Two or Three (.net)

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. - Jesus

2.22.2005

Blogging for Life: Terri Schiavo

by Tom Parsons [+/-] show/hide

by Daddypundit

Barring intervention from the courts, Terri Schiavo's feeding tube will be removed today. Allthings2All has a wrap-up of the situation as well as suggestions on what can be done in a post entitled "Terri Schiavo: Will You Help to Wash Her Feet?"

For more on this situation, also check out this aggregator of pro-life blogs that are posting about this situation.



UPDATE (Aaron): The stay that has prevented Terri's "husband" from murdering her has expired. Without any unforseen changes, he is now free to remove her feed tube and allow her to starve until she dies later this week. Please pray for Terri, her parents, and her husband that he would change his mind and let her parents take care of her instead of killing her.

UPDATE (Daddypundit): Judge George Greer, who has been overseeing the case, has issued an emergency stay until 5:00 PM EST tomorrow. A hearing had already been scheduled for tomorrow. Please continue to pray for Terri, her parents, and her husband.

UPDATE (Aaron): No real news, just annoyed by the news coverage of the case. The latest AP headline refers to this as a "right to die" case. When has it ever been a "right to die" situation? There has never been any proof beyond the husband's word that Terri did not want to use a feeding tube. It is bad when Rueters has a less biased headline. The main question I have had in all of this is why doesn't the husband just divorce her and move on. He has been living with another woman for years. He has children with her. Why will he not just let Terri's parents take care of her? It seems to me he has something to gain from killing her.

posted by Tom Parsons at 9:05 AM 8 comments

8 Comments:

  • I'll be the jerk and post this - you guys would back off this particular situation if she had explicitly written down that she wanted to die, right? I mean, if she had said, "I'd rather not live my life with a feeding tube...in fact, I'd rather die..." you'd allow for that, right?

    I have no problem looking at the Schiavo situation and seeing glaring problems on both sides of the argument. But nobody seems to believe Schiavo's husband - maybe he's pursuing this so aggressively because he honestly believes that Terri didn't want to live the rest of her life with a feeding tube. Isn't that possible?

    By Blogger The Wilkinsons, at 2/22/2005 9:07 PM  

  • Sam, part of the issue is that Terri never expressed in writing her wishes. She did not have any type of advance medical directive. It's been Michael who has claimed that she did not want to live.

    I'm not sure Michael is particularly credible in this situation. The allegation has been made (and it may have some merit) that he wants her to die to be able to collect the money from the malpractice judgement. The fact that he is also living with another woman (and has two children by her) raises a lot of questions. The bottom line here is whether Michael is really the best person to protect Terri. I'm not sure that he is.

    By Blogger Tom Parsons, at 2/23/2005 7:20 AM  

  • I'm willing to acknowledge that Terri's situation is extremely questionable. I'm willing to acknowledge that her husband might be a jerk.

    What I'm asking is whether you would both be willing to allow Terri to die if she HAD expressed the desire to in writing. While I'm willing to admit that her husband is a creep, I have to wonder if it is at least possible that he is pursuing this because he honestly believes that this is what she wanted.

    By Blogger The Wilkinsons, at 2/23/2005 8:23 AM  

  • Sam, as much as I might not like it that would not raise my ire hardly at all, if she had written everything down and he was simply obeying her written request.

    My wife has said that she does not want to be placed on life support. But all that Terri uses is a feeding tube and some doctors have testified that she could relearn the ability to eat, she just needs rehabilitation that her husband will not allow.

    I think if I were in his situation, even knowing what my wife said, I would allow her family to take care of her. I don't think I could allow my wife to starve to death like he is going to do.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 2/23/2005 2:02 PM  

  • By admitting that you wouldn't even do what your wife asked you to do, as gruesome as it would be to do, doesn't that at least make you consider that Michael Shiavo isn't going to get fair treatment from you?

    And shouldn't you admit that up front?

    I mean, I'll again admit that Mike Shiavo seems like a jerk (I'll reserve the more colorful language for my own website), but it seems like there's no chance he's going to get anything bordering on fair treatment from you. Which is concerning.

    By Blogger The Wilkinsons, at 2/24/2005 4:30 PM  

  • Let me rephrase that - my wife does not want to be on respirator and all the things that keep you artificially alive for a long period of time. She has said explicitly since this situation that she doesn't mind the feeding tube. I would find it very hard to end her life even that way, but she has also shared her desires with her family so I think they would be supportive of removing her off of life support (God forbid that choice ever comes up).

    Schiavo is totally different. His wife ended up in this situation in shady terms. In the beginning, before the court victory, he promises to use all the money for her treatment and rehabilitation. Shortly after he won the settlement, his words changed and he began to fight to kill her. She is not on a respirator or anything else, just a feeding tube to help her eat. Doctors have testified that she could regain the ability to eat if she went through rehabilitation (which her husband will not allow). He has also said that he wants her body cremated (not allowing any kind of autopsy). Something stinks.

    As far as not being fair, maybe I can't be, but I am not on a jury. Besides when have you ever been fair to a conservative. :)

    By Blogger Unknown, at 2/25/2005 6:00 AM  

  • Aaron,

    Again - Mike Shiavo's a jerk. But from a larger perspective, this case is unfortunately becoming a test case for assisted suicide. I guess my issue is that, because of the emotions involved, even bloggers like us without any real investment in what happens are losing our focus.

    The only question that should be answered are her wishes, or lack thereof, to die. If they don't exist, and they don't seem to, then she should live. But what I'm pressing is that if they DO (or if the DID) exist, would the people fighting for her life allow to her die?

    One of the pro-life issues outside of abortion is this right-to-die, which of course I support. Surely such a decision should be up to a person in unbelievable pain. Shiavo shouldn't be the test case here - unfortunately, she is. What concerns me is that those on the pro-life side of the right-to-die argument are using Shiavo as an example when, by all accounts, she isn't in any pain.

    Obviously, I should have figured out a way to express this earlier. What I don't want to see is a 700 Club in which cancer patients in their last days are damned for wanting to die because Terri Shiavo could learn to eat again. Since her situation is so much different, I don't want hers to be come the test case.

    By Blogger The Wilkinsons, at 2/25/2005 7:12 AM  

  • Sam, I think this is a case where those who support right-to-die over reached, just as many on the left did with gay marriage.

    As frustrating as it may seem to everyone who has a firm position on an issue (be it abortion, euthenasia, social security, etc.), the majority of America is mushy on controversial issues. Each side has to take an incremental approach. Every once in awhile one side tries to grabe too much and the cultural swings wildly away from it. I think this has happened with gay marriage and it may happen with right-to-death because of Terri Schiavo. You are right in that it is not a case that is truly representative of most of the euthenasia cases, but I think many will see this as supports are pushing for this lady to die when they have no way of proving that's what she wanted and a husband with lots of baggage.

    If she had a living will that said she did not want to remain on a feeding tube for an extended period of time and did not want rehabilitaion treatment to try to wean her from it, this case would not be where it is today. Pro-life bloggers would not be so up in arms, it would be another sad case, but would not be viewed as essentially murder.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 2/28/2005 12:32 PM  

Post a Comment