THE OPRI OPINION

The Schiavo Agenda......

March 2005
by Debra Opri - Attorney and Legal Analyst

By now we all know most of the story about Terry Schiavo and her 'hearsay' wish to die, first uttered about seven years after she had suffered a heart attack and began a fifteen year odyssey into a world where she could no longer communicate with the outside world. What we don't know, and what we certainly can't understand, is why Michael has had his own death wish.

Michael's brother, Brian, recently stated that "Michael's best friend, Terry, wanted to die." Brian tells us that Michael is grieving as he watches her in her final days. That he can't comprehend why the President of the United States had to 'get involved', when all he was doing was carrying out Terry's 'wishes', is, really, too simple a statement when the rest of us do not understand why he is hanging on to a fight to end a life so many want saved.

As an attorney, I have long believed that a person's right to life is as strong as, if not stronger than, a person's right to die. In this instance, it is not so much that we have this battle at all. Rather, it is that we must be forced to rely upon a presumably unreliable voice for Terry......her 'in name only' husband.

Michael's own life history must be addressed. His short marriage to Terry, before her tragedy, was rife with innuendo of domestic violence and problems. They were young and Terry's then alleged 'wish' of what she would want in terms of life support 'someday' was the utterance of a very young person who had yet to grow up and learn about life. Fifteen years is a long time in anyone's life, and certainly, if, in fact, Terry had at one time or another, indicated a lack of desire to ever be placed on life support, the facts and witnesses tell us that Michael was the only one who ever heard it.

And what about Michael's other life? Seven years into his wife's illness, he began a fight to end her life, with his first statements ever that Terry did not want life support. What's fractious about this argument is that at this point in Michael's life, he had now met another woman. Since then, he has two children by this woman. They are common-law spouses, as Michael has never divorced Terry. He has continued to be her guardian, despite his new family, and he continued to keep Terry's own family, including her mother, father and brother, out of the 'mix', that is to say, they have never had access to her medical records, no legal rights, and they have no challenge to his status as Terry's legal husband, despite his 'other' family.

And, if the news reports are true, there is the one million dollar trust Michael continues to be benefactor to as Terry's husband, upon her death, and as long as he remains her husband.

So, if we are to follow the reasonable conclusions, would it not be arguable that when it is reasonable to conclude that Michael should have surrendered his rights and obligations to his wife Terry at the time he began another family, turning over these rights and obligations to Terry's blood family - her mother and father - why then, has he fought so hard to end her life, merely through the legal validation of a marriage certificate.

If the stories of the one million dollar trust fund is true, then I believe it is the money. I'm sorry, but it is too obvious. If it is true, and there is money waiting for Michael once she is dead, then the answer is just too obvious to ignore. And, if this has been the motive to end Terry's life, when there have been blood relatives who have loved Terry enough to want her alive, then Michael's motive to kill for money is a crime. Isn't it?

So that the record is clear, I do not hold strong beliefs one way or the other concerning a person's right to life or right to death. I would not, personally, want to be kept alive by artificial means. I believe that suffering is not necessary. I do believe in one's right to choose. What I do not believe in is someone speaking on my behalf when they do not speak my words, and when they do not have the right to speak. In my heart, when Michael chose another woman and another family and another life, he should have surrendered Terry. He should have given her up to those who did still love her enough to want her around.

Debra Opri is an attorney and legal analyst. Ms. Opri can be seen on all the major broadcasting networks discussing a wide variety issues involving legal challenges facing the nation.

Click here to review
Archived Opinions.

Click here to view The
Opri Opinion promo reel.