I haven't written anything about the Terri Schiavo situation in Florida because I didn't really know what I thought about it. And to be honest, I still don't completely know.
I wouldn't want to be either party in this situation, her family or her husband, because it's unbelievably sad, and what makes it more so is that each side wants what's best for her, and I just think there's a discrepancy about what that is.
Of course her parents don't want their daughter to die. She was a young woman when her heart stopped, although her heart allegedly stopped from complications from an eating disorder, so you have to wonder what her "quality of life," a phrase everyone's been bandying about, was when this first began.
No one is denying that her parents have every right to want their daughter to wake up and smile at them and understand everything that's going on around her. But all the experts that have examined her, and there have been plenty, say that's extraordinary unlikely to happen.
We've all seen the videos where she makes noises that her parents are claiming are words, but repeatedly, experts say those are involuntary sounds that have no basis in real emotion or knowledge of what's going on around her.
Her husband has remained firm that she would not have wanted to live in this state, and I don't think anyone is disputing his sincerity about that, other than her parents and some jackass politicians that never should've been involved in the first place.
I don't think it's a coincidence that George Bush signed a bill he had no business signing regarding a case that originated where his milquetoast brother is governor. The fact that politicians have tried to use this case as a cause celebre is reprehensible and nauseating.
I also find it interesting that a point of contention on this has been that this woman's husband, Michael Schiavo, is being lambasted in the media for having a girlfriend and only wanting his wife's feeding tube removed because he wants to marry his girlfriend and move on with his life.
It's been 15 years; 15 years! They were only married for five years before she went into this vegetative state, and in the years since, he's sued her doctors on her behalf and studied nursing to help with her care.
If he didn't care about his wife, he could've divorced her any number of years ago and left her care to her obviously doting parents, and he would've been absolved of any responsibility.
It's ridiculous to think that he wouldn't try to forge some semblance of a life for himself while simultaneously trying to do what's right for his wife and what she would've wanted.
I don't know what the answer is, and I don't know what will eventually happen, but I sure as hell don't know why the government called a special session to discuss this case.
It was a clear case of political grandstanding, and I'm personally at least glad this woman couldn't witness politicians speak about her with a lot of flowery rhetoric, but couldn't be bothered to assign a real understanding of what her life will actually be like, attached to a feeding tube, for the duration of it.
4 comments:
Being a good Libertarian, I have to say that I think it's horrifying that the government is involved in this at all. Unsurprising, but horrifying.
That being said, I find it equally horrifying that, with her feeding tube removed, this woman is being left to slowly starve to death. Which strikes me as, in a word, barbaric. This isn't a case of turning off the breathing machine, or the machine that keeps her heart beating; this is a case of leaving another living being (no matter the level of life) to slowly starve, and I find that to be repugnant.
The Dude
First of all, it is akin to a breathing machine, and it totally does speak to her quality of life. Would you want to be kept alive that way, because I sure as hell wouldn't. If her husband is telling the truth, and there's no reason to believe he's not, having the tube removed is what she would've wanted.
What is your suggestion if the government shouldn't be involved, but the tube shouldn't be removed?
What if she had a living will specifically delineating that she wanted the tube removed? How would that make it less repugnant?
It wouldn't make it any less repugnant, but if it's what she wanted done, it's what she wanted done. And from what I understand, there is not a living will, am I wrong?
The Dude
No, there's not a living will. That's what I'm saying. Theoretically, that's what she wanted. Had there been a living will, we wouldn't know who the hell Terri Schiavo is. There are thousands of cases across the country like this and what bothers me is the fact that the government can't insinuate itself into our lives whenever they want.
I think the situation is terrible, and it's not like I'm rooting for the woman to die, but if that's what she wanted, that should be what happens.
Post a Comment