Public opinion and activism in the Terri Schiavo case

The case of Terri Schiavo became the subject of intense public debate and activism.

Two polls conducted in the days following the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube on March 18, 2005, showed that a large majority of Americans believed that Michael Schiavo should have had the authority to make decisions on behalf of his wife, Terri Schiavo, and that the United States Congress overstepped its bounds with its intervention in the case.

According to an ABC News poll from March 21, 2005, 70% of Americans believed that Schiavo's death should not be a federal matter, and were opposed to the legislation transferring the case to federal court. In the same poll, when ABC said "Terri suffered brain damage and has been on life support for 15 years. Doctors say she has no consciousness and her condition is irreversible," 63% said that they support the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube. Sixty-seven percent agreed with the statement that "elected officials trying to keep Schiavo alive are doing so more for political advantage than out of concern for her or for the principles involved."

A poll by CBS News reported on March 23 showed that 82% of respondents believed Congress and the President should stay out of the matter, while 74% thought it was "all about politics." Only 13% thought Congress acted out of concern for Schiavo. Furthermore, the approval ratings of Congress sank to 34%, its lowest since 1997.

A poll commissioned by the Christian Defense Coalition and completed by Zogby International after Schiavo's death found that, among likely voters, 44% said the tube should remain in place when asked, "[w]hen there is conflicting evidence on whether or not a patient would want to be on a feeding tube, should elected officials order that a feeding tube be removed or should they order that it remain in place?" Thirteen percent said the tube should be removed. Forty-four percent said the person should be allowed to live when asked, "[i]f a person becomes incapacitated and has no written statement that expresses his or her wishes regarding health care, should the law presume that the person wants to live, even if the person is receiving food and water through a tube?" (23% disagreed). After complaints that the polls were not actually asking questions that pertained to this case, or asked leading or confusing questions, Zogby did a very specific poll. This poll asked people if they agreed with starving and dehydrating to death a person who was in the same position as Terri, but without mentioning the fact that she was persistently unconscious. The exact question was "If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," The results were very dramatic. 79% said the patient should not be denied food and water, while just 9 percent said the patient should.

...
Wikipedia