Living Wills and Autonomy: The Terri Schiavo Case
This paper examines the Terri Schiavo case through the lens of advance care planning, arguing that a living will would have been the most appropriate advance directive to communicate Schiavo's end-of-life wishes. Drawing on Kirtland and Jackson's definition of a living will as a legally binding document specifying desired and unwanted medical treatments, the paper explains how such a document would have eliminated ambiguity about her preferences regarding life-sustaining interventions. The analysis also connects the living will to the ethical principle of autonomy, citing McLean's argument that individuals must be empowered to make decisions about their own lives free from undue third-party interference.
- Introduction: The Schiavo Dilemma: Introduces the Schiavo case and central question
- The Case for a Living Will: Argues a living will was the ideal directive
- Autonomy as an Ethical Foundation: Links the living will to patient autonomy
- References: Cited sources supporting the argument
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper anchors its argument in a clear, cited definition of a living will, giving the recommendation a precise conceptual foundation before applying it to the case.
- It connects a practical legal instrument (the living will) to a core ethical principle (autonomy), demonstrating that the two reinforce each other in the Schiavo context.
- Despite its brevity, the paper maintains a logical chain: identify the problem, recommend a solution, explain why the solution is ethically sound.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper exemplifies concept-to-case application: the student introduces a scholarly definition, maps it directly onto the case facts, and then elevates the discussion by grounding it in an ethical framework. This two-step move — definitional grounding followed by ethical justification — is a concise but effective way to construct a position in applied ethics writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper is structured as a single analytical paragraph supported by a reference list. It opens with a clear thesis (a living will was the ideal advance directive), supports the claim with a cited definition, applies that definition to Schiavo's circumstances, and closes by linking the recommendation to the principle of autonomy via a second scholarly source. The brevity suits a focused response paper or short-answer assignment at the undergraduate level.
Introduction: The Schiavo Dilemma
The case of Terri Schiavo raised profound questions about end-of-life decision-making and the legal instruments available to communicate a patient's wishes. At the center of the controversy was the absence of a clear, documented record of what Ms. Schiavo would have wanted if she became incapacitated and unable to speak for herself.
The Case for a Living Will
The form of advance directive that would have been most appropriate in this case — in terms of clearly communicating Ms. Schiavo's wishes — would have been a living will. As Kirtland and Jackson (2021) explain, a living will can be understood as "a written, legal document that spells out medical treatments you would and would not want to be used to keep you alive, as well as your preferences for other medical decisions, such as pain management or organ donation" (p. 95).
This would have been the most suitable advance directive option in this particular scenario because it would have clearly and unambiguously spelled out Ms. Schiavo's wishes regarding the interventions she would have desired — specifically, insofar as being kept alive is concerned — in the event that she became incapable of making decisions for herself.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.