ABSTRACT
The tragic final chapter of Terri Schiavo’s life story was unique in many ways (see Cerminara, chapter 8, this volume). Even in an era saturated with celebrity trials and confessional television talk shows, seldom has such an exquisitely personal decision been elevated to the level of fullblown, 21st century style public spectacle. Discussions normally held in reverent tones within the dimly lit corridors of hospitals and hospices were magnified by a 24-hour news cycle and an ongoing culture war into a national conversation—a national shouting match at times—with individuals, interest groups, and even the U.S. Congress aligning themselves with one or the other side of a horribly fractured family to engage in an agonizingly difficult debate over the relative value of a human life versus the essentially human right to decide how one’s life should be lived (and therefore ended). The situation seemed uniquely cursed with every difficulty that might befall a family striving to make the right decisions for an incapacitated loved one. Irreconcilable differences between family members about the appropriate course of action, the lack of any written documentation of Terri’s wishes about the use of life-sustaining technology, and ambiguity about her level of disability and prognosis for recovery all created a confluence of uncertainty that seemed only to fuel the moral outrage among active partisans and to make simple, comfortable resolutions difficult for almost any thoughtful observer.
