The Terri Schiavo case presents two lessons. The starkest of these is that life-and-death decisions involving a person in a vegetative state do not belong in the political arena. They are deeply personal matters to be decided by families. The best thing is to keep them out of the courts and, above all, out of the hands of legislative bodies who don't even bother to take the time to study the case or hold hearings.

But they can be made much easier if the person involved makes his or her intentions irrefutably clear ahead of time.

Schiavo's case, as tragic as it is, does not differ much from many similar cases that require tough decisions virtually every day in this country. Families and guardians deliberate with the help of competent medical professionals, clergy and, ultimately, their own consciences. Neither state legislatures nor Congress feels the need to get involved.

But in this case, the intensely private decision has now been turned into a political opportunity. The agonizing has become grand theater, with millions of Americans liberally offering their views of what should be done and which experts are to be believed.

Certainly, it would be cruel to criticize Schiavo for not having a living will. She was 26 years old when she suffered brain damage in 1990. Few Americans have living wills today, and few people in their 20s spend much time contemplating the possibility of such a tragedy. And yet her case has made very clear how important it is to have such a document and to make one's wishes known.

As for the second lesson, doctors have said Schiavo suffered heart failure all those years ago because she likely had a potassium imbalance due to an eating disorder. Too many women in America suffer from eating disorders brought on, in many cases, by cultural pressures to live up to an unrealistic image of ideal beauty. Schiavo's case illustrates how important it is to intervene early when people show signs of starving themselves.

But the lessons stop there.

We sympathize with Schiavo's family and their desires for her to some day recover. We are aware of the concerns some have expressed about her husband and his possible motives for wanting her to pass away. Frankly, we are not in a position to judge. Nor are we in a position to say whether she should remain on life support.

However, for 15 years, medical experts have been studying this case. For seven years, 19 separate judges have heard evidence, commissioned independent medical evaluations and rendered consistent judgments. For Congress and the president to step in at this late juncture and to rule, without any hearings, study or evaluation of their own, that, in effect, all the experts and judges were incompetent is simply wrong.

Life is indeed precious, and its sanctity must be protected. But tragedies such as these, no matter how messy, need to remain personal and private.