The Guardian
In 1998, Terri Schiavo's first guardian ad litem filed a report on her case. It
makes for interesting reading today.
by Wesley J. Smith
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/337laakp.asp
THE TERRI SCHIAVO CASE continues to take dramatic twists
and turns. Even as Michael Schiavo attempts to have Terri's Law declared
unconstitutional, pursuant to the law's requirements, a judge has appointed a
guardian ad litem--Professor Jay Wolfson, of the
There has been some confusion as to whether Wolfson
replaces Terri's quasi-estranged husband Michael Schiavo as guardian of Terri's
person. (I use the term "quasi-estranged" because Schiavo effectively
shattered the sanctity their marriage years ago by entering a committed
relationship with another woman and starting a family with her.) He does not.
Wolfson's sole responsibilities are to determine whether Terri should be allowed
a swallow test, whether she should be provided rehabilitation, and to write a
report with his recommendations about these matters--all within 30 days. In the
meantime, Schiavo remains fully in control over Terri' life and care (or the
lack thereof)--with the exception that he cannot, for now, remove her
tube-supplied food and water.
A little known but interesting facet of this case is that
Wolfson is not the first guardian ad litem appointed to represent Terri's
interests. When Schiavo first petitioned the court for permission to dehydrate
his wife in 1998, he properly admitted that he had two significant conflicts of
interest: He was likely to want to remarry and if Terri died, he would inherit
the more than $700,000 then on deposit in her trust account. (For those who have
not followed this case, Terri received
the money in a medical malpractice lawsuit.)
Because of these conflicts of interest, the Probate Court
appointed Richard L. Pearse Jr. of
Considering that the Pearse's report was written long
before the Schiavo case became an international cause celebre, it makes
interesting reading. The guardian ad litem supported Schiavo's position
on some points and the Schindlers on others. The following are its pertinent
portions:
*Pearse unambiguously accepted the diagnosis that Terri is
in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) based on the opinions of two doctors, one
who treated her and one who consulted on the case. This diagnoses was--and
remains-- disputed by Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler. Indeed,
subsequent to Pearse's report, the Schindlers energetically attempted to garner
evidence that she is conscious. To some degree, they have succeeded: Four board
certified neurologists, two board certified internists, one neuro-psychologist,
and two speech pathologists have testified in person or by affidavit that Terri
is not PVS. These opinions were reinforced by the affidavits of three nurses who
cared for Terri in the mid-1990s and who claim to have observed her being
interactive. Moreover, millions have viewed videos
of Terri and been shocked by the extent to which she appears to aware and
awake. (The courts have ruled consistently that Terri is PVS.)
*Pearse claimed that Terri has muscle contractures despite
receiving "regular physical therapy." He may have assumed that she
received such care--it is routine for bedridden patients, after all. Yet,
according to Patricia Anderson, the Schindler's attorney, there are no entries
indicating that PT was ever performed in Terri's chart after 1992. Indeed, in
1998, when a new doctor urged Schiavo to approve an evaluation of Terri so that
a plan of physical therapy could be developed, he refused to permit it.
*Pearse confirmed the charge by the Schindlers that once
the medical malpractice money was in the bank, Schiavo began to refuse medical
treatment for Terri, writing:
After February 1993, Mr. Schiavo's attitude concerning
treatment for the ward apparently changed. Early in 1994, for example, he
refused to consent to treat an infection from which the ward was then suffering
and ordered that she not be resuscitated in the event of cardiac arrest. The
nursing home where she resided at that time sought to intervene, which
ultimately led the ward's husband to reverse his decision and authorize
antibiotic treatment.
Perhaps because of the intervention by the home, Schiavo
soon moved Terri to a different nursing facility.
*Schiavo admitted to the guardian ad litem that he
had at least "two romantic involvements" after Terri's collapse.
"It is apparent to me," Pearse wrote the court, "that he has
reached a point that he has no hope of the ward's recovery and wants to get on
with his own life." (To say the least. At the time of Pearse's
investigation, Schiavo was already living with the woman who would become the
mother of his children.)
*Contrary to Schiavo's allegation on Larry King last week
that the Schindlers "really basically didn't have any care with
Terri," Pearse painted a vivid picture of parents worried deeply about the
quality of care their daughter was receiving and profoundly committed to
remaining involved in her life:
From the time of the ward's accident, the ward's parents
have been vitally interested in her welfare . . . After the falling out between
the ward's parents and her husband, Mr. and Mrs. Schindler pursued removal
litigation in an effort to have Mr. Schiavo removed as their daughter's guardian
and to have themselves appointed guardians of her person . . . They have also
pursued litigation against him to gain access to medical and financial
information concerning the ward which was withheld by the ward's husband, with
only partial success. They express extreme frustration with the current
situation in which they have virtually no input into the decision making process
concerning their own daughter. The ward's parents visit her regularly but at
times when they won't have to confront Mr. Schiavo.
Moreover, rather than the Schindlers not being interested
in seeing Terri, as was asserted on Larry King, Pearse noted that it was Schiavo
who "has isolated the ward from her parents."
*As of
*At the time of the report, only Schiavo claimed that Terri
would not wish to be kept alive if severely incapacitated. "However,"
Pearse opined, "his credibility is necessarily adversely affected by the
obvious financial benefit to him of being the ward's sole heir at law in the
event of her death while still married to him. Her death also permits him to get
on with his own life." (Subsequent to the filing of the report, and perhaps
in response to it, Schiavo's brother and sister-in-law came forward to claim
Terri made similar statements in their presence. In this regard it is worth
noting that no member of Terri's family, or any of her friends, recall her ever
making any such statements to them.)
*Pearse concluded, "Given the inherent problems
already mentioned, together with the fact that the ward has been maintained the
life support measures sought to be withdrawn for the past 8 years, it is the
recommendation of the guardian ad litem that the petition for removal be
denied."
UNFORTUNATELY, Pearse's opinion held scant sway with the
court. After filing his report, he requested further court instructions to
authorize him to continue to represent Terri as guardian ad litem.
Schiavo's attorney, George Felos objected, and attempted to have Pearse removed
for bias. This attempt failed but after his report was received, Pearse was
discharged from participating any further in the case. And despite Schiavo's
continuing conflicts of interest--which only deepened on the personal level as
he sired children--no other guardian ad litem was ever appointed to
represent Terri during the years of litigation, proceedings that culminated in
an October 15, 2003 court order requiring Terri Schiavo to be deprived of all
water and food toward the end that she dehydrate to death.