My Final Schiavo Post
I am loath to post on this topic again; it doesn’t fit with the tone I like to keep on this blog. The story is too emotionally charged. And I hate to add anything to the “All Schiavo, All the Time” news climate we’re finding ourselves in. (If I were a politician, I’d pick now to push some really unpopular legislation, while no one’s looking.)
But, here I am anyways.
Once again, the courts have come down on “Michael’s side.” I use the scare quotes, because no one really wins on this one. According to one source, that makes 22 different judges that have come to the same conclusion, probably not counting the Supreme Court’s decision to not hear the case.
And I have to say that I’m proud of Jeb Bush. At least one politician knows the limits of his powers, unlike certain members of Congress. (I’m referring to their attempted abuse of their subpoena power, their interference with states’ rights, and their general political grandstanding, using Schiavo as a pawn to push their own political ends. For a particularly egregious example, read Ronald Brownstein’s column that begins “Does the ‘culture of life’ extend to the victims of gun violence?”)
Jeb, on the other hand, knows that he doesn’t have any legal standing to intervene. So, we have one or two politicians who won’t disregard their oaths to uphold the laws of the country.
As far as the accusations that we’re torturing Schiavo by starving her to death, it turns out that ceasing food and fluid can be painless, according to the L.A. Times quoting doctors Robert Sullivan, Perry G. Fine, and Ira Byock, as well as a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine. In fact, the Times story states (my emphasis):
After suffering through cancer, the middle-aged woman decided her illness was too much to bear. Everything she ate, she painfully vomited back up. The prospect of surgery and a colostomy bag held no appeal.
And so, against the advice of her doctors, the patient decided to stop eating and drinking.
Over the next 40 days in 1993, Dr. Robert Sullivan of Duke University Medical Center observed the woman’s gradual decline, providing one of the most detailed clinical accounts of starvation and dehydration.
Instead of feeling pain, the patient experienced the sense of euphoria that accompanies a complete lack of food and water. She was cogent for weeks, chatting with her caregivers in the nursing home and writing letters to family and friends. As her organs failed, she slipped painlessly into a coma and died.
(I found the above story via Instapundit who found it by way of Daily Pundit.)
So, it turns out that death by a complete lack of food is actually a fairly peaceful way to go. (The story does say that eating a little food or water will cause hunger pangs and other unpleasantness, but having absolutely nothing causes the euphoria.)
So you can’t use that argument anymore: She is not being tortured to death.
Next, some argue that because her eyes move, she’s not in a persistent vegetative state. Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan, of the American Council on Science and Health, writes the following, which I also found via Instapundit, my emphasis again:
While we at American Council on Science and Health have been determined to remain on the sidelines of the raging national debate about the fate of Terri Schiavo (this is largely a legal and ethical issue, not a scientific one), we cannot remain silent about the outrageous misrepresentation of scientific facts about this case that has been occurring in the past ten days.
The medical reality of Ms. Schiavo’s case is this: She has been in what is medically referred to as a “permanent vegetative state” for the past 15 years, ever since her heart temporarily stopped (probably due to the severe effects of an eating disorder), depriving her brain of oxygen. Brain scans indicate that her cerebral cortex ceased functioning — probably just after she experienced cardiac arrest in 1990. Ms. Schiavo’s CAT scan shows massive shrinking of the brain, and her EEG is flat. Physicians confirm that there is no electrical activity coming from her brain. While the family video repeatedly shown on television suggests otherwise, her non-functioning cortex precludes cognition, including any ability to interact or communicate with people or show any signs of awareness. Dozens of experts over the years who have examined Ms. Schiavo agree that there is no hope of her recovering — even though her body, face and eyes (if she is given food and hydration) might continue to move for decades to come.
Those are the harsh facts.
Ah, you say, but what about the doctors who said that she was misdiagnosed? Dr. Whelan continues:
Thus it was shocking that Sen. Bill Frist — a heart surgeon before becoming Senate majority leader — went to the Senate floor twice last week to argue that Florida doctors had erred in saying that Terri is in a “persistent vegetative state.” How did Frist arrive at this diagnosis? From watching the family videotapes.
…
Yesterday, there was another public challenge to Ms. Schiavo’s well-established diagnosis: Florida governor Jeb Bush announced that a “very renowned neurologist,” Dr. William Cheshire, had concluded that Terri had been misdiagnosed and that she was really only in a state of “minimal consciousness” rather than a persistent vegetative state. He used this “new diagnosis” to argue that “this new information raises serious concerns and warrants immediate action.”As it turns out, Dr. Cheshire is not “renowned” as a neurologist — his limited publications focus on areas including headache pain and his opposition to stem cell research. Dr. Cheshire never conducted a physical examination of Ms. Schiavo, nor did he do neurological tests. Dr. Cheshire is director of biotech ethics at the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, a nonprofit group founded by “more than a dozen leading Christian bioethicists.” Everyone is free to be guided by a personal agenda — and it is clear that Dr. Cheshire has his.
This, combined with the fact that the court-appointed doctors, who are the only ones whose opinions mattered, agreed that Schiavo is in a PVS, invalidates the argument that she’s not in a PVS.
Next argument: Folks, life support is life support. Whether it’s pumping air in someone who can’t get air into themselves (via respirator) or it’s pumping food into someone who can’t feed themselves (via feeding tube), it’s still artificial life support. The only difference is that you can live a few days without food and water, while you can’t live without air for more than about twelve minutes, and that only if you’re a trained diver. Come on now, this argument was pretty weak to begin with.
Is it murder to withdraw artificial life support from Mrs. Schiavo? I don’t think so, and 22 judges who were closer to this case than any of us are have come to that same conclusion. If it was murder to withdraw such life support, we’d have hospital after hospital full of dead people being artificially kept alive.
So, when do we pull the plug? Again, the question has to be “Who decides?” And again, because Terri left no living will, and because Michael is her closest relative, and because the courts have not found him guilty–nor has he even been charged with–any crime against his wife (the slander of Terri’s parents notwithstanding), you have to come to the conclusion that Michael Schiavo is the one who is given the burden of choice here.
That’s the way I see it.
March 27th, 2005 at 9:29 pm
Schiavo’s condition has deteriorated since her feeding tube was removed 10 days ago. An attorney for Terri Schiavo’s parents said hospice workers are giving morphine to the woman to ease pain brought on by her body’s failure. –AP Story
March 28th, 2005 at 10:20 am
Considering this other medical support that she is in fact completely brain dead, yes, her merciful death would be an acceptable choice. It was very hard to tell from the media frenzy which doctors were saying the true facts.
I still disagree that feeding a person who cannot feed themselves is artificial life support.
And I still think both sides made mistakes in handling things. It shouldn’t have been carried to a federal level, the judges should have listened to the state ligislatures actions that were properly legal, Michael Shiavo probably should have just divorced her and moved on with his life leaving her in her family’s care . . . It’s just a mess now.
March 29th, 2005 at 7:28 am
This is a sad case. The saddest part is the people who have no business in this case elbow their way into the protest. The husband’s house is now under police protection. Some people are just too nosey. Do they have anything to do? Can they find a job or get a life?
BTW, Are you sure you are in BJU? I thought that Bob Jones is pro-life no matter what.
March 29th, 2005 at 11:50 am
I haven’t heard any official university position on the Schiavo case, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that they’d take the parents side on this issue. I’ve never claimed to be speaking for BJU in any capacity; just a student.
There’s a number of cases where I differ with the official position of BJU. Another example is gay marriage; Dr. Bob seems convinced that America will fall apart if the government recognizes gay marriages. Personally, I think that the government ought not be in the business of marriage; why should they care about my marital status? Let marriage be a religious issue, not a government issue.
But that’s off the topic.
What I think is terrible is that some moron
has been arrested for offering a $250K bounty on the life of Michael Schiavo. The epitome of Christian love and pro-life there.
March 29th, 2005 at 4:16 pm
Me, too, momtoast. This is a different thing from a “Do not resusitate” (sp?)order. That is why I believe it is actively killing a person vs. not reviving them — if you remove anyone’s food and water, they will not survive. Think of the uproar in this country if that had happened to an Iraqi prisoner, or even a dog. That is not letting nature take its course. That is actively helping nature along. It is the difference between, say, a cancer patient deciding not to have chemo vs. giving that same patient a lethal injection. If this is life support, every nursing home patient or quadripelgic who can’t lift a spoon is in trouble.
There is a severely disabled lady in our church who cannot care for herself, and this case scares her to death. She doesn’t believe her parents would do this to her, but she will likely outlive them, and who know what will happen to her in the long run if this kind of thing becomes precedent. That is what makes this the business of people besides Schiavo’s family: what happens here will affect other cases down the road.
The link to the bounty story didn’t work — it just got me to a page to register for the paper. But, no, that’s not the answer either. And I don’t know if he claims to be a Christian at all.
Who’s to say whether that happens to everyone. If Terri was not in pain they wouldn’t be having to increase her morphine.
This is saying, it doesn’t matter what it looks like, it doesn’t matter what you see her doing, you’re wrong.
I’m sure you could find doctor’s quotes on both sides of the issue.
March 29th, 2005 at 8:14 pm
If you remove someone’s air they won’t survive either. Artifically pumping food into the stomach and artifically pumping air into the lungs are the same thing, IMO. The only difference is it takes longer to die from lack of food than from lack of water/food.
And, frankly, giving her a lethal injection would have been better than what we’re currently doing. Same result, without torturing the parents (and the rest of the country) for as long.
Re: The disabled lady: She’ll have to make arrangements for someone to take care of her. The difference between Schiavo and her is that Schiavo’s brain is gone, and the disabled lady’s brain is not. Let’s be clear, Schiavo isn’t being disposed of because her husband doesn’t want to take care of her any more. If that was all there was to it, then he’d turn her over to the parents and go away without all the negative publicity to his name. He’s fought to carry out his wife’s wishes; if the disabled lady you’re referring to doesn’t want to die, then she won’t.
The fact that’s this case frightens her is a result of hysterical media coverage and spin; she has a misconception of the facts.
Re: Morphine: Maybe. Or maybe they’re trying to pacify people who call this “torture.”
Re: The video: Yes. That’s right. It doesn’t matter that she looks like she’s responding to a voice; she isn’t. They shot something like six hours of video that day, IIRC. I’d be stunned if they couldn’t find a ten second video clip to give to the media to play over and over and over. Which they did.
Re: Doctor’s quotes: Yeah, probably. There’s no shortage of emotionally involved doctors on both sides. In any case, we can debate this back and forth forever; unless there’s any more comments, I’m planning on moving on now.
March 29th, 2005 at 9:17 pm
On the issue of marriage, I totally agree with you. The government should not be in the business of marriage. However, marriage is not a church matter either. Marriage is a family matter. Jesus attended a wedding as a guest, not as a rabbi. The Temple was never a place to get married. It was the home. He even turned water into wine to help the family. (Some considered it was only grape juice by Welch.) I can’t remember Jesus or Paul officiating any wedding ceremony.
March 29th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
That’s a thought too… Hadn’t thought about that. Good point.
I meant that religious leaders ought to be the ones to argue with themselves over the morality of homosexuality and gay marriage, instead of senators and presidents.
Likewise, religious leaders ought not to concern themselves with tax policy and other non-moral political issues. Even if the words “separation of church and state” aren’t in the Constitution, they’re still a good idea.
March 30th, 2005 at 11:38 am
I do not understand why the religious right in the US are so concerned about the right to bear arms, (I do not mean wearing no-sleeves t-shirt), lowering taxes (even tough I like the idea but do not cut social security), free trade (on their terms, but no out-sourcing), 6 literal-day creation (dinosaur co-existed with human, maybe they are the dinosaurs)… I cannot read those doctrines anywhere in the Bible.
April 2nd, 2005 at 1:19 am
An brief true story..FYI, this my first experience with a blog…
Hospice provides literature for the families of new patients. Part of it decsribes how the brain dies.
(Nonno was 90w/ miners black lung) I watched Nonno reaching with the hands and listened to the verbal mumbles as he (my grandfather) died. I heard the word “peach”, then climbed onto the bed with Nonno and asked him if it was a good peach. He said “yes”. I asked him if I could have a piece, and he said (in a tone of ultimate kindness), “Sure” (complete with voice inflections) and reached to me with his fingertips together and knew where to place the piece of peach in my outstreched hand. Obviously, his eyes were closed. I couldnt believe it, so I asked him if I could have another piece, and again he said “sure” and again put a piece of his peach into my hand. Nonno was not aware of our discussions, and would only awaken when I kissed his face (not when anyone else did or said anything else). After awakening he knew nothing of what our family was standing around watching.
THERE IS a level within dying that can be communicated with unknown to the dyings’ normal state of consciousness. Someone reaching with their hands is common as they die and the brain dies. Trust to communicate during this state and you may enjoy a lifetime of reward.
Terri’s subconscious may have been very aware like Nonno’s was.
There’s always room for more understanding and Ms. Shiavo had strength somewhere despite her flat EEG.
Hope I did OK.
Warmest Wishes, Mark
April 4th, 2005 at 6:47 am
An interesting story of someone else who was told that her loved one would never recover, had been deprived of oxygen, etc.: http://www.lordofthepeeps.com/terri.html