KRIZTIA CREDENDA N.

TORAYNO
M/H (10:30-12:00)
NOVEMBER 23, 2015
On Dignity and Terri Schiavo case:
In a report by Dr. Fine, he reported, Finally, in May 1998, 8 years after Terri
entered the vegetative statewhich was now clearly permanentMichael Schiavo filed
his first petition asking a court to allow removal of Terri's gastrostomy tube. 1 After some
court hearings, political and court debate, the decision has legally approved the
removing of Terris feeding tube. This has denied her of food and water. Consequently,
she died of dehydration on March 31, 2005.
Terri Schiavos case has become an ethical issue, which is beyond the legality of the
matter. Before one would consider the various ethical arguments (e.g. clinical), there
must first the understanding of mans dignity.
One would agree with Seifert when he explained the fourfold roots of human
dignity. Furthermore, he has given a foundation when he defines dignity as inseparable
from personhood and vice-versa. As he establishes this point, it is then logical that the
first source of mans dignity is the very existence and substantial nature of the human
person2. This means that mans being person, regardless of his being unconscious, he has
his dignity and he has all the reason to be respected of his universal right to life. Again,
this is because, To be a person, whether healthy or sick, whether male or female,
whether old or young, whether conscious or in coma - is the first ground of human
dignity (ibid).
Hence, Terris dignity has been offended. The arguments that express her persistent
vegetative and unresponsive state are not valid points to take away the appropriate
treatment proper to her dignity. Furthermore, it is not then agreeable when Dr. Morisson
expresses, No one is denying this woman food and water... People in a persistent
vegetative state...have no knowledge of food Withdrawal of nutrition is a common
method for ending life, and many terminally ill patients choose that course...3.
If there was the act of choosing, it is then arguing of autonomy. Even so, the offense is
still clear as Lebech has clarified the issue on death with dignity 4, which expresses that
the legal contexts may have taken precedents from the judiciaries and the lawmakers
understanding of dignity. Although, it may be legal as it can be interpreted as dignity with
autonomy, the universal dignity that is being pointed out is compromised.
As this is compromised, the court decision is ambiguous, which resulted from the elitist
view of who has dignity (i.e. those in their consciousness). It is then difficult to find a
common ground on euthanasia and the right to life (ibid).
Nonetheless, one thing is clear. The human dignity of Terri Schiavo is
undermined. The removing of her feeding tube, depriving her of food and water is a
violation of her universal right to life. Hence, there has been a disparity of the legal
context to what is ought to be done to Terri with respect to her dignity as a person.
1 From Quinlan to Schiavo: medical, ethical, and legal issues in severe brain injuryRobert L.
Fine, MDcorresponding author
2 Seifert: The Four Roots and Sources of Human Dignity
3 Sean Morrison, MD, Professor of Geriatrics and Palliative Care at Mount Sinai School of
Medicine in New York, in an interview with The New York Times for a Mar. 25, 2005 article
entitled "Neither 'Starvation' Nor the Suffering It Connotes Applies to Schiavo
4 Lebech: DIGNITY & THE SLOGAN DEATH WITH DIGNITY

KRIZTIA CREDENDA N. TORAYNO

M/H (10:30-12:00)
NOVEMBER 23, 2015