I caught a couple of minutes of CNN, they were running a retrospective of Terri Schiavo’s life.   The narrative was warm and compassionate about her life prior to her lapse into a coma.  That bulimia as a likely cause of the potassium imbalance that caused the coma was quickly covered, without judgment.   The bit seemed more in place on Fox, but Fox vs CNN, liberal vs. conservative will be saved for a future post.

The Schiavo case has grabbed headlines because it is such an emotionally appealing issue.  A woman is lying in a bed and slowly dying.  She is in a coma and mostly non-responsive.   That her husband is the one who pushed for the feeding tubes to be removed seems, at first glance, to be the cold calculated moves of a man wanting to be done with caring for his crippled wife after 15 years of being in a coma.  It is easy to see the case in this emotion charged light.

I look at it as a test of the legal concept of the rights of a guardian.  Children, the elderly and those unable to make choices for themselves have or are appointed guardians.   In cases such as the Terri Schiavo case, the guardian is her husband.  His role is to make choices that she has previously directed, or are determined to be consistent with her wishes or at least in her best interest.  

If Terri Schiavo’s parents were successful in overruling the determination of her guardian then that would open up a huge on notable legal precedent that the will of the public can remove a guardian from his/her responsibilities.

Imagine the following:

•  A mother is caught on a security camera physically disciplining her child.   An outraged public demands that her child be removed from her guardianship. 
  
• An Amish family refuses medical treatment for a sick child.   Activists liken the decision to murder and have the child removed from the family for medical treatment.
  
• A mother takes her son from Cuba to the US, but is killed trying to reach Florida.  Anti-Castro activists and distant relatives succeed in preventing the return of the child to his father in Cuba.

These cases are not far-fetched, and they share, in my untrained legal mind, a strong similarity to the Schiavo case.   Her husband is her guardian, and the courts have repeatedly upheld his judgment of what actions she would prefer to be taken in this situation.   It is hard to look at the anguish of her parents, who disagree, but this is a significant issue that needs to be looked at not in light of the plight of one woman, but in the light of the impact a precedent would have on our society.

I think it appropriate that so many courts have weighed in on this matter.  I wish the Supreme Court had been willing to take this matter up.  While not a matter of strict constitutional interpretation, the SCOTUS should have spent the time to offer what jurisprudential wisdom they could spare.