A Legal Struggle

Question: Analyze the research in order to determine who was ethically correct in your opinion; the husband or the parents. Answer: Introduction Terri Schiavo underwent a legal struggle regarding the right to end her life when she remained in a vegetative state for nearly fifteen years. She was under a strict diet and collapsed one fine morning. The doctors extended her treatment but she went into a permanent vegetative state from which she could never recover. After a few years of her treatment, her husband claimed that her feeding tube should be removed and it should be allowed to her that she should end her life because had she been alive, she would have never agreed to such a life. On the other hand, her parents were totally against the removal of her life support and claimed that the plea was being made by her husband so that he could utilize the money he had received against medical malpractice for his own benefits. In this situation, after a lot of stifle, the court finally agreed to allow Michael Schiavo, husband of Terri Schiavo to put an end to the life of Terri (Miller, 2015). Ethical Standards There are arguments on both sides of this matter. While the husband was correct on making a plea, the parents were also correct on the issue. As far as the ethical standards are in question, it can be said that if the feeding tube would have been removed many years back, there would have been no unethical act done. Terri was already in a vegetative state and the doctors had very clearly explained that there are no chances of her revival (KRUSE, 2015). As such, there are no evidences that her life span would have shortened and hence ethically, she would not have been killed. Rather, she would have been allowed to put an end to her sufferings. It also makes economic sense because either way, she had become a non productive resource or she was of no good for the nation. Rather, if the feeding tube would have been removed earlier, it would have saved a lot of economic expenditure and at the same time, the medical resources spent on her could have been used for some other purposes. The Hi ppocratic Oath of the doctors would not have suffered and there would have been no harm on anyone. The alternative treatment that was given to Terri was equally horrifying and her vegetative state showed no signs of improvement. She was constantly being fed through tubes and channels which no human being likes. As such, her condition was so worse that her husband was right in requesting to allow for the removal of her feeding tube. On the other hand, her parents were somewhat justified in claiming that she should be allowed to live. Being parents, it is obvious that they could not bear to see their daughter succumb to death. With the Divine power, it is said that one should never lose hope (Sanburn, 2015). Hence, as parents they were right in expecting that she will come back to normal life in due course. Analysis However, it must not be ignored in this respect that the claim was raised by her parents because of the money received by Michael for medical malpractice. Michael was not ethically wrong because he extended all that he could do to improve her condition. He was also appointed as the official guardian of Terri and hence, he had all the rights to take decisions about her when she was incapacitated to decide on her life. Michael had done nothing wrong in taking this decision (Terrisfight.org, 2015). On the other hand, her parents it is quite evident that her parents wanted her to live so that they could stop Michael from utilizing the money for personal benefits. But, the trial Court as well expressed the view that if Terri was normal in the present day, she would have never agreed to this kind of a lifestyle that she was presently in. the brain scans of Terri clearly showed that considering her potassium levels there was nothing in the medical science as well that could improve her condition (WND, 2015). She was a person who was very sophisticated and was particular about her own beauty and own self. She could in no way agree to keep a life where she was simply alive by a miniscule machine and there was nothing else in her life. As such, it is argued that her husband was right in appealing for her removal of life support and allowing him so that he could put an end to her life thus bringing peace to many people (Miami.edu, 2015). The matter would have been a bit difficult for t he parents in the initial stages but slowly, even they would have accepted the reality. Conclusion Thus, ethically, it can be said that while there is nothing wrong in the legal standards regarding the death of Terri, the same is morally correct as well. Personal view is that Michael Schiavo was correct in making the plea and convincing the Court. Had the incident taken place many years back, things would have been much happier. References KRUSE, M. (2015).Jeb 'Put Me Through Hell.POLITICO Magazine. Retrieved 24 August 2015, from https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/jeb-bush-terri-schiavo-114730.html#.Vdrs5fmqqko Miami.edu,. (2015).Schiavo Timeline, Part 1 | Ethics | University of Miami. Retrieved 24 August 2015, from https://www.miami.edu/index.php/ethics/projects/schiavo/schiavo_timeline/ Miller, Z. (2015).Jeb Bush: No Regrets on Terri Schiavo.TIME.com. Retrieved 24 August 2015, from https://time.com/3826605/jeb-bush-terri-schiavo/ Sanburn, J. (2015).How Terri Schiavo Shaped the Right-to-Die Movement.TIME.com. Retrieved 24 August 2015, from https://time.com/3763521/terri-schiavo-right-to-die-brittany-maynard/ Terrisfight.org,. (2015).Terri Schiavo Life Hope Network. Retrieved 24 August 2015, from https://www.terrisfight.org/ WND,. (2015).10 years later, Terri Schiavos death still haunts. Retrieved 24 August 2015, from https://www.wnd.com/2015/03/10-years-later-terri-schiavos-death-still-haunts/