Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

End-of-life bills reveal divide over how far law should go

By STEVE BOUSQUET and CARRIE JOHNSON
Published March 16, 2005

THE TERRI SCHIAVO CASE 'Who there would take Terri's place?' Issues draw many who link their cause to Schiavo case End-of-life bills reveal divide over how far law should go Related 10 News video: Terri Schiavo Bill gets Governor Bush's support

Michael Schiavo, who spoke in his attorney's office for about an hour Tuesday, says he has avoided interviews because he has nothing to prove to the world. He also said he has many supporters, but they aren't as demonstrative as those of Terri Schiavo's parents.

THE LATEST IN STATE HOUSE The latest version of a state bill designed to prevent a feeding tube from being removed from Terri Schiavo includes these provisions: A feeding tube cannot be withdrawn from a person in a persistent vegetative state if the sole reason for doing so is to end a life; a conflict exists between a guardian and a relative; and the person has no written advance directive or living will. A guardian or family can ask a court to prevent withdrawal of a feeding tube based on those factors. The bill would apply to every living person the day it becomes law.

WHERE THEY STAND ON CONGRESSIONAL BILL Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Indian Shores Supporter Rep. Mike Bilirakis, R-Tarpon Springs Supporter, sponsor Rep. Jim Davis, D-Tampa Opposes Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Crystal River Did not respond Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Bartow Supporter, sponsor Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida Undecided Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Florida Supporter, sponsor

[Times photo, 1990: Joe Walles] Michael Schiavo, on a visit with Terri at a nursing home more than 14 years ago, says in the early years of his wife's illness he looked for signs of improvement but eventually realized there was no hope. "What's there is a shell of Terri," he says.

TALLAHASSEE - State Rep. Dennis Baxley of Ocala uses stark terms to defend the need for a law in cases like Terri Schiavo's.

"We do not starve people to death," he says.

But fellow Republicans in the Senate are moving much more cautiously.

After Baxley fended off attempts in the House Tuesday to alter his bill that could block the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, he watched silently as a key Senate panel made major changes to the legislation.

"I believe these are very personal matters, and the family should be the one that's involved," said Sen. Alex Villalobos, R-Miami, as he voted for the Senate's version.

Baxley's proposal would make it much harder for a feeding tube to be removed from a person who did not have a living will. Some Senate Republicans consider that too intrusive.

The Senate version applies only to cases like Schiavo's, where the person is in a vegetative state and there is a conflict between the patient's guardian and another family member and there is not a clear, written directive.

The Senate bill also limits who can file a lawsuit to block removal of a feeding tube. The House bill allows "any interested party" to sue, but the Senate restricts that to guardians and relatives of an incapacitated person. The Senate also opposed reducing the role of judges in end-of-life cases, as House members wanted.

"We're not taking the courts on," said Sen. Dan Webster, R-Winter Garden. "I think we're being respectful of the decisions they have made."

The Senate and House versions would apply to Schiavo and "every living person on the effective date of this act."

But legislators made it clear that preventing Schiavo's feeding tube from being removed is the motivating force behind both bills. Leaders in both chambers say openly they hope to have a bill passed and signed into law before the 1 p.m. Friday deadline a judge set to remove Schiavo's tube.

The Senate bill passed on a party-line vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee, with six Republicans in favor and two Democrats against. A third Democrat, Sen. Walter (Skip) Campbell, D-Fort Lauderdale, voted for the Senate version.

Sen. Dave Aronberg, D-West Palm Beach, criticized the bill as "a huge expansion of government."

Sen. Steve Geller, D-Hallandale Beach, protested, "We are once again substituting our judgment for that of the courts."

Bill SB 804 could make it to the full Senate as early as Thursday, when the House also will debate the issue.

Villalobos, the Senate majority leader, did not say he would support the bill on a final vote. The bill could fail if a half-dozen Senate Republicans balk.

Senate President Tom Lee said, "There is no agreement" with the House on a final bill. "We should move slowly and cautiously," Lee said. "I don't want to repeat the problems we had last time."

At the Senate's insistence, the Legislature in 2003 passed "Terri's Law," which allowed Gov. Jeb Bush to override court decisions and order Schiavo's feeding tube reinserted.

A unanimous Florida Supreme Court ruled that law unconstitutional.

Before Tuesday's action, Webster said he and Lee agreed on some basic points.

"Take off the table all the people with living wills. Take off the people on other life-support systems. Now we're down to one group of people," Webster said. "In those situations, he and I wanted to err on the side of life."

Sen. Jim King, R-Jacksonville, who fought for a death-with-dignity law after his parents died of cancer, said he could not understand why lawmakers are so eager to intervene again.

"Why would we be so arrogant as to suggest that someone who has followed our law should be penalized as we try and rush to save Terri?" King said. Just a few weeks ago, he pointed out, legislators said such matters were best left to the courts and would not pass legislation that applied retroactively to cases like Schiavo's.

"To make it retroactive is to do exactly what everyone said they didn't want to do," King said. "They said they didn't want to make a carve-out for Terri and that's exactly what they are doing."

--Times staff writers Joni James, Lucy Morgan and Alisa Ulferts contributed to this report.

[Last modified March 16, 2005, 04:29:47]