Here's an excellent, imo, op/ed piece from a Ft. Wayne, Indiana paper online:

Congress as doctor

Congress' decision to intervene in the Terri Schiavo case marks a disturbing federal government intrusion into an individual's health care. And it has frightening implications for the separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches.

Clearly politicians determined to prevent Schiavo's husband from making the gut-wrenching decision to remove life-sustaining feeding tubes cared more about scoring political points than following the rule of law. Nineteen Florida judges have ruled that Michael Schiavo has the right to cease using machines to keep his wife alive in her vegetative state. The federal courts had already declined to hear the case, and the rightward leaning U.S. Supreme Court upheld that decision.

Some Americans may be surprised to learn neither the House nor Senate bothered to gather a majority of its members' votes in passing this midnight legislation. The House approved the measure 203-58, with 174 members absent. Only three senators were present when the Senate used its unanimous consent rule to approve the legislation, though any one of the 100 U.S. senators could have forced a real vote.

The implications are frightening. Unhappy with the decisions of state and federal courts, Congress passed a law sending the case to yet another court. What's to stop Congress from continuing to move any case from court to court until its members get the decision they want?

While conservative groups hoping to keep Terri Schiavo alive challenge the motives of her husband, they ignore the irrefutable judgment of health-care experts. As explained in last year's Florida Supreme Court decision overruling a state law meant to overrule her husband's decision:

"Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid-1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this state for many years."

More important, the court ruled that to its best judgment, Terri Schiavo would not want to remain on life support.

Yet members of Congress have declared they know more about Schiavo's wishes than her husband, more about her medical condition than the doctors who examined her.

It is only natural for Schiavo's parents to hold out for that miracle, to pray for it every day. And decisions about ending life support are far from knee-jerk. Hospitals and hospices must follow strict requirements to ensure that the patient has no hope of recovery. As with many families, the choice is not unanimous.

In this case, the health-care providers have agreed they have no substantive argument to keep Terri Schiavo on life support, and her guardian must make the final choice.

This is a matter for Schiavo's guardian and health-care experts to decide. Congress should have stayed out of it.