's bumbling

Written by Mac Diva
Published September 25, 2004
page 1 | 2

The good news about this decision is:

•It affirms that the courts are the proper venue for weighing issues of equity effecting individuals.

•It confirms that the legislative process cannot be used to undermine judicial decisions.

•A state court rendered it, instead of relying on the federal judicial system to 'rescue' it from the excecutive and legislative branches' folly.

The bad news is that the state's Supreme Court had to step in at all. The lower court's decision was fairly rendered. It weighed the competing interests involved and decided that Schiavo, who will not recover from her persistent vegetative state, need not remain in limbo for years to come.

The interlopers seeking to advance their interests in the case — the pro-life movement — have no actual standing. Their lives will not be impacted if the woman is allowed to finish dying. Schiavo is merely a vehicle for them to use to further their cause. That, in part, is why I have no empathy for them. They took what should be a personal decision made by family — whether to maintain a body after it can no longer function — and converted it into a decision to made by strangers for political expediency. That is the antithesis of caring about other people, not evidence of a reverence for life. They must be very muddled thinkers to confuse imposing their will on others with protecting people from harm.

Reasonably related

So Gov. Bush behaved as if he is King Jeb. Why does it matter that a governor usurped the judicial prerogative? Michael C. Dorf offers additional insights at Findlaw.

Note: This entry also appeared at Mac-a-ro-nies.

page 1 | 2
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Florida court rejects Bush's bumbling
Published: September 25, 2004
Type:
Section: Politics
Writer: Mac Diva
Mac Diva's BC Writer page
Mac Diva's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Mac Diva
All Politics Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — September 26, 2004 @ 03:47AM — bhw [URL]

Terri Schiavo's is a very sad case, but the law had to go. It allowed one government official to override the legal guardian's decision and/or the court's ruling. Even the FL legislature realized they'd made a mistake in passing the law.

I wrote a post about it a few months ago, when there had been another update in the case.

I think that it's the husband's right to make the feeding tube choice, but the guy gives me the creeps.

#2 — October 2, 2004 @ 01:06AM — Mac Diva [URL]

Michael Schiavo is the kind of character a good novelist would have created for a book about a right to die case. He makes the situation edgy. Think how less compelling the story would be if a goody two shoes husband was involved. A fellow who hasn't even touched 'down there' in fourteen years. Ole Mike figured out a way to have his cake and eat it to. Another aspect that is almost novelistic is how Terry Schiavo got into the predicament she is in. It was man against himself (oh, those male terms!), not man against nature, originally. And, we haven't reached the parents, yet. (She yawned, so she was responding to conversation. Right.) Joyce Carol Oates could have written this.

I am going to guess that something about Terry's situation, perhaps contributory negligence, made it a bad wrongful death case. So, the way to collect damages would be to keep her on life support. But, if the terms of that agreement have been fulfilled, there is no reason to continue with the life support, as you suggested.

#3 — March 22, 2005 @ 00:50AM — Nikka zorana

Nobody deserves to be starved to death. I am from Serbia and what is happening in america is wrong! Terri is alive and she is God's precious gift. Taking water and food from her is a serious crime! How would you like it if i starved you to death~~ yes she may be on a feeding tube, but she is still alive if she is breathing than she is alive. She is not on any machines get the facts right!!! i am 100% for life. The world is watching america will your country stand for life or death. If you country stands for death may God in heaven have mercy on you all!!! Life what a beautiful choice! Give Terri to her parents.. Michael is living in MORTAL SIN with another woman.. he does not love TErry he just wants her money... what is is to say that a judge has the right to end life. starvation is the worst way to die. i see in america that it is a crime to starve a horse to death, then why are you starving a human being that has dignity and the right to life. Dying by starvation is agonizing pain it is sin to watch someone die and just stand by. America you need Jesus

#4 — August 23, 2005 @ 20:43PM — Winston Jen

Nikka zorana, your points are very misguided and poorly thought-out. Terri was 'alive' only in a physical sense. Her mind was dead, and she had no hope of ever becoming conscious again.

The feeding tube IS life support, because she couldn't feed herself or even swallow. She stated that she did not want to be kept alive in this state, and the courts consistently found that the wishes she expressed to her husband were valid and should be respected. Yes, she didn't put them in writing, but they were young and didn't think of things like this. However, Michael Schiavo still had many witnesses that confirmed what Terri's wishes were.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/20249)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments