Terri Schiavo Case

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/21/politics/21cnd-debate.html?hp&ex=1111467600&en=d959f74eb94c300f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

1. The central issue to this case is whether or not Terri Schiavo, a severely brain damaged woman, should remain alive with the help of a feeding tube or be permitted to die. This is "a case that has ignited emotional national debate over the right-to-die issue."

2. I believe the competing interests are those of Terri's parents versus those of her husband. Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, are fighting to get the tube reinserted and "say that their daughter would have wanted to be kept alive." Her husband, Michael, says that Terri would not have wanted to live this way and is asking that the feeding tube be permanently removed.

3. The competing interests in politics are those of the Republican party and Democratic party. The Republicans want Schiavo to be kept alive and have even talked about calling her as a federal witness. The Democrats, on the other hand, believe Schiavo should have the right to die and believe that her husband and legal guardian should make this decision. According to this article, the majority of Republicans support the idea of transferring jurisdiction into a federal court. This is surprising because Republicans usually support "states' rights and the holiness of matrimony."

4. This article did a good job of touching on the complexities of this case. I do not know if there is a right answer to this kind of issue, but the story described both sides in a way that gave enough information for readers to make build their own understanding and view. Although the arguments have been going on for years, I think the article described the background and recent developments as clearly as possible.

5. I believe it was about right. The article flowed nicely and the reporter used legal and political terms that the average reader could comprehend.

6. The article was long enough so that I could walk away and have a good idea of what was going on in the case but was short enough so that I did not feel overwhelmed with information. It mostly focused on the recent developments of the case which is what readers, including myself, are most interested in.

7. I thought that the quotes were the best part of the story. Without hearing from Michael Schiavo and President Bush, the story would be less interesting as well as less credible. I also believe that it is important to provide some background information. Since this case has been going on for the last seven years, it was important for the reporter to supply what has already taken place as well as the recent news. I also liked the photographs the article contained.

8. The weakness of this story was that some of the sentences and paragraphs got a little long. Although the content was not hard to follow, I would have changed the structure so that the article did not look so intimidating and lengthy to readers.