It's sad that this has

It's sad that this has turned into a pissing contest between the Florida judiciary and the state legislature.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday
struck down a law that was rushed through the Legislature last fall to
keep a severely brain-damaged woman hooked up to a feeding tube against
her husband's wishes. The unanimous court said the law that kept Terri
Schiavo alive violated the separation of powers between the judicial
branch and the legislative and executive branches. Lower courts had
ruled that Michael Schiavo could have the tube removed, but the
Legislature passed the law to overrule the courts. Gov. Jeb Bush then
used the law to order the tube reinserted. The court's decision came
just weeks after oral arguments. It was not immediately known if the
ruling would clear the way for the tube's final removal. An attorney
for Terri Schiavo's parents, who want her kept alive, would not
speculate. Michael Schiavo's attorneys did not immediately return calls
seeking comment. "It is without question an invasion of the authority of the
judicial branch for the Legislature to pass a law that allows the
executive branch to interfere with the final judicial determination in
a case," Chief Justice Barbara Pariente wrote for the court. "That is
precisely what occurred here."

{my emphasis}
That's just sad. Granted it was an emergency measure, and it shouldn't
have held up under scrutiny, but it's really quite sad that Terri
Schiavo, it now appears, has wound up on the wrong end of a pissing
contest. If there was ever a case where a fresh judicial review was
required simply as to the merits of the case, this is the one. Is that
what happened? Nope. It was all about whether the legislative
overstepped its bounds by giving the executive the power to do
something to trump the judiciary. This woman's husband seeks to gain financially
from her death. (On the timeline, check out the malpractice awards that
he can't gain access to unless she's dead). It's apparent, to me at
least, her "wish to die" wasn't invoked until after the malpractice
cases were successful. This guy wants to remarry and has two children
with his girlfriend. He wants to move on. Her parents are more than
willing to take over her care, and if this guy was a reasonable
individual you'd think he agree to that. He'd be free to do as he
wished. But, no. He claims she wanted to die if something like this
ever befell her and he's just honoring her wishes. I'm not buying it.
And it's very, very sad.
If nothing else, this is a good time to remind everyone to get your wishes put down in writing.
It's a scary thing to think about. I know. Been there, done that with
the husband. It's horrifying to be handed a raft of paperwork that
demands you list out all the juicy legal information about who has
power of attorney, if there's a living will, what are the stated wishes
of the patient? And all sorts of other things, like hospice care if its deemed necessary, because you never thought you'd have to think about it until much, much later
in life. And all of this is occurring while your spouse is under the
knife for an operation the surgeon has taken delicate pains to inform
you might not work out. It's even scarier if you don't have any
paperwork to back up what you know to be the true wishes of your loved
one. Fortunately, all worked out in the husband's case, but we all know
not every case has a happy ending. What would you do in such a
situation? No one wants to face their own mortality, but think of the
favor you'll be doing your loved ones if you a. find out what's
required in the state you reside in and b. do something about it.

Posted by: Kathy at 12:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 664 words, total size 4 kb.