Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks Faculty Scholarship Shepard Broad College of Law 1-1-2007 Collateral Damage: The Aftermath of the Political Culture Wars in Schiavo Kathy L. Cerminara Nova Southeastern University - Shepard Broad College of Law,[email protected] Follow this and additional works at:http://nsuworks.nova.edu/law_facarticles Part of theHealth Law and Policy Commons Recommended Citation Kathy Cerminara,Collateral Damage: The Aftermath of the Political Culture Wars in Schiavo, 29 Western New England Law Review 279 (2007). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Shepard Broad College of Law at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please [email protected]. Western New England Law Review Volume 2929 (2006-2007) Issue 2SYMPOSIUM: THE POLITICS OF Article 2 HEALTH LAW 1-1-2007 COLLATERAL DAMAGE: THE AFTERMATH OF THE POLITICAL CULTURE WARS IN SCHIAVO Kathy L. Cerminara Follow this and additional works at:http://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Kathy L. Cerminara,COLLATERAL DAMAGE: THE AFTERMATH OF THE POLITICAL CULTURE WARS IN SCHIAVO, 29 W. NewEng. L. Rev. 279 (2007), http://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss2/2 This Symposium Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Review & Student Publications at Digital Commons @ Western New England University School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western New England Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Western New England University School of Law. For more information, please [email protected]. COLLATERAL DAMAGE: THE AFTERMATH OF THE POLITICAL CULTURE WARS IN SCHIAVO * KATHY L. CERMINARA INTRODUCfION Theresa Marie Schiavo died a celebrity at the age of forty-two in Pinellas Park, Florida, in early 2005.1 She never sought the pub­ lic spotlight; she never even knew she was a celebrity. She became a celebrity, and one of the best-known figures in bioethics, because of politics. In testament to the power of the politics surrounding Ms. Schi­ avo's death, numerous authors have written an incredible amount about her case. Many articles have focused on the constitutional implications of the controversy.2 Others have discussed the inter­ section of Ms. Schiavo's case and the interests of people with disa­ bilities,3 or have analyzed the Schiavo case within the framework of * Professor, Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center. Thanks go to Barbara Noah for the opportunity to write this, to Mary Coombs for assistance in making this better, and to Jennifer Rolnick for research assistance. 1. Kathy L. Cerminara, Theresa Marie Schiavo's Long Road to Peace, 30 DEATH STUD. 101, 111 (2006). For a complete interactive timeline linking to key documents in the case, see Kathy L. Cerminara & Kenneth Goodman, Key Events in the Case of Theresa Marie Schiavo, University of Miami-Ethics Program, http://www6.miami.edu/ ethics/schiavo/terrLschiavo_timeline.html [hereinafter Cerminara & Goodman, Time­ line j (last visited Jan. 16, 2007) (listing her death at the Mar. 31, 2005 entry). 2. See, e.g., Michael P. Allen, Terri's Law and Democracy, 35 STETSON L. REV. 179 (2005) [hereinafter Allen, Terri's Law and Democracy j; Michael P. Allen, Congress and Terri Schiavo: A Primer on the American Constitutional Order?, 108 W. VA. L. REV. 309 (2005) [hereinafter Allen, Congress and Terri Schiavo j; Terri D. Keville & Jon B. Eisenberg, Bush v. Schiavo and the Separation of Powers: Why a State Legislature Cannot Empower a Governor to Order Medical Treatment When There is a Final Court Judgment that the Patient Would Not Want It, 7 J.L. & Soc. CHALLENGES 81 (2005); Thomas C. Marks, Jr., A Dissenting Opinion, Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004),35 STETSON L. REV. 195 (2005); Barbara A. Noah, Politicizing the End of Life: Lessons From the Schiavo Controversy, 59 U. MIAMI L. REV. 107 (2004). 3. See, e.g., Adrienne Asch, Recognizing Death While Affirming Life: Can End­ of-Life Reform Uphold a Disabled Person's Interest in Continued Life?, in IMPROVING END OF LIFE CARE: WHY HAS IT BEEN So DIFFICULT?, Hastings Ctr. Special Report 35, No.6 S31 (2005); Samuel R. Bagenstos, Judging the Schiavo Case, 22 CONST. COM­ MENT. 457 (2005) [hereinafter Bagenstos, Judging the Schiavo Casej; Kathy L. 279 280 WESTERN NEW ENGLAND LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29:279 end-of-life decision-making law.4 Most of the attorneys and other living participants in the drama have written books about their ex­ s periences in connection with the case. While none of these authors have ignored, or could have ignored, the politics surrounding what happened to Ms. Schiavo, only a few have concentrated on it.6 This Article, building on what those authors have written, examines the politics surrounding her death and draws some conclusions about the aftermath for those left behind in the America Ms. Schiavo departed. I. THE POLITICS OF SCHIA vo Because of the extensive amount already written about it, this Article will not recount in exhaustive detail the basic facts of Schi­ avo. Instead, it will briefly introduce the reader to Ms. Schiavo and then enumerate the myriad ways in which politics played a role in her death. Cerminara, Musings on the Need to Convince Some People with Disabilities that End-of­ Life Decision-Making Advocates Are Not Out to Get Them, 37 Loy. U. CHI. L.J. 343 (2006) [hereinafter Cerminara, Musings]; Lois L. Shepherd, Terri Schiavo and the Disa­ bility Rights Community (Fla. State Univ. ColI. of Law, Pub. Law & Legal Theory, Working Paper No. 188, 2006), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=882480; see also Sa­ muel R. Bagenstos, Disability, Life, Death, and Choice, 29 HARV. J.L. & GENDER 425, 427 (2006) (using Schiavo as a springboard to discuss the positions of disability rights activists in the areas of "nontreatment of infants with disabilities, proposals to legalize assisted suicide, and the practice of prenatal testing followed by selective abortion"). 4. William Allen, Erring Too Far on the Side of Life: Dejii Vu All Over Again in the Schiavo Saga, 35 STETSON L. REV. 123 (2005) [hereinafter Allen, Erring Too Far on the Side of Life]; Kathy L. Cerminara, Tracking the Storm: The Far-Reaching Power of the Forces Propelling the Schiavo Cases, 35 STETSON L. REV. 147 (2005) [hereinafter Cerminara, Tracking the Storm]; John A. Robertson, Schiavo and its (In)significance 35 STETSON L. REv. 101 (2005); Lois L. Shepherd, Shattering the Neutral Surrogate Myth in End-of-Life Decisionmaking: Terri Schiavo and Her Family, 35 CUMBo L. REv. 575 (2005) [hereinafter Shepherd, Shattering the Neutral Surrogate Myth]. 5. JON B. EISENBERG, USING TERRI: THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT'S CONSPIRACY TO TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS (2005) [hereinafter EISENBERG, USING TERRI]; JON B. EI­ SENBERG, THE RIGHT VS. THE RIGHT TO DIE: LESSONS FROM THE TERRI SCHIAVO CASE AND How TO STOP IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN (2006); DAVID C. GIBBS WITH BOB DEMoss, FIGHTING FOR DEAR LIFE: THE UNTOLD STORY OF TERRI SHIAVO AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR ALL OF US (2006); MICHAEL SCHIAVO WITH MICHAEL HIRSH, TERRI: THE TRUTH (2006); MARY SCHINDLER ET AL., A LIFE THAT MATTERS: THE LEGACY OF TERRI SCHIAvo-A LESSON FOR ALL OF US (2006). 6. See, e.g., George J. Annas, "I Want to Live": Medicine Betrayed By Ideology in the Political Debate Over Terri Schiavo, 35 STETSON L. REV. 49 (2005); Cerminara, Tracking the Storm, supra note 4; Joshua E. Perry, Biblical Biopolitics: Judicial Process, Religious Rhetoric, Terri Schiavo and Beyond, 16 HEALTH MATRIX 553 (2006). Keville and Eisenberg identify one issue raised by Schiavo as being "whether politics and popu­ lar opinion should play any role in individual medical treatment decisions." Keville & Eisenberg, supra note 2, at 83 (emphasis added). 2007] COLLATERAL DAMAGE 281 The basic facts of Schiavo were simple. In 1990, at the age of thirty-six, Theresa Marie Schiavo suffered a cardiac arrest. Initially, her husband and parents were united in seeking aggressive treat­ ment, including experimental therapy, in an attempt to revive her from what physicians said was a persistent vegetative state (PVS).7 After three to four years of such efforts, however, Ms. Schiavo's husband began to accept physicians' statements that she would never regain cognitive function.8 Ms. Schiavo's parents and siblings did not.9 Thus, they objected when Mr. Schiavo, acting as Ms. Schi­ avo's guardian, approached the Florida guardianship court to ask the court to determine whether Ms. Schiavo would want to be maintained on medically supplied nutrition and hydration in the condition in which she existed. A. The Litigation When Mr. Schiavo filed suit in 1998, the case was a typical end­ of-life decision-making case of no great import, presenting well-set­ tled issues under Florida law. Florida law clearly permitted with­ holding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment when a patient was in a PVS.I0 Florida lawmakers also clearly considered medically supplied nutrition and hydration to be a form of life-sustaining treatment.ll Thus, if the court determined by clear and convincing evidence that Ms. Schiavo would not have wanted medically sup­ plied nutrition and hydration to continue when she lay in a PVS, the law was clear that treatment should be withdrawn. After a five­ 7. The law uses the term "persistent vegetative state," although neurologists dif­ ferentiate between a "persistent" and a "permanent" vegetative state. Roughly speak­ ing, a patient is said to be in a persistent vegetative state when in a "cognitively unresponsive state" for more than a month, and to be in a permanent vegetative state if the condition lasts for twelve months. Nancy L. Childs & Walt N. Mercer, Brief Report: Late Improvement in Consciousness After Post-Traumatic Vegetative State, 334 NEW ENG. J. MED. 24, 24-25 (1996). 8. SCHIAVO WITH HIRSH, supra note 5, at 87-89, 99. 9. See generally SCHINDLER ET AL., supra note 5. 10. See FLA. STAT. ANN. § 765.302(1) (West 2005) (specifying that a patient may, in advance, direct the withholding or withdrawal of "life-prolonging procedures" at a time in which he or she is, inter alia, in a persistent vegetative state). 11. See FLA. STAT. ANN. § 765.101(10) (West 2005) (defining "life-prolonging procedure" to include "artificially provided sustenance and hydration"); see also In re Guardianship of Browning, 568 So. 2d 4, 11-12 (Fla. 1990) (finding a constitutional right to refuse medically supplied nutrition and hydration); David Casarett et aI., Appropri­ ate Use of Artificial Nutrition and Hydration-Fundamental Principles and Recommen­ dations, 353 NEW ENG. J. MED. 2607, 2607 (2005) (describing agreement that medically supplied nutrition and hydration as being treatment as "well established among ethicists, clinicians and the courts"). 282 WESTERN NEW ENGLAND LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29:279 day evidentiary hearing, during which it considered, and either credited or discounted, the testimony of eighteen witnesses, the court did so determine and authorized Mr. Schiavo to withdraw 12 treatment. Thereafter began a lesson in the use of end-of-life litigation as an exercise of political power. Numerous amici curiae joined in the case, primarily vitalist and disability-rights activists protesting the court's ruling and Mr. Schiavo's position in the litigation.13 Multi­ ple motions and appeals caused the case to travel throughout the judicial system several times between 2001 and 2003. It is not too much to say, as George Annas has, that the attorneys filing the mul­ tiple appeals were not "doing law" but rather "doing politics."14 Nevertheless, the courts continued to affirm the trial court's deci­ sion. Ms. Schiavo's medically supplied nutrition and hydration would be discontinued. B. The Legislation After politics through litigation failed, it was time for those op­ posing the withdrawal of Ms. Schiavo's life-sustaining treatment to turn to politics of the old-fashioned kind. Citizens across the coun­ try began to flood both the Florida Legislature and the U.S. Con­ gress with e-mails and telephone calls, although many of them knew nothing about the case other than what they had heard on the radio or television, or had read on Internet blogs or in e-mails. In late 2003, the Florida Legislature authorized Governor John Ellis "Jeb" Bush to order reinsertion of the tube through which Ms. Schiavo 15 received medically supplied nutrition and hydration. After that law was declared unconstitutional,16 federal legislators acted to au­ thorize review of the case in federal court.17 They also attempted 12. In re Guardianship of Schiavo, No. 90-2908 GD-003, 2000 WL 34546715 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Feb. 11, 2000). 13. Cerminara, Tracking the Storm, supra note 4, at 154-55. 14. George J. Annas, Address at the Health Law Teachers' Conference: The Cul­ ture of Life and the Politics of American Bioethics (June 2, 2006) (on file with Western New England Law Review); see also University of Maryland Hosts 30th Annual Health Law Teachers Conference, 14 LAW & HEALTH CARE NEWSLETTER 1, 3 (2006), available at http://www.law. umaryland.edu/specialty/maryhealth/documents/program_newsletter­ fal12006.pdf (providing a summary of the presentation given by Professor George Annas). 15. 2003 Fla. Laws ch. 3, 418, Pub. L. No. 03-418 (2003), declared unconstitutional by Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004). 16. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321. 17. An Act for the Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo, Pub. L. No. 109-3, 119 Stat. 15 (2005). 2007] COLLATERAL DAMAGE 283 otherwise to prevent adherence to the state court determination,1S despite the tremendous amount of review the case had already re­ ceived in the Florida state court system. At the same time, efforts were under way, not only in the Florida Legislature but also in many state legislatures across the land, to substantially revise end­ of-life decision-making law in general, because of the Schiavo case.19 Terri's Law, the 2003 Florida legislation authorizing the gover­ nor to negate the outcome of the state court litigation, transpar­ ently put political interests above concern for appropriate government· functioning. Michael Allen has called Terri's Law "both an unabashed legislative intrusion on the judicial branch and a simultaneous transfer of legislative authority to the executive branch."20 He has written eloquently about its "gross deficiencies under even the most basic separation of powers analysis," and has opined that "[q]uite frankly, it is difficult to find any action taken by a legislature or executive in the United States that can be classi­ fied as such a fundamental breach of the constitutional separation of powers."21 By authorizing Governor Bush to order resumption of treatment, the law, written to apply only to the Schiavo case, essentially empowered the governor to reverse a judicial decision 22 by acting as a super-surrogate for Ms. Schiavo. Yet the law did not require the governor to investigate, or even to consider, what Ms. Schiavo's wishes would have been with respect to the treatment choice in question, as surrogate decision-makers generally must.23 18. Allen, Erring Too Far on the Side of Life, supra note 4, at 135 (describing attempts to subpoena Ms. Schiavo to appear before the United States House Commit­ tee on Oversight and Government Reform as "motivated not by a search for accurate information, but rather as a ruse for additional delay in the court-ordered removal of Ms. Schiavo's nutrition and hydration tube"); see also Thomas W. Mayo, Living and Dying In a Post Schiavo World, 38 J. HEALTH L. 587, 591-92 (2005). 19. See Cerminara, Musings, supra note 3, at 381 n.243 (listing bills); see also Lois Shepherd, State Legislative Proposals Following Schiavo: What Are They Thinking?, 15 TEMP. POL. & Civ. RTS. L. REV. 361 (2006) [hereinafter Shepherd, State Legislative Proposals Following Schiavo]. 20. Allen, Terri's Law and Democracy, supra note 2, at 187. 21. Id.; see also id. at 192 (describing Bush v. Schiavo, the Florida Supreme Court decision that invalidated Terri's Law as "a protection of liberty and a rejection of tyr­ anny"); Noah, supra note 2, at 116-20. 22. Keville & Eisenberg, supra note 2, at 93-95. 23. ALAN MEISEL & KATHY L. CERMINARA, THE RIGHT TO DIE: THE LAW OF END-OF-LIFE DECISIONMAKING 3-47 to 3-49 (3d ed., Aspen 2006). It was in fact the lack of decision-making standards that led the Florida Supreme Court to note a delega­ tion problem, not just a separation of powers problem, with the law. See Bush v. Schi­ avo, 885 So. 2d 321, 332-36 (Fla. 2004). 284 WESTERN NEW ENGLAND LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29:279 Clearly, Terri's Law had "nothing to do with substituted judgment decision-making and everything to do with politics. "24 Even before Terri's Law was invalidated, and continuing with renewed frenzy thereafter, the Florida Legislature considered ma­ jor changes to Florida's end-of-life decision-making law in reaction to Schiavo. The Legislature considered multiple bills based on a National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) model statute. Those bills would have limited the rights of Floridians to make end-of-life treatment choices about medically supplied nutrition and hydration. Additionally, the proponents of those bills intended them to re­ quire restoration of treatment in Ms. Schiavo's case.2S The Legisla­ ture debated those proposals longer than the incredibly brief three days it took to pass Terri's Law,26 but nonetheless engaged in that debate in the heat of the moment, while receiving thousands of frantic e-mails and telephone calls pleading for someone to save Ms. Schiavo's life. After Ms. Schiavo had died, and when the im­ mediate political crisis had passed, legislators reflected on what they nearly had done and realized how much the frenzy had af­ fected their judgment. At that time, it became clear that such a bill would not pass.27 Previously, legislators in Florida had done a superb job of de­ veloping the state's end-of-life decision-making law in a thoughtful, deliberate manner. Legislators had considered all viewpoints the last time they significantly revised the law. At that time, they not 24. Keville & Eisenberg, supra note 2, at 95. 25. Kathy L. Cerminara, Legislative End-Run Around Supreme Court in Schiavo Case Threatens Separation of Powers, DAILY Bus. REv., Mar. 18,2005, at 13; see also Annas, supra note 6, at 57 (describing attempts in Florida to pass "new legislation aimed at restoring the feeding tube"); Jay Wolfson, Schiavo's Lessons for Health Attor­ neys When Good Law is All You Have: Reflections of the Special Guardian ad Litem to Theresa Marie Schiavo, 38 J. HEALTH L. 535, 537-38 (2005) [hereinafter Wolfson, Schi­ avo's Lessons for Health Attorneys]. 26. Noah, supra note 2, at 114 n.26. 27. See Maya Bell, Debate About How to Die Rages On, But Chasm Grows, OR· LANDO SENTINEL, Mar. 26, 2006, at AI, available at 2006 WLNR 5017182 (Westlaw) [hereinafter Bell, Debate About How to Die Rages On]; Maya Bell, Governor Aban­ dons Feeding-Tube Efforts, ORLANDO SENTINEL, Apr. 13,2006, at B7, available at 2006 WLNR 6227279 (Westlaw). The Florida Senate's Committee on Health Care studied and reported on Florida's existing statutory scheme in late 2005, after Ms. Schiavo's death. Interim Project Report 2006-137, Fla. S. Comm. on Health Care (2005), avail­ able at http://www.f!senate.gov/datalPublications/2006/Senate/reports/interim_reportsl pdfl2006-137he.pdf. The Committee concluded that, "Florida's laws governing the sub­ stantiation and safeguarding of written and oral advance directives work for the major­ ity of Floridians." [d. at 9. The Committee did not recommend any "statutory changes." Id. 2007] COLLATERAL DAMAGE 285 only listened to experts and persons who contacted them about pro­ posed revisions, but they also held public hearings across the state to learn from the experiences of those who might not be able to contact lawmakers themselves.28 In contrast, the attempts to revise Florida's end-of-life decision-making law in response to Schiavo re­ sulted solely from short-sighted, special-interest-motivated attempts to respond to vocal constituents with political weight. During this same time period, and continuing after Ms. Schiavo had died, myriad state legislatures similarly responded to the Schi­ avo controversy by considering the same sorts of changes to their state end-of-life decision-making laws.29 Most of their proposed changes also were based on the NRLC Model Act and, thus, prima­ rily addressed the withholding or withdrawal of medically supplied nutrition and hydration as opposed to other life-sustaining treat­ ment.30 Specifically, the Model Act would have established a pre­ sumption that an incapacitated patient wanted medically supplied nutrition and hydration regardless of that patient's medical condi­ tion, unless the nutrition and hydration was medically contraindi­ cated or the patient had previously explicitly stated, preferably in writing, that he or she did not desire nutrition and hydration.31 28. See Robert G. Brooks et aI., Advancing End-of-Life Care: Lessons Learned From a Statewide Panel, 6 J. PALLIATIVE MED. 821 (2003) (describing the operation of the Florida Panel for the Study of End-of-Life Care and the results of its recommenda­ tions); see also Allen, Erring Too Far on the Side of Life, supra note 4, at 134-35 (describing the same panel); Wolfson, Schiavo's Lessons for Health Attorneys, supra note 25, at 547 (describing Florida law on these issues as having been "carefully crafted" through that process). 29. Mayo, supra note 18, at 597-98; see also Shepherd, State Legislative Proposals Following Schiavo, supra note 19, at 11-14. 30. See Lois Shepherd, Terri Schiavo: Unsettling the Settled, 37 Loy. U. CHI. L. REV. 297, 329 (2006) (stating that legislation in many states was based on the NRLC Model Act); NAT'L RIGHT TO LIFE COMM., MODEL STARVATION AND DEHYDRATION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES PREVENTION Aer (2006) [hereinafter NRLC MODEL Aer], available at http://www.nrlc.org!euthanasia/modeln&hstatelaw.pdf (bearing nota­ tion "Revised January 2006"). 31. See Nat'! Right to Life Comm., Spurred by Schindler-Schiavo Case, Model State Law to Prevent Starvation & Dehydration Proposed [hereinafter Spurred by Schindler-Schiavo Case], http://www.nrlc.org!euthanasialModelBillAnnoucement.html (last visited Jan. 16,2007). Compare NRLC MODEL Aer, supra note 30, with H.B. 701, 2005 Leg. Reg. Sess. (Fla. 2005) (version introduced in Florida during the Schiavo de­ bates). The existence of such a presumption in favor of the administration of medically supplied nutrition and hydration echoes a presumption appearing in the Roman Catho­ lic Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Hospitals (ERD) promulgated by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. Leonard J. Nelson, III, Catholic Bioethics and the Case of Terri Schiavo, 35 CUMBo L. REV. 543, 556-57 (2005) (citing Directive 58 of the 1994 ERD, reiterated in the 2001 ERD). The similarity between the NRLC Model Act and the ERD raises at least two concerns. First, one wonders at the propri­ 286 WESTERN NEW ENGLAND LAW REVIEW [Vol. 29:279 Public opinion polls and surveys indicated that most constituents did not in fact want end-of-life decision-making choices to be lim­ ited in this manner,32 but politicians introduced the bills because they listened to vocal e-mailers and callers, as well as to the power­ ful special interest groups behind those e-mailers and callers. While this simply may be one of the consequences of having a representa­ tive rather than a parliamentary government,33 the phenomenon certainly illustrates the power of political forces in Schiavo. Finally, it is impossible to forget the most nationally visible po­ litical activity relating to Ms. Schiavo. In early March 2005, slightly more than three weeks before Ms. Schiavo's death, federallegisla­ tors began introducing bills about the case in the U.S. House of 34 Representatives. Later in March, in an "event unique in Ameri­ can politics,"35 the U.S. Congress reconvened from Easter recess to pass emergency legislation that would give Ms. Schiavo's parents the right to file suit in federal court to have the case reviewed again.36 Just as in the Florida Legislature, debate was "frenzied"37 ety of an attempt to virtually pluck a concept from a Roman Catholic document and insert it into state law in multicultural America. Second, even if such incorporation of a particular religion's directives into law is appropriate, the ERD, as Nelson notes, is not as clear with respect to withholding or withdrawal of medically supplied nutrition as focus on this single provision would indicate. See id. 32. See Robert J. Blendon et aI., The American Public and the Terri Schiavo Case, 165 ARCHIVES INTERNAL MED. 2580,2584 (2005) (concluding, based on meta-analysis of the results of twelve opinion surveys, that "[e]fforts to place more restrictions on choices in cases similar to Terri Schiavo's are likely to prompt vocal opposition from those who favor maintaining the choices currently available or expanding them"). Medical professionals would not like to see such laws either. See AM. MED. ASSOC'N, AMA-YPS DELEGATE'S REPORT 4 (2005), available at http://www.ama-assn.orglamallpub/upload/mml17/a2005delegatesreport. pdf (see "Res­ olution 209," resolving that the AMA opposes such legislation); Gina Shaw, Schiavo's Legislative Legacy: New Look at Consent, Living Wills, and Advance Directives, NEU­ ROLOGY TODAY, June 2005, at 1 (describing neurologists' concerns about such legislation). 33. Cf R. Alta Charo, Realbioethik, HASTINGS CTR. REP., July-Aug. 2005, at 13 [hereinafter Charo, Realbioethik] (identifying "fear [of] the ten-second spot" as one of the reasons that a politician would not vote against the federal legislation regarding Schiavo). 34. See Cerminara & Goodman, Timeline, supra note 1, at Mar. 8, 2005 entry. 35. Annas, supra note 6, at 58. 36. See Allen, Congress and Terri Schiavo, supra note 2, at 318-20 (describing the legislation, which granted federal courts jurisdiction to hear claims arising "under the Constitution or laws of the United States related to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment"). 37. Annas describes the debate in the U.S. House of Representatives as being "notable primarily for its incredibly uninformed and frenzied rhetoric" and notes that C-SPAN covered it live. Annas, supra note 6, at 61; see also Bagenstos, Judging the Schiavo Case, supra note 3, at 458 (describing the "[l]ack of meaningful congressional