There are several legal terms and laws to keep in mind before discussing this case. According to Legal Aspects of Health Care Administration by George D. Pozgar, the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990 “provides that each person has a right under state law to make decisions concerning his or her medical care.” (2012). The text further states that “adult patients who are conscious and mentally competent have the right to refuse medical care to the extent permitted by law, even when the best medical opinion deems it essential to life” (Pozgar, 2012).

To be considered competent there are specific guidelines to help assess a patient. Capacity is the ability to make treatment decisions (Pozgar, 2012). The individual must be able to understand …show more content…
Discussion The questions as to whether it should be legally acceptable for health care providers to force feed a patient without or against their consent in order to save their life can be controversial. The controversy derives from the battle between the patient’s rights and the medical teams’ obligations to sustain life. Outside of individual beliefs and opinions this question must be answered based on facts and legal evidence.
This specific question deals with the treatment of enteral feeding or tube feeding and whether it should be administered despite lack of consent. Enteral feeding refers to the delivery of a liquid food mixture into the patient through a tube. This mixture contains proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and vitamins all necessary for the body to survive (cite). Sometimes the tube is put in through the nose and into the stomach, which is called a nasogastric tube. Other times a gastrostomy tube is used which is when the tube is inserted through the skin and directly into the stomach …show more content…
In this case, Terri was incapable of forming thoughts let alone treatment decisions. Based on the assessment of patient capacity described in the statement of facts, it is clear that Terri Schiavo did not pass the assessment as legally competent. Since she could not make treatment decisions herself, Michael Schiavo, was legally granted guardianship since he was her husband.
Guardianship grants the individual the right to make medical decisions on behalf of the patient when they are incapable of doing so on their own (Pozgar, 2014). After years of Terri being in a persistent vegetative state, Mr. Schiavo expressed wanting to end enteral feeding and take out the tube (2014).
This action outraged the parents of Terri Schiavo, as well as the public. The parents and other family members believed that because Terri was not terminal and had the ability to live for years to come, that she should remain on a tube feeding. They did not want to give up on Terri and took this matter to State and Federal