August 31, 2004

Florida Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Schiavo Case

---

The Florida Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in the case of Governor Jeb Bush vs. Michael Schiavo.  The focus of the court’s deliberation has been on whether or not “Terri’s Law,” adopted in a special legislative session in 2003, interferes with Mrs. Schiavo’s constitutional right to privacy and the separation of powers doctrine. 

According to current Florida law, a proxy or surrogate may withhold or withdraw nutrition and hydration from an incapacitated individual (who cannot give informed consent for treatment) who is terminally ill, has an end-stage condition, or is in a persistent vegetative state (see Ch. 765, Florida Statutes) 

Terri’s Law, adopted October 21, 2003 allowed the Governor to issue a one-time stay during a 15-day window in cases when:

1.                 the patient has no written advance directive;

2.                 the court has found the patient to be in a persistent vegetative state;

3.                 the patient has had nutrition and hydration withheld; and,

4.                 a member of the patient’s family has contested the withdrawal.

 After signing this legislation, the Governor ordered the re-insertion of Mrs. Schiavo’s feeding tube, which had been withdrawn after lengthy court proceedings. 

 This complex case has drawn wide interest and has tragically pitted Mrs. Schiavo’s husband, Michael, against the Schindlers, her parents and siblings.  Both sides have invoked the Catholic Tradition at various times in this dispute.  Two items bear consideration:

 First, in addressing questions of withholding or withdrawing nutrition and hydration, the Catholic Tradition[i] presumes in favor of providing them to patients as long as the benefits outweigh the burdens to the patient (see Ethical & Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, 58).  While commentators have offered various interpretations of Pope John Paul II’s recent papal allocution on the vegetative state, there is widespread agreement that this presumption is reaffirmed.  Florida’s Bishops have consistently articulated a preference for a “safer course” in the case of Mrs. Schiavo.

 Second, the principle of autonomy – that persons ought to make their own decisions, and in medical questions, to direct their own care – has also been cited in the case.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church[ii] and the USCCB’s Ethical and Religious Directives[iii] support this notion.  Autonomy is not exercised in a vacuum, however; it should be exercised among morally appropriate options while meeting the obligations to do no harm (nonmaleficence), to do good (beneficence) and to give each their due (justice). 

 “We join with many others in continuing our prayers for Mrs. Schiavo and all engaged in this tragic case.  We salute all those who have sincerely sought to advance Mrs. Schiavo’s interests in this case,” said Michael Sheedy, Associate for Health at the Florida Catholic Conference,  

 For more information, contact Michael Sheedy at msheedy@flacathconf.org.