Should We Have the Right to Die?

Running head: RIGHT TO DIE
RIGHT TO DIE
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

RIGHT TO DIE1
RIGHT TO DIE
Death is not the antonym of life but it is a part of life. In this case of Theresa Marie
Schiavo of Florida, who was in an irrevocable persistent vegetative state due to brain dead
condition for a period of 7 years (bioethics.miami.edu & Policy, 2020). Her husband Micheal
Schiavo, after a long term medical treatment asked to remove her feeding tube stating that she
would not have wanted to continue her life with the support of artificial machines (Rohlinger
et al., 2015). Her parents contended that Micheal’s demand was wrong as, Terri being a
catholic would never support the act of euthanasia, thereby, shoe would want to live. The
argument to allow or disallow the right to death for Terri went for a long time (Rohlinger,
Pederson & Valle, 2015). The objective of this study is to convince about the
inappropriateness of the verdict in the favour of Michael Schiavo.
It was assumed that Terri collapsed in her apartment on February 25, 1990 because of
cardiac arrest. While moving to the hospital, it was found that she was suffering from
hypokalemia. She was further diagnosed with bulimia nervosa. In 1992, Micheal sued the
fertility doctor of Terri for the failure to diagnose bulimia. In November 1990, Terri was
taken to the University of California, San Francisco, for a tentative nerve stimulation by
Micheal. The treatment was unsuccessful though. The doctors declared her condition as
persistent vegetative state in a year of her cardiac arrest. The court appointed Michael
Schiavo as Terri Schiavo's legal guardian on June 1990 and this decision of the court was not
challenged by the Schindlers at that time. In 1998, Micheal filed a petition for removing
Terri’s feeding tube which was challenged by Terri’s parents. Court then engaged Richard
Pearse as Terri’s Guardian ad litem. Pearse after investigation reported that the doctor’s
reports about persistent vegetative state is correct and includes absence of voluntary action
and spontaneous communication as per the Florida Statue (Masters, 2016). However, he
rejected Micheal’s petition in the absence of living will. The case then referred to the county