The Schiavo case was a bit different. The patient at hand was comatose, and there was no small amount of disagreement between the next of kin as to what to do next. Since the next of kin were unable to reach agreement on their own, the courts stepped in. The Florida court made its decision, and that should have been the end of it. Unfortunately a bunch of politicians in D.C. decided to make headlines for themselves and try to step in.
That was a mistake.
This case is much different. Here the patient is alive (although a minor) and there is no disagreement between the parents as to what is best for the kid. This is, pure and simple, a disgusting abuse of government power.
Rob - 10:07am on 07/22/2006
While the particulars of the two cases were very much different, the “disiturbing echo” was the presumptuous interference by government in both cases in life and death decisions which are of no concern to the government regardless of the age of the subject individual.
You and I disagree on the Schiavo case in that I do not believe that in that instance any court had the legal or moral authority to sentence the patient to death absent a requisite criminl conviction. But regardless, no court should involve itself in these sorts of decisions, especially in this current case where the court’s actions are at the behest of a state agency.
The Schiavo case was a bit different. The patient at hand was comatose, and there was no small amount of disagreement between the next of kin as to what to do next. Since the next of kin were unable to reach agreement on their own, the courts stepped in. The Florida court made its decision, and that should have been the end of it. Unfortunately a bunch of politicians in D.C. decided to make headlines for themselves and try to step in.
That was a mistake.
This case is much different. Here the patient is alive (although a minor) and there is no disagreement between the parents as to what is best for the kid. This is, pure and simple, a disgusting abuse of government power.
While the particulars of the two cases were very much different, the “disiturbing echo” was the presumptuous interference by government in both cases in life and death decisions which are of no concern to the government regardless of the age of the subject individual.
You and I disagree on the Schiavo case in that I do not believe that in that instance any court had the legal or moral authority to sentence the patient to death absent a requisite criminl conviction. But regardless, no court should involve itself in these sorts of decisions, especially in this current case where the court’s actions are at the behest of a state agency.