I have been too silent on the subject of Terri Schiavo's plight, thinking I didn't have anything to add. Now I think I should at least express my opinion and link to others who have said so much.
[Updated 3/23: The following paragraph has been revised after further review, elaborated on at the bottom of this post. Struck text is original, followed by a revision in italics.]
First, my opinion. This is all but an act of murder by her husband who has refused to give her proper medical care, has denied visitation rights to her family, who has left her in order to start a family with another woman while refusing to divorce Terri (I think this should be a disqualifying factor in his legal status as her guardian), and who stands to make a bit of money when she dies. His claims that Terri is in a vegetative state (PVS) are disputed. I don't know Michael Schiavo's motivations for his actions, but I don't think that he is acting in her best interests given some of his behaviour during this ordeal, such as his previous refusal to pay for rehabilitation, attempting to refuse her parents visitation rights, and starting a family with another woman while refusing to divorce Terri (I think this should be a disqualifying factor in his legal status as her guardian). Yet I am commanded to love this man, who I consider to be an enemy of God, because Jesus told me I should. Does love imply agreement? No, love does not imply tolerance of evil, but rather confronts it. In this case, with no personal contact between this man and me, I think it implies I should be praying for his soul. Maybe there would be more hope for Terri that way.
When I hear someone say that she deserves death with dignity, my reaction is "According to whom?" Terri didn't ask for this fate. Before my father passed away last November, I saw what had to be done in Texas before someone could be denied food and water. There were lots of papers and instructions, that had to be in order before treatment could be denied. That ensured that the dying person had left clear instructions on how to handle their fate. No word of mouth hearsay could be used to justify letting them die with no treatment. Unfortunately, the judge letting Mr. Schiavo do this to Terri has done just that, admitting as binding a word-of-mouth recollection of a passing comment, witnessed only by someone who stands to benefit from her death, and contradicted by testimony from her family.
Now for some links:
Susan b. has written a lot about Terri Schiavo, start here and go down.
blogs4God has a post from Mean Dean and links to other bloggers' posts.
And blogsforTerri has a roundup of all the latest news and advocacy information.
Update 3/23/2005: Joel Thomas comments below, "You are being dishonest when you claim that Terri's husband stands to benefit. ... Although I think the court should have ruled the other way, I believe that Terri's husband was motivated by love, not be greed."
Based on his comment, and on this letter sent to John DerbyShire, of National Review Online, I'll admit I don't know Michael Schiavo's motivation, whether it be money or trying to honor a verbal promise to a loved one. So I've revised the post. Thank you for reading, Joel, and your comment.
You are being dishonest when you claim that Terri's husband stands to benefit. The Schindler family offered to let the husband have an equivalent amount of money to walk away. Another person put up a million dollars to persuade him to change his mind. Who would undergo this kind of villification (I think in fact you have libeled the husband) to get a few bucks? Are you aware that Terri's husband is in great danger of being murdered? Who would want to risk being murdered just for the bucks?
Although I think the court should have ruled the other way, I believe that Terri's husband was motivated by love, not be greed.
Posted by: Joel Thomas at March 23, 2005 03:48 AMNote on style: before rendering high-handed opinions full of narcissistic faux-indignation, remove your head from your ass and acquaint yourself with the facts of the case -- for example, the many long years the husband spent attending to his wife, even to the point of dragging her out to California for specialist evaluation, or of his in-laws belief that they should have received half the insurance money, or the parent's original court declaration that she was permanently vegetative, etc. These decisions have to be made by families, courts, doctors & nurses everyday, yea unto the father of Tom Delay, and your pompous posturing is really nothing other than ignorance of the Law and daily human existence. Whatever else might be your motivation, it is certainly not regard for the dignity of human life. Tens of thousands of Iraqi women and children bleed for your stupidity.
Posted by: AudioAquatic at March 28, 2005 10:08 PM