Schiavo Case

1. How would you describe the central controversy here?
   Schiavo’s parents want to keep her feeding tube in, while her husband wants it removed. The case also has brought out the religious right for life to defend Schiavo.
2. Webster’s describes politics as being about “competing interests.” In the Schiavo case what are the competing interests for the individuals involved?

The two competing interests are those who want Schiavo’s tube removed and those who want it to stay installed. The right for life movements have taken this case has something they wanted to fight for.
3. What are the competing interests for the political factions involved?

I think that conservative republicans are using this case for political gain amongst the religious right. However, since democrats also supported the congressional intervention. I don’t think it was successful, also polls indicate that most Americans thought that the political intervention in the case was for the political gain.
4. Political issues are often complex. Did the article you read bring out complexities of the case?

At this point in the case the politics involved have died down. The judges have refused to reinsert her feeding tube. The family plans on appealing the decision to the Supreme Court. One of the possibly political ramifications is the expected possibility of President Bush appointing a Supreme Court justice.
5. Was the level of complexity too much, too little or about right for this issue?

No.
6. Explain your answer to question No. 5.
I think that since the case is nearly over, or at least that’s the impression I’m under, that it isn’t going to change. The political ramification is that Bush should have the opportunity to nominate a Supreme Court judge.

7. What was the best part of the story, i.e. something you should try to do in your own reporting?
It seemed complete and brought the reader up to date on the case without recapping what has already happened.

8. What was a weakness of the story, i.e. something you should try to avoid in your own reporting.

I think the article could have touched on the likely hood of whether or not the Supreme Court would here the case.