When Michael Schiavo stated emphatically that he would not divorce Terri or turn her care over to her parents, the Schindlers, people across America began talking. The question on everyone's mind was: Why not? In the debate over Terri Schiavo, it seemed that Americans could all agree on one thing: if he divorced her, the whole dilemma would have ended. Her parents would have been happy. And, he would finally be able to remarry.
But, perhaps the country mistook Michael Schiavo. Was he really the heartless man her parents had depicted him as? Or, was he in fact a man so committed to his wife that he willingly let himself be vilified by the American public.
Let's review
At the time, Michael Schiavo claimed that he simply wanted to carry out Terri's wishes. He argued that she did not want to be sustained indefinitely by artificial means in a severely incapacitated state without hope of recovery. Rather, she had articulated to him that she preferred instead to die with dignity.
Mr. Schiavo was threatened and bribed. His detractors were determined to buy him off so that he would either reverse his decision to have Terri's feeding tube removed or at the very least remove himself as her guardian. Yet, he was steadfast. He stated in an interview: "She may be in a vegetative state, but her dignity requires that we honor her rights and that's what this case is about now."
Understanding why divorce was not an option
A divorce would have revoked Michael Schiavo's status as Terri's guardian. But why? For starters, marriage is a consensual contract that upholds the spouse's next of kin decisions and even routine decisions about daily care. For example, Michael was allowed by the courts to determine her visitors, how often she was to be administered Communion, and her burial arrangements.
So, in the attempt to take control of Terri's destiny, the Schindlers petitioned for a divorce on Terri's behalf March 1, 2005 on the grounds of alleged adultery. As expected, their petition was swiftly denied.
Had the petition been granted, her parents would have assumed full control of her destiny. The usual order of persons to make decisions for the patient is first adult children, then parents, after that, adult siblings and finally other relatives. Terri had no children, so full decision-making power would have passed to her parents. In cases where no listed person is available, a judge is appointed to decide. Clearly, the last thing Michael Schiavo wanted after his years of legal and in-law battles was to relinquish his guardianship of carrying out his wife's wishes.
A Conflict of Interest
It appeared to the American people that Michael Schiavo's decision was complicated by a conflict of interest. While he claimed that a part of him had moved on, he also claimed to love Terri so much that he was willing to fight to carry out her wishes.
It was still difficult for many to resolve his commitment to Terri with his new life, which included a long-time girlfriend and two children. Many assumed his steadfastness was motivated more by a need to move on in his life than his actual love for Terri. For his opponents, it was difficult to understand why he would withstand such hostility not simply from members of the Schindler family but from the public, if not for his desire to expedite his wife's death.
Why Appointing Terri's Parents as Guardians was not an option
The years of bitter battles in and out of the court house over Terri's care and money have established a relationship of mistrust between the Schindlers and Mr. Schiavo. When Terri Schiavo was found in February 1990, collapsed from a potassium deficiency, possibly caused by an eating disorder, she had suffered intensive brain damage. Initially, Michael Schiavo and the parents were united, even sharing a house together to optimize caring for her.
Michael Schiavo was eventually appointed guardian in 1990, taking her to California that same year for experimental treatments for her brain. When Terri was placed in a Florida nursing home, Michael Schiavo was a taskmaster with the staff over his wife's care. He went to nursing school to better understand the care for Terri. He filed a malpractice suit against the doctor who provided Terri with fertility treatment on the grounds that her potassium deficiency should have been detected.
Both sides view the financial award from the malpractice suit as the beginning of their 12 year-old feud. A fight occurred in 1993 when the Schiavo couple was awarded $750,000 in economic damages for Terri and $300,000 for Michael for loss of companionship. Michael Schiavo claims Mr. Schindler asked how much he would receive from the settlement. The Schindlers claimed they wanted the money for more aggressive therapy.
That same year, Michael Schiavo blocked the Schindlers access to his wife's medical records, and the Schindlers tried to remove Michael Schiavo as Terri's guardian.
In 1994, on the advice of Terri's doctor, Schiavo decided not to have her treated for a urinary tract infection, since hope for recovery seemed futile. He later changed his decision and his do not resuscitate order, after being challenged by the nursing home.
By 1998, Michael Schiavo had reached a turning point with his wife's treatment. Soon thereafter, he asked the court to remove Terri's feeding tube, which the Schindlers challenged. It was removed in 2001 and reconnected days later, based on new evidence which the Schindlers has sent to the media in an accelerated publicity campaign.
Given Terri's concern with appearances, Michael Schiavo forbade any further pictures by the family in an attempt to contain the media frenzy. He then subsequently decided to have her cremated, inciting an uproar amongst her family member who had hoped to have her buried in Florida. And despite the Schindler's efforts, a judge refused to intervene in Michael Schiavo's plans.
Ultimately, in this climate, divorce would have never been an option. In the face of such obstacles, he remained steadfast in his commitment to her wishes believing it to be the only way she would retain her dignity.
You are right. He could never divorce her. She would have been cared for and finally the truth would have come out about his murderous temper. He would then have spent years in jail. Oh well, life is not as long as eternity and I'm glad I'm not in his shoes.
This story is complete nonsense, an obvious attempt to justify the actions of an impatient, adulterous and greedy husband. What a sham! Never in the US have the machinations of media, politics and bureaucracy conspired to kill an innocent, disabled, defenseless person in full view of the world. Terri was but the latest victim of Roe-America, a country whose culture is possessed by a utilitarian "me-first" philosophy. God help us all.
@John, unfortunately, Terri was brain dead and her brain had shrunk so much, with fluid in her brain (you can google the scans of her brain from the autopsy)...there was no way she would wake up. However, none of that negates his actions. Her parents should have been her legal guardian. She wouldn't ever wake up, but they were willing to care for her and he wanted to move on. Which he had. Very sad story, one I had followed since the fight began to be more publicized. I will never forget this story. It was terribly saddening and horrific in my mind. He should have legally let her go.
Wake up? She was awake, she was alive and when they refused her water and food, she died. It doesn't matter how much brain tissue she had, she was defying the odds, she was breathing on her own and able to open and move her eyes. I think the ones who need to wake up are the people who follow along with this pro-death culture we are living in today I think the one who needs to wake up is Michael Schiavo.
She was brain dead nothing was funcitional upstairs what so ever. I do not see her husband as being murderous and in the wrong. Keeping Terri hooked up to machines longer than needed was only hurting everyone, there was no closure in her death. Michael Schiave did everything humanly possible for treatment till the official point of no return. He did what he had to. There was no need to keep Terri on machines its not what she wanted and I'm sure her husband knew that more then her parents. I wouldn't call him an adulterer. I can tell that these anonymous responses are from bias females.
WOW @ Kerri. He clearly was an adulterer, since he had a GIRLFRIEND and CHILDREN. And, let us not forget that Terri was INFERTILE and his girlfriend bore his children. Sounds like an M.O. for murder to me....
Nevertheless, she didnt belong to him alone, she had FAMILY who loved her. How could he have known her more than her family, whom she grew up with? They werent even married for 20 years.
Do you have children? If one of them were dying, wouldnt you want to be able to be in the room when they dued? Or care for them?
WOW
@Kerri
Three different nurses gave sworn affidavits of testimony that Terri was NOT in a persistent vegetative state and that she responded to stimuli. According to the nurses, she laughed, cried, and talked. That is not the definition of brain dead.
Michael Schiavo stood to gain a lot of $$$ from his wife's death. As such his motives for removing the feeding tube are questionable at best.
Learn more about this case before you decide to just dismiss us as "biased females".
At what point is enough enough? My family and I shared our wishes with each other during the media frenzy around Terri's hospitalization...we all agreed that if the quality of life isn't there, i.e. being fed from a tube/bed ridden, why continue and make those you love watch you suffer? Obviously he knew her well enough to know that she wouldn't want to carry on a life hooked up to machines and having others clean her up every day...would you?? I really don't know of anyone that would choose to live life that way?! Give the guy a break. Thankfully, it was not YOU making the decisions he had to make. He gave it his all and after many many years of standing by his wife's side, it was time to move on...as hard as that can be sometimes.
Please note that we can’t answer legal questions in the article comments. If you have a specific legal question, click here to connect with an attorney.