Sanctity of Life

National Review Online

There was an honest, forthright case for ending the life of Terri Schiavo. It was that her life no longer had any value, for herself or others, and that ending it — the quicker the better — would spare everyone misery. We disagree with that view, holding it wiser to stick with the Judeo-Christian tradition on the sanctity of innocent life. But the people who made this case deserve some credit for straightforwardness.

But while the public may have agreed with the removal of Schiavo’s feeding and hydration tube, apparently there are limits to the public’s willingness to tolerate euthanasia — and apparently its defenders recognized these limits. So we saw euphemism after euphemism deployed to cloud the issues.

Perhaps chief among these was the fiction that we were “letting her die.” On March 18, Schiavo was in no medical danger of death. She was profoundly brain-damaged (although just how profoundly remains unknown), but she was not in a coma or on a respirator. She was not being kept alive by artificial means, any more than small children are kept alive by artificial means when their parents feed them. Her body was functioning, there is some reason to believe she was minimally conscious, and she was responsive to stimuli (it’s been reported she was actually being administered pain medication). She had devoted parents and siblings who were willing to care for her. She could easily have gone on in these conditions for many years. She was not close to dying. For death to arrive, she would have to be killed.

TownHall.com Pat Buchanan (archive)

Terri Schiavo is dead. She did not die a natural death, unless you believe a court order to cut off food and water to a disabled woman until she dies of starvation and thirst is natural.

No, Terri Schiavo was executed by the state of Florida. Her crime? She was so mentally disabled as to be unworthy of life in the judgment of Judge George Greer. The execution was carried out at Woodside Hospice. An autopsy will reveal that Terri’s vital organs shut down for lack of food and water. She did not die of the brain damage she suffered 15 years ago. She was put to death. We have crossed a watershed in America.

WASHINGTON, March 29 /Christian Wire Service/ — The National Clergy Council, representing conservative church leaders from Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox and Protestant traditions, today applauds the Reverend Jesse Jackson for his visit to Terri Schiavo’s hospice where she is dying from starvation and dehydration. In comments to the media, Rev. Jackson said at the scene that Mrs. Schiavo is dying of “starvation and dehydration and it is unnecessary,” “cruel” and “immoral.”

The Reverend Rob Schenck said about Rev. Jackson’s visit and remarks, “There is nothing for Jesse Jackson to gain here except respect for having done the right thing. This is a rare expression of moral courage from a partisan and we applaud him heartily for it. We pray that it is taken seriously and acted upon urgently by all those with the power to save Terri’s life.”

Rev. Schenck made his comments in Pittsburgh, PA, where he is recovering from brain surgery and has made calls to congressional leaders pleading with them to intervene at this late hour.

National Review Online Wesley J. Smith

My debate about Terri Schiavo’s case with Florida bioethicist Bill Allen on Court TV Online eventually got down to the nitty-gritty:

Wesley Smith: Bill, do you think Terri is a person?

Bill Allen: No, I do not. I think having awareness is an essential criterion for personhood. Even minimal awareness would support some criterion of personhood, but I don’t think complete absence of awareness does.

If you want to know how it became acceptable to remove tube-supplied food and water from people with profound cognitive disabilities, this exchange brings you to the nub of the Schiavo case — the “first principle,” if you will. Bluntly stated, most bioethicists do not believe that membership in the human species accords any of us intrinsic moral worth. Rather, what matters is whether “a being” or “an organism,” or even a machine, is a “person,” a status achieved by having sufficient cognitive capacities. Those who don’t measure up are denigrated as “non-persons.”

Allen’s perspective is in fact relatively conservative within the mainstream bioethics movement.

Jewish World Review Nat Henthoff

http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | Florida Circuit Court Judge George Greer has again ordered the removal of 41-year-old Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube. As of this writing, attempts by the Republican Congressional leadership and some Democrats are being made to save her, through the courts, but the odds are long. If she dies of dehydration and starvation, this grave injustice can affect the rights of many disabled Americans who do not have clearly written directives as to their treatment when they can no longer speak their wishes.

The fundamental issue in Terri’s case is disability rights — not the right to die. Throughout all the extensive media coverage of the case, there has been only slight mention — usually none at all — that nearly every major disability rights organization has filed legal briefs to prevent what they and I regard as judicial murder. The protests are not only from pro-lifers and the Christian Right.

New York Times (free registration required) JOHN LELAND

N the parade of faces talking about Terri Schiavo last week, two notable authorities were missing: Aristotle and Descartes. Yet their legacy was there.

Beneath the political maneuvering and legal wrangling, the case re-enacted a clash of ideals that has run through the history of Western thought. And in a way, it’s the essential question that has been asked by philosophers since the dawn of human civilization. Is every human life precious, no matter how disabled? Or do human beings have the right to self-determination and to decide when life has value?

“The clash is about how we understand the human person,” said Samuel Gregg, director of research at the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, a conservative policy group.

WorldNetDaily.com

Major media organizations paint the pitched battle over the life of Terri Schiavo as a clear- cut debate between pro-life and right-to-die advocates, bankrolled by big money activist organizations on both sides. But the case of the 41-year-old brain-injured Florida woman is anything but clear cut.

The little-publicized nuances of her 15-year saga often get lost amid the smoldering, post-election political warfare reignited by the intervention of Congress on behalf of Terri. But as President Bush pointed out in a statement on Terri Schiavo, “there are serious questions and substantial doubts” in her case.

Chief among these doubts is whether the removal of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube on March 18, which amounts to slow death by dehydration and starvation, reflects her wishes. There is no written directive from Terri Schiavo on the matter.

ABC News

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. Mar 26, 2005 — After another round of losses in the courts, Terri Schiavo’s parents kept watch over their dying daughter Saturday, seeking permission to give her Easter communion as their attorneys acknowledged the fight to reconnect the brain-damaged woman’s feeding tube was nearing an end.

QUESTION: In general, how should an Orthodox Christian view the current situation with Terry Schiavo? I guess one of the issues is that of extraordinary means. Does the Church have a position on extraordinary means? I presume it does but then what are extraordinary means? Does the Church consider a feeding tube extraordinary means?

Another related question would be: How does the Orthodox Church view the matter of a person’s wishes in the event they ended up in a vegetative state? In other words, does anyone have the moral right to deny themselves food, water, etc. If they enter a vegetative state or would that be considered suicide.
[Read more…]

From Wesley Smith:
I participated in an on-line debate for Court TV yesterday with Florida bioethicist, Bill Allen. We mostly discussed Terri Schiavo. But we also got deeper into the context in which the Schiavo case is being played out, that is, the idea that some of us are not “persons” based on cognitive impairments. Note, that Dr. Allen agrees with my worry, that personhood theory would not only permit Terri to be dehydrated, but harvested for organs, assuming consent. To say the least, this undermines universal human rights. Here is an excerpt. The entire debate can be found here.
[Read more…]