MARCH
20, 2005 --
Did
Terri Schiavo tell her husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo,
that she would prefer, if incapacitated to die by dehydration and/or
starvation?
LPR acknowledges that it has not followed the legal history of this tragic
case. If there is evidence that Mrs. Schiavo explicitly stated that she would
like to die from withdrawal of all nourishment if incapacitated LPR would like
to see it.
Did Mrs. Schiavo leave any indication how she would like to die, if incapacitated?
LPR senses that immediate death following removal of life support systems is
not quite the same as death following removal of a feeding tube -- unless of
course a feeding tube is seen as the same sort of life support system as, say,
a respirator.
The tragedy of Terri Schiavo has, sadly, been turned into another occasion
of political name-calling.
Can't we just take a common sense
view of this tragedy -- even at this late date?
(The suggestion by The New York Times that those opposed to removing Mrs. Schiavo's
feeding tube are ghouls is
unfortunate; to suggest that proponents of removing the feeding tube are barbarians
is not helpful.)
It seems to LPR that, at this point, there is a husband, eager to see his wife's
alleged wish for death, if incapacitated, to be complied with - and there are
the parents of Teri Schiavo eager to care
for their daughter.
There are, of course, possible conflicts presented by the chief protagonists
in this situation.( Why are there any contending parties in this tragedy, LPR
wonders?)
|
|
On the one hand
there is the possible conflict of the husband who, after Mrs. Schiavo
dies, is apparently ready to begin
married life with the woman with whom he has had children. And there is the conflict
of parents who apparently would not like to see a child predecease them.
Do these conflicts balance out? Is one more persuasive than the other?
Inmate No. 284797 is serving a prison term of 10 to 25 years in Michigan -- parole
was denied last December --
for assisting in the death by lethal injection of terminally-ill Thomas Youk.
Was it the great mistake of Dr. Jack Kevorkian that he did not help Mr. Youk
die from hunger and thirst?
Did Terri Schiavo want to die, if incapacitated, by removal of a heart-lung machine,
by lethal injection, by denial of nourishment? By just one of the foregoing?
By any of the foregoing?
In matters of the death of Terri Schiavo, shouldn't we be as certain of the facts
as when a murderer is sentenced to death?
Chief Justice John Marshall, in Gibbons v. Ogden advised us to stick to the basics
and not get distracted by "ingenious" counsel. One of the basics in
this case is the manner of death and LPR suggests
that death following the directive "do not resuscitate" is not quite
the same as death following the directive "do not feed."
In this case, LPR understands that there was no explicit directive. Is it that
our society has declared: 15 years of feeding by tube are enough?
A great many years ago, a very wise king had to decide which of two women was
the mother of a baby. He ruled against the woman who thought it would be fair
that
the baby be cut in half. LPR has a hunch that if the Schiavo case were brought
before King Solomon, he would rule for the parents.
|
|