The Terry Schiavo case

While I'm sorry for the family and everyone whose privacy was invaded by our disgusting media,and I'm glad this case opened a diffucult dialogue in our society about dying with dignity and the importance of living wills,I believe the REAL significance of the Schiavo Fiasco was that it showed just how desperate the Neo-Cons in our Government are to curry favor with the Right to Life folks-that they would latch on to some families misfortune and exploit it for their own political gain speaks volumes about just how low they are willing to go.It also provided a timely distraction from the debate over social security,the death toll in Iraq and the flailing economy.

The Schiavo incident, in and of itself, was a tragic, personal one that shouldn't have turned into the public circus that it did. What happened then was horrible, no matter what side you look at it from. However, it DOES bring out important issues that is relevant to pretty much everyone as far as making clear what one's personal choices are in case there is no other way to communicate those wishes later.

Its over, the media hype was ridiculous. Michael was cleared of all the false accusations and Terry is in a better situation now that she had been in 15 years. This was invasion of privacy at its worst.

A hugely important issue, it brings euthanasia (as opposed to allowing someone to die with dignity) into the arena of public discussion. I generally agree with Gypsy on this except for one minor point. The right to die issues usually deal with someone who is terminal and being kept alive by artificial means. This lady wasn't dying, she was a healthy, brain-damaged patient, one of millions throughout the US and the world. Was she getting better? Well, no. But what made this a landmark case is that a Florida Judge somehow accorded a right, not to die, but to kill. I think neanderthal conservatives (like me) are OK with pulling the plug out of mercy for someone who is terminally ill and being kept alive by a ventilator. This was an estranged husband, with a new wife and family, petitioning the court for the right to kill his ex-wife. His conflict of interest was so overwhelmingly obvious, I would expect a judge to at least find something to substantiate Michael's impassioned but u... Read more

This was a personal family issue. It was important to the rest of us only in that it brought to the fore the question of government interference in what most of us consider a very private matter.

While its something we should all consider, (living wills) I dont think its that important at all. It was simply something that the media new people would want to watch. Death and ignorance sells. Its a shame. That was a personal family affair. The fact that it was made a show out of is Pitiful.

The right to die issue has always been a personal one, and rightfully so. This one should have been, as well. Even if Terry DIDN'T leave a living will of some sort, historical tradition (which I know some of you on here love) dictates that the end of life decision lies with spouse. I believe that this is, and should continue to be, the right course. After all, who are we most likely to discuss end of life issues with most? Our parents or our Husband/Wife?? I'm sorry that Terry's parents couldn't let her go, but I believe that, ultimately, justice was done in this case. The moral of the story is that, if you have specific wishes, your loved ones need to know, both verbally and in writing. Really, it's that important. What are you doing reading this, don't you have papers to write??????