Terri Schiavo: rest in peace.

As Charles Weijer has pointed out, the case of Terri Schiavo involved a family conflict regarding end-of-life decisionmaking. This irreconcilable conflict resulted in a series of judicial interventions that were a rerun, with some differences, of the Karen Ann Quinlan, Nancy Beth Cruzan and other wellknown cases. Nowadays, many hospitals rely on clinical ethicists, ethics committees or mediators — before court intervention — to resolve conflicts in which family members or health care providers disagree about clinical interventions or care plans for an incapacitated patient. What was striking in Terri Schiavo’s case was the political rhetoric that surfaced on an issue that health care providers and ethics committees tackle on a daily basis. And what was so tragic, aside from the patient’s condition, was the breach of her right to die with dignity. Whatever one’s view of her case, Terri Schiavo had a right to have her life and death kept private and her medical records held in confidence. The media, along with prominent politicians, paraded her medical status for the entire world to witness. Not only was there a breach of privacy, but politicians, the media, special interest groups, family members and supporters used her mental status to promote their causes. If one believes that withdrawing nutrition and hydration from a patient in an irreversible coma or persistent vegetative state constitutes murder, there are ways of debating the issue and developing a consensus. But to use Terri Schiavo and her husband, her legally appointed surrogate decision-maker, to further that point of view strikes me as opportunistic. The violation of the Kantian principle to treat mankind as an end, never as a means, dealt a further blow to Terri Schiavo’s wish to die with dignity. May she finally rest in peace.