Medical ethics should not be politicised

The right to a dignified death has been played out across the American media in recent months. Terri Schiavo's case has prompted people to question what they would want done in a similar situation and has been a rallying call to the political and religious "right to life" movement in the United States. The news showed President George Bush flying back from his holiday to sign a bill in the early hours of the morning. The bill was drafted for a single family and signalled the very public intervention of the state in a family's personal affairs.

Terri Schiavo was diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state by most of the doctors who saw her. The family was divided over what the best course of action was. Her parents wanted her maintained via artificial feeding and questioned the diagnosis. Michael Schiavo, Terri's husband and legal guardian, insisted that she had made it clear that she did not want to be kept alive in an incapacitated state.

Many agree that the case may have had little to do with the individuals concerned. George Annas, chairman of the health law department at Boston University of Public Health, said, "This is not about Terri Schiavo, I think this is about abortion and stem cells. Congress wants to say that we want pro-life judges because the judiciary is out of control and favours death over life." The recent publicity, however, was the culmination of a seven year legal battle, in which Terri's parents exhausted every legal option before Congress attempted its final intervention.

The fundamental issue here is how far the state should intervene in the concerns of an individual. US Judge George Greer said, "I see no cogent reason why the committee should be able to intervene into a case involving the decision of whether or not to remain on life support. I don't think that legislative agencies or bodies have business in court proceedings."

The US has highly politicised religion and medical ethics. Currently, rightwing Christian groups dictate government policy, with greater and greater intervention in the lives of ordinary citizens, especially around reproductive issues, terminal illness, and stem cell research. Recently, in the United Kingdom, with the looming general election, church leaders have said that they would like more ethical issues, such as abortion, placed at the heart of politics.

ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
All to no avail

A poll in Time magazine found that 75% of Americans believed it was wrong of Congress to intervene in the case, and 54% would vote against a member of Congress if they had voted for the interventional bill. UK politicians who use medical ethics for electioneering should bear this in mind: medical ethics should not be an election issue, and ethical debates should be a matter of conscience for the individual.