Happy Spring. The time of year when new things grow, flowers bloom and trees begin to blossom with buds, animals and people make more babies, the sun shines more brightly and longer, the weather gets balmy, and the rains come.
Oh yes, and for one woman and her husband, there’s a huge national drama to perpetuate. I haven’t weighed in on the Terri Schiavo case for several reasons. One, I was and still am, for the most part, really and truly uninformed about what’s going on. No, uninformed isn’t the right word. We are all pretty informed on the matter. It’s the access we don’t have. Access into Terri’s mind and opinion. Access into her husband Michael’s head. Access into the judge’s head. And that’s where things are really happening. Believe me, the battles being raged there probably dwarf any war between India and Pakistan.
I don’t believe Michael Sciavo is unconflicted about his course of action, even if he does seem to be compromised in the worst of ways. Greg Piper notes that Michael has conflicts of interests in this case like Castro’s got Cubans and the high investigative journalism standards we might expect if it were about a President lying about a blow job or whether there were WMD’s in Iraq are sorely lacking here. To quote:
I’m not sure why most media have not seen it appropriate to mention’s Michael’s behavior for a decade. Editors might think it’s just a family dispute – but his actions and deviations from promises in court are in the public record. More likely, I think, is a reluctance to get involved in “personal matters” that also showed itself in the Jeff Gannon/James Guckert scandal involving a fake White House reporter. When Gannon/Guckert’s role in gay porn websites came out, it took several days for mainstream media – as opposed to blogs – to mention that. The imposter’s personal life, in that case, wasn’t particularly relevant to how he got into a press briefing, but the rationale for withholding the information is the same: it’s a personal matter.
The sway of journalims over public opinion is unprecedented. Yet this is barely acknowledged, though issues like abortion and same-sex marriage would not have nearly the attention or support they have if it weren’t for the headlines and selective reporting. In another post, Greg writes that “one little sentence in a two-page (online) story, high enough to be noticed by the casual reader, would be enough [to sway public opinion in favour of life for Mrs. Schiavo]. Indeed it would. And whilst the blogosphere is busy tooting its own horn, why haven’t we seen a more concerted effort to keep Terri alive at least in what we cover on our daily blogs? Sure, it’s starting to happen now, but mightn’t this have been a little more useful, say, a year and a half ago?
Perhaps its our innate sense of optimism and hope in the human ideal; that Michael Schiavo would wake up one day and realize all along that he has been a selfish prig and a prime candidate for the Ironies Division of hell, and change his heart, or at least his tune of “When is that bitch gonna die?” When you’re on the side of life, it’s difficult to think of Michael Schiavo as anything more than a guy who thinks that his wife is an inconvenience. And God forbid this American deny his own convenience.
American Digest writer Gerard Van Der Leun says that the Schiavo case is about friendship and the departure from politics that it should be (but isn’t). The GOP considers this “a great political issue” that can be used to galvanize core members and help propel conservative representatives to elected posts in the 2006 midterm elections. And that’s just tragic. What happened to humanity? What happened to justice? Not everything can be or should be boiled down to “Ask what you can do for your country.”
In the words of Ronald Reagan, since outfitted from the anti-abortion arguments of the 80′s by Peggy Noonan, “Don’t kick it”. This isn’t about the value of human life. Forget value. To classify this case with such a venal term is gross and antiseptic. Maybe human. But certainly not the best we can offer.
Offer life. Simply because it is life, and worth living, even at the bottom of a deep, dark well. That’s something no science textbook can explain.
J-Lew, you’re an optimistic idealist disguised as jaded realist. (One of your many endearing qualities). I, on the other hand, can’t hide the fact that I generally see the world as a pile of llama caca. When it comes to the Schiavo case, I say, why would anyone think it best to keep her “alive”? Let me make a short case from limited information: 1. She’s been mostly dead for 15 years already, 2. Multiple docs say it isn’t going to change. 3. Oodles of money are being spent keeping her not-completely-dead for no apparent reason. 4. She isn’t contributing anything to society, unless you consider her role as a rallying point for political activism (which she could just as easily continue to be after complete physical death). 5. Supposedly, she had at some point in her more living past commented that she’d never want to be kept in such a state anyway. 6. What we’re offering her by keeping in the food tube isn’t life, it’s continued physical existence. Life is something that was taken from her 15 years ago.
So, who knows Mikey’s real motivations, but all that aside, doesn’t it just make more sense to let her go where she would be anyway were it not for back-up generators? So, if there’s a special place reserved in Hell for Mike, I guess I’ll probably be the tour guide. Anywho, thank God I’ve signed and filed my Advanced Medical Directive — if I’m ever in her Velcro shoes and strappy-chair, PULL THE PLUG BABY!
Brad, that was probably the single best response I’ve heard to the Schiavo case in favour of pulling the plug, so to speak.
Allow me to retort, or rather, provide a counter-argument that doesn’t argue against your points, but rather makes a new point that makes all of your points…moot.
From the Christian perspective, we are all created in the image of God. It’s a kind of truth that isn’t really tied to anything else, so it’s not a proviso, just a fact of our existence–we carry the face of our Father, to borrow from CS Lewis and Stephen King.
The quality and condition of our lives does not affect, either negatively or positively, this inherent human dignity that comes from simply being.
In Terri’s case, she’s being kept alive by machines. Nevertheless, she is not a vegetable, nor incapable of thought. She is still 100% human. Jesus, when confronted with the ailing, the diseased, the “incurables”, did not respond by pulling their plug. He healed them. And he comforted them. Heck, even the dead he raised up, including those who insisted there was no point in laying on of hands, and laughed when He did so.
I’m not saying Jesus is going to raise Terri back from her current state. If He does, it would be wonderful. But the point is, though, He never responded to like situations by saying, “Well, it’s what she would have wanted.”
I guess my ultimate feeling on the whole situation is “Err on the side of life.” Maybe it’s a mistake, but it’s certainly a mistake that we can live with (no pun intended). I’d rather be guilty of keeping her alive than sending her to the next world before she’s called.
I agree with Jeremiah. (I know. Not something I write/say everyday) I’m not sure about all that media stuff, but what you wrote in that comment summarizes my thoughts, only more eloquently.
>Nevertheless, she is not a vegetable, nor incapable of thought.
Actualy, she is in what doctors have called “a persistant vegetative state”:
(From CNN, who ripped it from NIH)
PERSISTENT VEGETATIVE STATE
This term is commonly, but incorrectly, referred to as “brain-death.” It can follow a coma.
People in a persistent vegetative state cannot think, speak or respond to commands and are not aware of their surroundings. They may have noncognitive functions and breathing and circulation may remain relatively intact. (This means her brainstem is still intact. But not necessarily her cerebrial cortex, where thought takes place – Petie)
They also might move spontaneously and even grimace, cry or laugh. Some people might regain some awareness after being in a persistent vegetative state, but others might remain in the state for decades.
———–
CNN has a news timeline about this, it’s worth a look. Go to their site and click on the latest news about her, the timeline is linked to from every article.
———–
Michael has been offered large sums of money to drop this and go on, and let her parents keep her alive via feeding tube. He has a girlfriend and children with this girlfriend, but has not divorced Terri I presume because he feels some sense of duity here. If it was a question of greed, as some claim, he could’ve taken the money and run years ago.
I am assuming the reason he has kept on is he honestly believes that Terri would not have wanted to “live” this way.
The judgement call is Michael’s to make, according to our courts. The responsiblity for whether or not to pull the plug belongs to her husband. If God were to hold anyone accountable for whether or not this is the right thing to do, it is her husband, not you or me.
What I think we are seeing is a bunch of people who all love this person fighting because some people have learned to let go, and others cling to hope for her recovery because they can not accept the fact that they have not had their Terri as the knew her since 1990.
——-
That said, Euthinasia is a tricky subject. Abortion can also be included here. As Christians, we believe that life is sacred, and God has commanded us not to kill. He said if you (his followers) kill it is a sin. But people outside Christianity and Judisim are left to roll their own morality.
We will be judged based on what we do. I would argue that while we know what is right for us, we can not say what is right for other people. Since we live here and our courts have ruled so many times that Michael Schiavo is the the legal guardian of Terri Schiavo, I feel that the weight of this decision sits solely on his shoulders.