IN THE MATTER OF KAREN ANN QUINLAN

US, 1977, 100 minutes, Colour.
Brian Keith, Piper Laurie, David Hffman, Stephanie Zimbalist, Biff McGuire?, Louise Latham.
Directed by Glen Jordan.

In The Matter of Karen Ann Quinlan is a very good telemovie. It takes up the true story of the-girl who went into coma, was kept on life support systems, had a case heard in various American courts about the question of her being taken off the support systems to die with dignity and peace. The film focuses briefly on her illness, and her parents' acceptance of the fact that she was going to die. The bulk of the film concerns the legal and moral questions in the American court. Emphasis is given to public reaction. The issues of life and death, ordinary and extraordinary means for life support are well discussed in the human drama. Brian Keith-and Piper Laurie. sustain the film with excellent and sympathetic performances as the parents. David Huffman has a good role as the lawyer. The film might have been exploitative and a prying into a family life. However, it transcends this and is an effective social telemovie.

1. A successful and interesting telemovie? Its topical interest in the '70s with the case of Karen Quinlan? How well did it communicate to the home audience - the moral dilemmas, the special issues of medicine and morals, of law? A satisfying human drama?

2. The tastefulness of the telemovie - not capitalising on the real experiences of the Quinlan family, not prying into their experiences? Bringing this story into the home, audiences identifying with the characters, realising in an emotional way the issues involved, receiving the message and being able to judge?

3. How well did the film use the facts - of the family, of their relationships, of the moral dilemmas? Of the wear and tear of the anguish? The taste and propriety of the film? The insights behind the headlines?

4. The introduction to the situation and issues: Karen and her stopping breathing, the attempt to revive her, putting her on the life support systems? The doctors and their judgments about her inevitable death? ice and his vigils, his anger, his non-acceptance of her death? Julie and her coming to terms with the reality more quickly? The need for Joe to sit, to remember, to come to terms?

5. The flashback devices, the indication of Karen and her vitality, the fact that she was adopted, her relationship with her parents? The particular points of insertion of the flashbacks? The key to understanding Joe's and Julie’s reaction? The ability to cope or not? The question raised about their love for her as an adopted child? The genuineness of their love?

6. The first part showing the basic situation: the background of family life, Karen's vitality. the shock to all, the quick hospitalisation, the taking over of the doctors. decisions about what medication and treatment? Joe's non-acceptance, the daughter accepting while the son did not? Julie and her having to be the strength in the home? The clashes with Joe? The discussion with the doctors, with Sister Luke, with their priest friend? Coming to terms with the situation?

7. The raising of moral questions about ordinary and extraordinary means of continuing life? The quotations from Pope Pius XII? American law? Questions about rights to life, guardianship, medical means? How well did the film highlight legal issues, medical issues, moral issues? The family's right to decide, the law's right to decide? The doctors putting into practice legal decisions? Or not?

8. The drawn out nature of the court case, the pros and cons of taking Karen off the life support systems, the doctors and their unwillingness to act? 114oral issues, medical issues? The question of guardianship and the need for parents to exercise control and guardianship? Public reaction? The media?

12. The disappointment of the first judgment? The appeal and its preparation? The family's visits to Karen? The daughter and the temptation to turn off the system? The son and his unwillingness to visit? The build-up to the wait at the hotel? The parish priest and his manoeuvring of the hotel manager?

13. The verdict and its unanimity? The reasons given? From a law point of view, morality?

14. Joe and Julie confronting the Board? The doctors and their stances? Sister Luke? medical ethics confronting the law? The decision of the doctor to wean Karen from the support systems, the tension, the success?

15. An achievement for the family for Karen's dignity, quiet death? How persuasive the emotional drama? The issues? The aftermath of Karen Ann Quinlan surviving so long off the machinery?

8. The change in dramatic mood in the second part of the film: the parents and their concern to take their daughter off the support system and continuing their love for her, the tenderness of their visit? The daughter giving her support? The son distancing himself? The discussions with the lawyer and his decision to take the case? The intrusion of the press and public opinion? The doctors and their unwillingness to act? Board meetings at the hospital? Sister Luke? The pressures on Joe and Julie - the later comment about their not being angry? Their anguish and their decisions in terns of love for their daughter, their Catholic faith, sense of God's presence and providence, prayer?

9. How well did the film highlight the issue of the humanity of death, the right to die with dignity? Extraordinary means of life support - prolonging a person in coma as not dying with dignity? A natural way of dying?

10. The portrait of the lawyer - the young man, training, ambitions? The seeming enormity of the case? His terms for acceptance - discussion with his wife, financial situation, the visit to Karen Ann? The shared decision? The long research?