Court and the End of Life - The Terri Schiavo Case And Similarity To Cruzan

Like Cruzan, the case of Terri Schiavo involved a young woman in a persistent vegetative state and the question of whether her nutrition and hydration could be discontinued. Schiavo entered into a PVS in 1990, when her brain was deprived of oxygen during a heart attack brought on by an eating disorder. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, believing that she would never recover and saying that his wife did not want to be kept alive by artificial means, petitioned a Florida court to remove her feeding tube.

In 2000 the trial court determined that Schiavo did not wish to be kept alive by artificial means based on her clear and direct statement to her husband. However, Schiavo's parents appealed the ruling, based on their belief that their daughter would recover. They also contested the assertion that their daughter did not want to be kept alive by artificial means. Schiavo had left no living will to clarify her position, but under Florida's Health Care Advance Directives Law, a patient's spouse is second in line to make a decision about whether life support should be suspended (after a court-appointed guardian), adult children are third, and parents are fourth.

Constitutional Breach?

By October 2003 Schiavo's parents had exhausted their appeals; the Florida appellate courts upheld the ruling of the trial court. At that time, a Florida judge ruled that removal of the tube take place. However, Schiavo's parents requested that Florida Governor Jeb Bush intervene. In response, the Florida legislature developed House Bill 35-E ("Terri's Law") and passed this bill on October 21, 2003. The law gave Governor Bush the authority to order Schiavo's feeding tube reinserted, and he did that by issuing Executive Order No. 03-201 that same day, six days after the feeding tube had been removed.

Legal experts noted that the Florida legislature, in passing "Terri's Law," appeared to have taken judicial powers away from the judicial branch of the Florida government and had given them to the executive branch. If this was the case, then the law was unconstitutional under Article 2, Section III, of the Florida constitution, which states: "No person belonging to one branch shall exercise any powers appertaining to either of the other branches unless expressly provided herein." Thus, Michael Schiavo challenged the law's constitutionality in Pinellas County Circuit Court. Governor Bush requested that the Pinellas County Circuit Court Judge dismiss Michael Schiavo's lawsuit arguing against Terri's Law. On April 30, 2004, Judge Charles A. Davis rejected the Governor's technical challenges, denying the Governor's motion to dismiss. In May 2004 the law that allowed Governor Bush to intervene in the case was ruled unconstitutional by a Florida appeals court. The legal battle continued, with the case scheduled to be argued before the Florida Supreme Court on August 31, 2004.