CNN NEWSNIGHT AARON BROWN
Battle Over Terri Schiavo
Aired March 29, 2005 - 22:00 ET
AARON BROWN, HOST: Good evening, again, everyone.Terri Schiavo has begun her 12th day without a feeding tube, both sides agree now, the end is drawing close. Mrs. Schiavo is reportedly no longer producing urine, a sign her kidneys may be shutting down.That said, those who want to save her have not stopped fighting, at least not publicly.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN (voice-over): This evening, Mrs. Schiavo's mother, Mary Schindler made a public plea to her daughter's husband, Michael Schiavo, and to his girlfriend Jody.
MARY SCHINDLER, TERRI SCHIAVO'S MOTHER: Michael and Jody, you have your own children. Please, please give my child back to me.
BROWN: Outside Terri Schiavo's hospice in Pinellas Park, Florida, supporters of Michael Schiavo have joined the crowd of protesters, though they remain vastly outnumbered. And, as you probably know by now, the Reverend Jesse Jackson joined the protesters, and entered the fight on the side of the Schindler family, calling for Florida lawmakers to pass emergency legislation to intervene.
REV. JESSE JACKSON, POLITICAL ACTIVIST, SUPPORTS SCHINDLERS: I was on the phone today, talking with members of the Senate, asking them to be creative enough to try to fashion some emergency legislation to stop the starving, to stop the dehydration.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: An outline of another sad day in the Schiavo case. We're joined now from Pinellas Park by Larry Klayman, attorney and former general council of Judicial Watch. He's been with the Schindler family over the past few days, and is in this, as he is in virtually everything I've ever known him to do, a passionate proponent, in this case of that cause. Larry, it's good to see you.
LARRY KLAYMAN, ATTORNEY, FMR. GEN. COUNCIL, JUDICIAL WATCH: Thanks, Aaron, it's good to see you, too.
BROWN: Can you give me a concrete idea that your side has that could turn this around at this point?
KLAYMAN: The Reverend Jackson articulated it very well. He reached out to us. Obviously, we've asked the governor for his help. We believe that he has the executive power. He's a good man, he's been a good governor, we'd like him to act. He has the ability to grant clemency to Terri, in fact, restore her civil rights. But if that does not happen, the legislature in Florida is really where we're at right now. We're trying to reintroduce legislation that was voted down last week. We're looking for senators to support -- state senators -- Jesse Jackson is playing an instrumental role. We believe he will turn around at least three senators, and the procedures exist that this legislation can be reenacted, very, very quickly, perhaps within a day. Now, we're racing the clock, and we urge Jesse Jackson and those senators in Tallahassee to get the job done quickly before it's too late.
BROWN: Larry, someone speaking for the state house in Florida said that they wouldn't get to this till next Tuesday at the earliest, even if it passed the senate.
KLAYMAN: That person is mistaken because they'll be reintroducing the legislation that was discussed last week in the Senate. It can be reintroduced tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. for a new vote. The senate can vote upon it. It will go over to the house. The house would then have an opportunity to adopt the senate bill or house bill. That would then be sent back to the senate. It could all be done in one day, and the whole job could be signed by the governor tomorrow evening. It can happen, if everything breaks the right way. We thank Reverend Jackson for being here and working very hard to get this thing done.
BROWN: Larry, a couple of other things. You said to us earlier today when we talked that the legal system had failed both sides. Let me just play this back to you for a second. This case has probably been litigated as much as any right-to-life or right-to-die case in the history of any country. Each side has had doctors, the court has appointed doctors, Ms. Schiavo has had a guardian, independent of her husband, looking out for her interests. It may be the outcome isn't an outcome that people are comfortable with, and that makes sense to me, but how can you argue that the system failed?
KLAYMAN: Aaron, I saw it in a smaller way. You know, over the years -- that's why I started Judicial Watch in 1994. I'm now in private practice, having run for the senate down here, and this was a big part of my campaign, is that we need to do something about the system where we don't have the best and brightest on the bench. Now, how could this Judge Greer have made a decision, that there was clear and convincing evidence, when the evidence here was simply that Terri had made a statement watching an episode of E.R., of emergency room? And when that kind of a situation arises, there are judges that are supposed to review the decisions of other judges. But judges, like everybody else -- lawyers, doctors, you name it -- protect themselves, and they rally around, they group the wagons, and that was the reason for Judicial Watch, was to watch judges, and it performs a valuable function. But, beyond that, the lesson that will be taken out of this -- and let's pray that Terri lives, because not only do we want her to live as a human being, but she'll be very helpful in getting the job done -- is that we need better judges on the bench, number one, and number two, in the family law system -- and I had a tragedy in my own family where my grandmom had a do not resuscitate order put on her charts and my stepdad at the time told the hospital not to feed her. I went in as the grandson, I had no standing, just like the Schindler family. My grandmother was the closest person in my life, and we need to revise the family laws which simply do not serve the interest of the American people.
BROWN: That is a great conversation, honestly, to have, and we ought to have it, and I'd love to have it with you, perhaps, tomorrow or after this terrible tragedy ends, because there will be other chapters no matter how it ends. That's a good place to start. Larry, it's good to see you.
KLAYMAN: Absolutely. Absolutely. Thank you, Aaron. God bless.
BROWN: This is, I think it's fair to say, a story without a good ending. There may be a "right" ending, but there's not a good one, not when a young woman dies, not when families are so estranged. The fact that there are important principles doesn't alter that essential fact. And the estrangement will continue on after death, with battles over what's to become of Ms. Schiavo's body. Her husband has requested an autopsy, which he hopes will settle some issues in this sad matter, but not likely all, nor will it settle all the family disputes. Here's CNN's David Mattingly.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The decision to have the autopsy conducted by a county medical examiner may not be enough to satisfy Terri Schiavo's family, the Schindlers. Their attorney already suggests experts in cases of abuse and strangulation may be needed in the autopsy to answer their questions about what caused her brain damage.
DAVID GIBBS, SCHINDLER'S ATTORNEY: What happened in 1990? Was there any type of strangulation or abuse or anything that occurred? I think those issues need to be addressed. What kind of condition is Terri in? What kind of condition is her mind and body in? Did she have a heart attack? There's a lot of things that can be known, and I think for the family and for all involved, getting good answers is a very good thing.
MATTINGLY: But experts caution that an autopsy will produce limited findings. Questions about injuries that may or may not have occurred 15 years ago may go unanswered, while questions about the condition of her brain and the diagnosis of a persistent vegetative state could be resolved clearly.
DR. CYRIL WECHT, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: What the autopsy can tell you is, what she died of, that is to say, whether there truly is this significant brain damage.
MATTINGLY: The Florida circuit court, again, reaffirmed Michael Schiavo's authority to make the decision to have his wife's body cremated and buried in Pennsylvania where they grew up. On Tuesday Judge George Greer turned down the Schindler's emergency request to have their daughter buried in Florida without cremation.
PAUL O'DONNELL, SCHINDLER FAMILY SPIRITUAL ADVISOR: In our tradition, we like to have the body there at the liturgy, and that afterwards that it's buried in a dignified place, because we believe that the glorified soul will be reunited with the body one day.
MATTINGLY: As far back as November 2002, Michael Schiavo has claimed to be acting on the wishes of his wife Terri, and not his own. He was quoted in the newspaper "St. Petersburg Times" saying, "she never wanted to be put in the ground with bugs. She always told me that." The judge found Schiavo's plans to be consistent with Roman Catholicism. Schiavo's only obligation is to notify the Schindlers of any memorial services and the location of the cemetery. Any change of plans or reconciliation seems very unlikely. The family animosities that erupted over Terri Schiavo's life may well continue long after her life is over. David Mattingly, CNN, Pinellas Park, Florida.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: There are some basic medical questions here, so we bring in, again, Dr. Sanjay Gupta who joins us now. 12 days without food and water. What's happening to her body at this point?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN MEDICAL EXPERT: Couple of very predictable things happen, when someone does not receive any calories or any fluids. Several things happen in a sequence: first, the organs start to shut down, most predictably the kidneys, and you can see that because the body just stops producing urine. What's really happening, though, is those toxins that are otherwise filtered by the kidneys start to buildup in the heart -- I'm sorry, build up in the bloodstream -- eventually affecting the heart, and ultimately -- her heart just would not function properly, and that would probably be the ultimate cause of demise.Aaron?
BROWN: It's heart failure?
GUPTA: That's right.
BROWN: We were looking earlier at -- for lack of a better word -- some pictures of her brain. These were done -- tests that were done on her by the court-appointed neurologist in the case. When you look at them, this is your business...
GUPTA: Yes. BROWN: Is it clear what we are talking about?
GUPTA: Yeah, it is clear what we're talking about. And I think even a layperson can see a significant difference between the brain on the left, which is healthy 25-year-old, and then Terri Schiavo's on the right. All the dark area, the very black area there is fluid, and fluid is essentially filled in areas of the brain where brain cells have died. So I would look at a scan like this and say, there's been a significant amount of brain cell death, and you can tell that sort of throughout the brain, meaning globally, throughout the entire brain. What you can't say, though, Aaron, and this is an important point, is exactly what that person would look like clinically. There are people who have significant amounts of fluid in the brain and are still quite functional. And there are people who have relatively normal-looking brain scans and aren't functional. So you've really got to take all this information together.
BROWN: So all that picture tells us is there's fluid on the brain and it doesn't really tell us anything else?
GUPTA: You couldn't say for sure this person, based on the CT scan, is in a persistent vegetative state. In fact, let me take it one step further. I think we have some actual images of what the brain itself might look like, leaving aside the scans, but taking a look on the left, again, a normal brain or a healthy brain, and then on the right, again, I think even a layperson can tell there's a significant amount lost of brain tissue there. Even to call that a PVS brain, as it says there, is probably not entirely accurate, because you cannot make a clinical diagnosis based on looking at the brain itself.What they're going to do as part of this autopsy is see if it all fits together. We know what she looked like when she was alive, in terms of what she was able to do. Does that fit with what her brain actually looks like as well?
BROWN: All right, thank you for walking us through that. There actually are a couple of other medical questions, and I suspect we have got some days to get to those, about this condition all happened. It's good to see you again.
GUPTA: Thank you.
BROWN: Sanjay Gupta is in Atlanta. Tonight, as we said at the top, around the country there are no doubt hundreds of families like the Schindlers and the Schiavos who are making end of life decisions about a loved one. In some cases, there are no doubt disagreements between the spouse and the parent. You simply don't hear about them. We do not report them. Terri Schiavo became news after she became a cause, and becoming a cause was no accident.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN (voice-over): It has been the Schindler family, but most especially 70-year-old Bob Schindler, who has been the driving force that has turned his daughter's life, and it would seem now her death, into a national cause. But he has hardly done it alone. It all began five years ago.
CARRIE GORDON EARLL, POLICY ANALYST, FOCUS ON THE FAMILY: He was starting to shake the bushes, if you will, to let people know that he was concerned about his daughter. By that time, her feeding tube had been ordered removed. And they were in an appeal process. So you know, the Schindler family has had a lot to do with why this is a front burner issue.
BROWN: Michael Schiavo went to court in the winter of the year 2000, seeking to have his wife's feeding tube removed, saying it was her spoken wish. At about that time, right to life groups started putting the story in play on Web sites and through e-mails to reporters around the country. It is a textbook study in how a cause is born.
LARRY SABATO, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR POLITICS, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: These interest groups exist for a purpose. And when they find a case that they believe represents that purpose, they latch on like a dog to an ankle, and you just can't separate the two. That's what happened here. BROWN: Every time there was a turn in the Michael Schiavo lawsuit, an appeal upheld, a different medical opinion offered, there was a corresponding uptick on the right to life Web sites. And when selected portions of the family's own home video of Terri Schiavo were made public by her father, it gave a simmering movement new manager.
EARLL: Terri has become that silent spokesperson, and many are galvanized by that, because what it speaks to our human dignity and our place in a civilized society. So hopefully, it will have an impact of the nation.
BROWN: By 2003, the movement gained new strength and a new ally, in Florida Governor Jeb Bush. He pushed a bill through his state's legislature, with the help of the Washington-based Family Research Council, one of the country's largest and most energetic pro-life groups.
TONY PERKINS, PRES., FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: The previous president of Family Research Council, Ken Connor, actually has been serving as the attorney for Jeb Bush in defending Florida's Terri's Law that the legislature there passed a year and a half ago. So the organization has been indirectly and directly involved in this battle for quite some time.
BROWN: The Schindler family began a Web site of its own, TerrisFight.org, inviting donations for basic things, like paper and computer printers and toner. A variety of right to life groups and social conservatives grabbed on.
SABATO: The fact of the matter is, that there is not a crisis, there is not a personal disaster that is not exploited, openly and unashamedly, by one group or another. In this case, there are probably a dozen groups actively trolling for contributions, large and small, from people who have been paying close attention, and they'll get it.
BROWN: By the time Congress and President Bush became part of the drama, the week before last, the case itself had already become the cause for social conservatives. They had been working it for five years. But had the family not been out there, not just seeking help from organizations, but publicly making their pleas, giving the story its human face, there likely would have been no national story at all.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: But it is a national story, and we have much more on it tonight, beginning with this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are we to say that the entire federal government is powerless to help her?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: Making an industry out of outrage, not just the politics of it all, the business. Later, the voice of the trial we'll never forget.
BROWN: In a moment, Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who has traveled to Florida to be with the Schindler family, we'll talk with him.
BROWN The case of Terri Schiavo, as we said earlier, has become a cause -- magnet for a range of people in groups. Rick Santorum, the U.S. senator from Pennsylvania is in Pinellas Park, Florida tonight. A long participant in the right to life movement. And he joins us from there tonight. Good to see you, senator.
SEN. RICK SANTORUM (R), PENNSYLVANIA: Thank you, Aaron.
BROWN: Should Congress have passed a law that explicitly said the court, the federal court must re-evaluate the entirety of the situation?
SANTORUM: Obviously, I believe the answer is yes to that. As you know, under the Constitution, we have a right to prescribe the jurisdiction of the court. And we thought in this case, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) amount to a death case. As you know, there's a police officer standing in that room right now who is not allowing any kind of hydration, not even by tube, but by mouth. What you have is a situation where someone was given a death sentence and no federal court reviewed the facts and circumstances of this case. And so what we -- given the tremendous conflicts in the record that came out during and subsequent to this case, we thought it was appropriate in this case to have a federal court review because in a sense this woman is being given a death sentence by a state court.
BROWN: But if I recall the law, correct me if I'm wrong, what the bill said is the court may -- the court -- the bill did not say the court shall.
SANTORUM: No. Yes, the court shall consider this case. It was required -- they were required to do so, and they were required to have a de novo trial. That's exactly what the bill said, and this judge simply ignored it and snubbed his nose at the Congress.
BROWN: Senator, did the bill say may or shall? This seems to be hanging on one word. Because it's been my impression for a week -- you tell me I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
SANTORUM: It's a misimpression there.
BROWN: It won't be the first time.
SANTORUM: You are absolutely wrong. The bill said "He shall hold a de novo trial." That's what the bill said.
BROWN: And so the...
SANTORUM: He must hold a new trial.
BROWN: The federal district court ignored that, the appeals court ignored that and the U.S. Supreme Court ignored that.
SANTORUM: Well, they didn't ignore it. What they -- the district court ignored it. The appeals court, as you saw in the dissenting opinion, felt the -- decent felt that what the judge did was abuse his discretion and ignored a direct edict of the Congress. What this judge said, is he used a calque (ph) between Senator Levin and Senator Frist to suggest that he had the option of reinserts the tube. And he felt that his looking at the facts of the case that were presented at trial and any other new evidence that they wanted to submit in their briefs was sufficient for a trial de novo. That is clearly not what Congress intended. That's not what a trial de novo is. But the appellate courts felt he did not abuse his discretion. And that, to me, was wrong, but that's they felt. That's what they decided.
BROWN: One final area, if you will. The polling on this, and people always dispute the questions in the polls, but this case has been out there, and I think people understand it -- has suggested pretty strongly that what people want here is to keep these decisions within families where possible and in courts, if absolutely necessary, but out of -- with all due respect, your hands, the hands of the Congress and the Senate. Without -- I'm just curious what you think about that. What do you think that says...
SANTORUM: And I think that's -- I would general agree with that. I think they should be family decisions, first and for most. And secondly, when you have a dispute, as you do in this case. that the courts, unfortunately, have to get involved in these decisions. And what I think we see here is a court that got involved and did so erroneously. And we have a situation which I think is compelling, one that I think is setting a very dangerous precedent in this country, where someone because of their diminished capacity -- a disputed diminished capacity is being starved to death over the objections of someone who's willing to take care of them. I think that is a truly unique case, and one that cries out for, at least, another set of eyes to look at this anew. And that's what the Congress did. It was not trying to insert our judgment. Quite the contrary, we did not say -- in fact, I think it's obvious the fact that we haven't further acted, we did not say that we were going to insist on any particular decision. What we wanted was someone, independent of Judge Greer who's been brought into question under this case, to take a look at the facts and circumstances. And unfortunately, Judge Whittemore decided not to do that against the express intent of the Congress.
BROWN: Sir, do you think there will be new federal law that grows out of this?
SANTORUM: I think there's a -- look, these are issues that one of the things I've found out and I think we've all learned, is these issues are far more common than I think most of us envision. I sometimes I've got to tell you, I get chills listening to doctor after doctor getting on talk shows and television shows saying, Oh, I would easily pull the plug on this case. Or I'd easily remove a feeding tube here. I mean, we do it all the time. I don't think most Americans realize how callous we've become in dealing with people who are of diminished capacity and who otherwise would live if given simple hydration and food, and are simply not allowed to live. That to me is something that we need a public policy discussion on, as to how we're going to treat those that are the least among us.
BROWN: Good to see you, sir. We appreciate your time tonight, thank you.
SANTORUM: Thanks, Aaron.
BROWN: Rick Santorum, senator from Pennsylvania. When Terri Schiavo became a cause, she also became, in truth, an opportunity to some. To some, that sounds crass, and perhaps it is. And it's also true to say, that groups on both sides have used the case for their own ends. And sometimes their own ends has a lot to do with money. Here's our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST (voice-over): The Terri Schiavo issue has sparked plenty of outrage.
REV. PATRICK MAHONEY, DIR. CHRISTIAN DEFENSE
COALITION: Are we to say that the entire federal government is powerless to help her?
SCHNEIDER: In politics outrage can be marked, it's already happening in the Schiavo case. Last month Bob Schindler, Terri Schiavo's father, sent out an e-mail plea to raise money for the legal fight to save his daughter. Those who responded are now on the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation Active Donor List. Response unlimited, a direct mail and telemarketing firm has advertised the list for rent. One has names of more than 6,000 donors, available at the rate of $150 per thousand names. The other for $500 per thousand, lists more than 4,000 E-mail addresses. The outrage industry works for both the right and the left. The American Progress Action Fund calls House Majority Leader Tom DeLay the very picture of political opportunism and hypocrisy, click and donate.You need to target a devil, says an experienced liberal fund raiser.
ROGER CRAVER, DIRECT MAIL CONSULTANT: You know, the business of political causes and issues is a lot like professional wrestling. There is good and there is evil.
SCHNEIDER: Who's the Devil in the Schiavo case, her husband?
MAHONEY: Why should a man who's in a 10 year relationship with another woman, fathered two children, has gone on with his life by some archaic -- archaicing (ph) law now speaks for a woman he has no emotional connection to.
SCHNEIDER: It's hard to see a political pay off for attacking Michael Schiavo. Conservative activists see a bigger target.
RANDALL TERRY, SCHINDLER FAMILY SPOKESMAN: In the past year we have seen the "Pledge of Allegiance" come under attack because of under God. We have seen the 10 Commandments removed from a state court house. We've seen homosexual marriage created out of thin air. And now we see an innocent woman being starved to death.
SCHNEIDER: So who is the Devil.
TERRY: The mood of the country is ready for chief executives and for legislatures to tell the judiciary no, no more, no.
SCHNEIDER: The outraged industry is at work, and judges are a target.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHNEIDER: "The New York Times" quotes a witness who says he was present when the Schindler's agreed to the marketing arrangement, although the witness is not sure how much attention the Schindlers were paying. Now a spokesperson for the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation said today quote, "Never at any time did Mr. Schindler ask me to sell those names. I don't believe he fully understood the terms of this deal. It was never his intent to accept money" -- Aaron.
BROWN: Bill, thank you. Good so see you. Bill Schneider in Washington tonight. When he heard that Jesse Jackson was entering the Schiavo case, a cynic we know opined, there must be some sort of federal law that says any news story that runs longer than a week must have Jesse Jackson in it. We take a more charitable view, that is just one more example of the many odd couplings this story has produced. Here's CNN's Susan Candiotti.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SUSAN CANDIOTTI CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Some of them have been here every day, representing different faiths. Some church goers, some not. A dying woman has brought them together.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We are uniting under the same banner of love for our sister Terri.
CROWD: Let Terri live!
CANDIOTTI: The wheelchair-bound usually lobby for the disabled, now siding with anti-abortion advocates. Among the strangest bedfellows, conservative abortion opponent Randall Terry and liberal human rights activist Reverend Jesse Jackson. (on camera): Politically speaking, before Reverend Jackson showed up here today, what has been your view of him?
RANDALL TERRY, SPOKESMAN FOR PARENTS OF TERRI SCHIAVO: Well, politically, he and I are not on the same side of most issues, I don't think.
CANDIOTTI (voice-over): To say Randall Terry was floored would be an understatement.
TERRY: I couldn't have written this script in my wildest dreams if I was doing a hallucinogenic drug.
CANDIOTTI: A script played out as the Schindlers would have wanted, cameras enveloping Jackson like a swarm of bees, jostling for position. And though he opposed federal legislation in Schiavo's case, he called her situation an injustice. Jackson insisted his presence wasn't odd.
REV. JESSE JACKSON, FOUNDER, RAINBOW/PUSH COALITION: I do not, because her quest to live transcends our mortal, oftentimes self- righteous arguments. And there are those who love the fetus, then want to starve the babies. There are those who want to love Terri and then ignore...
CANDIOTTI: One analyst says the timing of Jackson's involvement appears well-calculated as Terri Schiavo weakens.
CHARLES ZELDEN, NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: I suspect, as of many Democrats, he is torn between the more conservative cultural elements of his party and his followers and the more liberal.
CANDIOTTI: But one of the few supporters of Terri Schiavo's husband here, that's Raymond Simmons, standing to the right of Randall Terry, isn't impressed with Jackson's visit.
RAYMOND SIMMONS, SUPPORTER FOR MICHAEL
SCHIAVO: All these politicians are coming here to take credit and get their 15 minutes of fame for their political reasons, and Jesse Jackson coming out here is just adding to the confusion.
CANDIOTTI (on camera): Others may perceive it as confusing, but to those on both sides of Terri Schiavo's fate, any support is welcome at this pivotal moment. Susan Candiotti, CNN, Pinellas Park, Florida.
All 32 minutes of one sided exploitation AS COMPARED TO AN 'Interview of Equality Presenting the Legal View' and not the biased view.
REV. BARRY LYNN, EXEC. DIRECTOR, AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: I think the problem here, Larry, is that the Congress should never have gotten involved in this case. The religious right should not have gotten involved in Mrs. Schiavo's case. And with all due respect to my friend, Jesse Jackson, he should not have been involved here in this way.
It's trying to second-guess the legal and the medical judgments that have now been reviewed by 24 different courts and 24 attempted legal interventions. I think this is a civil rights issue. The question is whether Americans have a right to say no to life- sustaining therapies, whether that is a feeding tube, or a ventilator, or a kidney machine, and if they can't speak for themselves, who can we listen to? The courts have said Michael Schiavo have made that decision. People have challenged that decision in court, but I think now that all these processes have gone on, it's time to let Mrs. Schiavo go in the care of that hospice, which has been nothing but kind to her throughout this entire process.
