This comes from a letter lawyer Robert Destro (who has represented Terri Schiavo’s parents) sent to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (which Sensenbrenner put in the Congressional Record tonight):

Terri’s parents have alleged that the law created by Florida courts in Terri’s case violated both
Terri’s rights and theirs because:
1. The guardianship court compromised his judicial independence when the he appointed
himself, rather than an independent guardian ad litem, to serve as Terri Schiavo’s health care
proxy.
2. The Florida courts permitted Terri’s husband, Michael Schiavo and his attorney to represent
Terri’s interests notwithstanding the Florida courts own admission that his interests were
adverse to hers.
3. The Florida courts did not appoint a guardian ad litem for Terri, nor did they provide her
with counsel to argue and protect her interests. The result was a situation in which Terri
herself had no assistance of counsel in a case in which her life hangs in the balance.
4. The way the Florida courts applied the state’s law and constitution to incapacitated persons
with severe cognitive disabilities violated her rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the
Fourteen Amendment. After Terri’s case, the only persons in the State of Florida who are not
entitled to an independent judiciary and effective representation are incapacitated persons
who cannot speak for themselves.
5. The state court order under which Terri’s nutrition and hydration is currently being withheld
was entered after a proceeding tainted by “structural defects” that call the integrity of the
entire fact finding process in to question. As a result, we simply do not know either “what
Terri wants” or what her current medical condition actually is.
6. The state court order violates the standards set out in both federal and state precedents that
recognize the right to self-determination in health-care decisionmaking. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261, 280 (1990) and Guardianship of Browning, 568 So.2d
4, 12 (Fla.1990). Both of those cases recognize that accuracy, not finality, is essential in any
case where a guardian has asked for a judicial decree authorizing the death of the a person
with a severe disability such as Terri’s.
The Need for the Proposed Legislation
• Review of Terri’s Federal Claims by a Federal Court is an Essential Step in
Protecting her Right to Privacy
We have argued in federal court that Terri’s federal rights were violated by the state courts, and
that her continued custody in the guardianship violates her constitutional rights. Generally speaking,
such reviews can take place in only two ways: 1) direct review by the Supreme Court of the United
States by Petition for Certiorari; or 2) a federal writ of habeas corpus.
Because Terri will die within two weeks from starvation and dehydration, the traditional option
of a petition to the Supreme Court of the United States is not an option. It simply takes too long.
We did try an emergency motion for a stay, but the Court denied it on Thursday, March 17, 2005. As
a result, Mr. and Mrs. Schindler’s only option was a petition to the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Florida asking for a writ of habeas corpus.
Unfortunately for Terri, the habeas corpus statutes are focused almost exclusively on prisoners.
Getting the courts to understand that people in Terri’s situation are also entitled to habeas relief is
both difficult and time consuming. On Friday, March 18, 2005 the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Florida dismissed Mr. and Mrs. Schindler’s attempt to get a fair trial for Terri
because Judge Moody believed: a) that Terri is not a “person in custody” entitled to habeas relief; b)
that Mr. and Mrs. Schindler do not have standing to argue that Terri did not get a fair trial; and c)
that the federal courts are duty bound to respect the findings of the Florida courts concerning her
wishes.
Because we believe that federal law is to the contrary, we asked for, and received, a “Certificate
of Appealability” from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which is
currently considering our request that the District Court give Terri and her parents a hearing on their
federal claims.