I am not sure GQ is the right place for this. I am not debating the issue of Terri’s case but rather asking if I am reading the following correctly and if so what is the point behind it all?
Regardless of which side of the right-to-die fence you sit on I cannot imagine what the possible purpose is behind the House asking a person who is brain dead to appear before them. Seems like a sad attempt at a photo-op but maybe I am missing something other Doper’s can enlighten me on.
I don’t know anything about this case other than what you just posted but one thing stands out. You refer to the person as being “brain-dead” whereas the quote you posted refers to the woman as being “brain-damaged”. The extent of the brain damage would be the deciding factor in just how pointless the whole task was.
I’m kind of confused about this too. Is there some legal reason why a feeding tube cannot be removed from a person who has been subpoenad?
From that article it looks like the subpoena is to ensure that they don’t let her die before Congress has decided the case.
Apparently the woman goes in and out of vegetative states. The last couple of times she’s lapsed into one her husband has tried to pull the plug (and succeeded on a couple of occassions), but her biological family have in the past successfully fought and had her put back on life support.
Hopefully, the good that will come out of this is an acknowledgement that removing someone’s feeding tube so they can starve to death over the course of a week or two isn’t the most humane way to do it… and the opening of better alternatives.
It is a ridiculous stalling ploy. There’s some law that says it is illegal to harrass or injure anyone that has been subpoenaed by Congress – they’re trying to insert their authority to “save Terri’s life”. Despite the fact that this case has been litigated for over ten years, in and out of court, up to the Florida supreme court, the Florida legislature, Jeb Bush, and on and on. It’s pretty sickening, actually.
From further in the article I linked above they say this…
In this case it would seem this is a helluva lot mroe than semantics so you were right to question it. I do not personally know what her actual status is.
Well, they did have Bud Selig testifiying last night…
Seems like a clear abuse of the law to me.
Bingo on the procedural part of that statement. They were just discussing this on NPR a few minutes ago and said that those members who issued the subpoena do not actually intend for Terry Schiavo to show up, but to use the fact that it is against the law to interfere with a Congressional subpoena to prevent removal of her feeding tube.
I dunno. After ten years, what is left of Terry’s damaged brain has liquified. 
Isn’t the failure to appear a contempt of congress?
Oooh, that’d be fun to see if came back to bite them. They could transfer her to a prison hospital. And it could go on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on (well, you get the picture).
Add in the United States Supreme Court as well. They refused to here the case (with no comment). cite
Valgard’s points on what they are up to makes sense.
adam yax:
I kinda wondered about this too. If she doesn’t show up for her subpoena then congress can throw her in jail for contempt of congress thereby saving her life (gotta keep her alive to serve out her jail sentence).
Ok…that is my cynical side talking but these days who knows?
You got a cite for that “goes in and out” part? My take on his case is that she is in a persistent vegetative state, and “persistent” is incompatible with “in and out.”
I have an opinion on this case, but hey, this is GQ.
Yeah, not unlike suing to halt an execution on the grounds that the medications used for lethal injection have not been tested for saftey and efficacy for the intended use. A ploy.
I don’t see how she can be tried. She is unable to defend herself in any way, or to take part in her defense, so I would guess that putting her on trial would be unconstitutional. Someone else who removed her tube might be accused of preventing her from showing up, but since there is now a court order to remove it, it would be a juristictional issue.
I’ve moved this one from GQ to Great Debates. I think there will be many threads about this. Hopefully this one will stay civil and in GD.
samclem GQ moderator
"The Republican Party. Bringing Smaller Government to you since… since… " ummm…
“The Republican Party. Bringing Smaller Government to Large Corporations, but NOT to Individuals.”
:rolleyes:
As of this posting, the feeding tube has been removed.
It seems her status has been upgraded from “brain dead, with the ceb cortex destroyed and replaced with fluid” to “disabled”:
“The case of Terri Schiavo raises complex issues. Yet in instances like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life. Those who live at the mercy of others deserve our special care and concern. It should be our goal as a nation to build a culture of life, where all Americans are valued, welcomed, and protected - and that culture of life must extend to individuals with disabilities.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050317-7.html