This essay discusses the Terri Schiavo 's case during the time period between 1990 and 2005.After Ms. Schiavo suffers cardiac arrest, lack of oxygen leads her brain to damage. As a result of this damage, she had to be given a PEG tube to continue her life in the vegetative state. Her husband is appointed as guardian by the court, and Terri 's family do not reject that. Michael Schiavo-her husband- receives about $300,000 and about $750,000 for Ms. Schiavo’s medical care.After three years, he demands the PEG to be removed.However, Terri’s parents don’t want their daughter to be left for dead, hence the court trials, that lasted until 1985-Terri’s death, start. I think Ms. Schiavo’s PEG tube should have been removed earlier. First of all, due to the brain damage, she was …show more content…
Finally, with respect to the court’s decision on Michael’s guardianship, I do not think that the right to decide Terri’s continuation of life is not legally her parents to be made. Moreover, Michael is the one who spent effort on the care of Terri, thus the situation affects him the most. Nonetheless, the parents have shared more memories with Terri, and they have bonds that come with blood.Therefore it is understandable for them to want her daughter live as long as possible.Besides, regarding the money Michael was given for Terri’s care, he is responsible for the care of Terri until her natural death. So, if we consider only the economic facts of the case, the PEG tube should be removed in the first place. Yet, the parents suggest the reason behind Michael request to have the tube removed is to have rest of the money for Terri’s care.
In conclusion, if I were to be Terri, I wouldn’t want to continue my life while if I were to be Terri’s parents or husband, I would want her to live as long as she can regarding both my connection with her and that it is not my decision to kill someone. However, as a person outside of the case, I support the removing of the PEG tube with a concern of