March 29, 2005

Dear Ms. Malloy:

Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts on the case of Terri Schiavo. I always appreciate hearing from the people I represent in Congress.

This is a case which has produced very strong feelings, emotions and opinions on both sides.

Most people arguing against federal court review are the people who have supported expanding federal power involvement in almost every aspect of American life.

Most people arguing for federal court review are the same people who for years have criticized federal judges for assuming too much power and jurisdiction.

I voted to allow Terri Schiavo to live in part because of my great respect for Senator Bill Frist (R-TN) . Senator Frist reviewed the records of 33 physicians involved in this case. He found Mrs. Schiavo to be responsive to human contact in several ways and not in a persistent vegetative state.

I voted the way I did in part because her husband denied her rehabilitation and access to outside air and light for several years.

I also voted to allow Terri Schiavo to live because of the love and importance of her family and their willingness to care for her at their own expense.

I voted the way I did because even though this case has been litigated for seven years, that is far less time than the average death penalty case in this Country, and I did not feel one more review would seriously damage anyone.

And finally, I voted the way I did because I simply felt it was extremely cruel to starve someone to death, and it was better to err on the side of life rather than the side of death.

Frankly, I was not at all surprised to see the federal courts rule in the end against keeping Terri Schiavo alive in spite of the merits of the arguments for doing so.

Federal judges are appointed through a political process, but many are extremely sensitive about this fact. Thus, they often go to extremes to prove how non-political they are. Also, some simply would love nothing better than to show they are powerful enough and "courageous" enough to stand up to the Congress .

I understand and respect the opinions of those on the other side of this case, and I certainly would not criticize anyone who at least felt concerned enough one way or the other to share their views with me.

Again, thank you for contacting me. If I can be of further assistance to you, your family or friends, please do not hesitate to let me know.

With kindest regards,

John J. DUNCAN, JR
Member of Congress

April 11, 2005

Dear Mr. Malloy.

Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts about Terri Schiavo. It is an honor to serve you as Majority Leader of the United States Senate, and it is a privilege to respond to your concerns.

There is no more sacred virtue in our society than the need to preserve and protect human life. In Terri Schiavo's unique and tragic case, her life was at stake, her end-of-life wishes were in dispute, and medical experts were split on her medical condition. I suggested the courts solicit additional tests and attempt to reach a medical consensus on her condition. I also recommended current and complete neurological examinations, which she did not have, using the most up-to-date medical technologies.

Congress passed a bill that allowed a federal court to take a fresh look at her case. The fact that the bill passed unanimously in the Senate and with bipartisan support in the House suggests that members of both political parties agreed that the courts should at least have considered additional medical evidence in her case. I am extremely disappointed in the federal court rulings on this case, and I am deeply saddened by her death. When medical facts are in dispute I believe that we should always err on the side of life.

Sincerely,

William H. Frist, M.D.
Majority Leader United States Senate

P.S Please visit http.//frist.senate.gov to register for my e-mail newsletter.