The meaning of Life

By the time this column appears in print, Terri Schiavo might be dead. Terri is the eye of a political storm surrounding a timeless philosophical question — who has the right to decide whom lives and whom dies?

The Florida woman has been in a vegetative state for 15 years and has become the poster child for an individual’s right to die. Her story is sad and it deserves sympathy. The 41-year-old disabled woman suffered from bulimia. It induced a heart attack in 1990, which temporarily starved her brain of oxygen.

Her husband, Michael, wants to remove her feeding tube, which ultimately means Terri would starve. Courts and doctors appointed by the courts have ruled that she is now in a persistent vegetative state. Brain scans have shown that the part of Terri’s brain that controls thought and voluntary movements had atrophied, but she is able to breath on her own. Her parents and siblings believe that she interacts with them and that her condition is at least partly reversible through therapy.

The politicians and political action groups don’t know Terri nor do they see her as anything more than a political toy. Extremists have seized on Terri’s case as if her life was a card or a die or something to advance their token in the game that is the control of the hearts, minds and government of the American public.

Terri’s family, doctors, experts and parents experiencing the same dilemma weigh in that Terri is/is not suffering, is/is not responsive, may/may not recover. But no one knows what is going on inside Terri’s mind except Terri. And no one can accurately predict if she will ever recover.

That’s where the pain and the fear of making a wrong decision play their parts. What if? And that’s the question Congress and other factions of society are trying to answer for Terri’s family.

Our elected officials are given the responsibility to govern trade and finance, make war and peace and enact laws that are fair and just. But their granted responsibilities do not include directly deciding whether individuals live or die.

Terri’s case brings up issues important to everyone. The Internet-based Living Will Registry reported that in past weeks hits on the Web site went from around 500 to 20,000 weekly.

Some experts say that a living will is fine if a person’s fate is imminent, however, they can not predict every possible scenario that might occur in the distant future. For example, no one knows what types of medical advances may be made in the next decade or two.

An alternative is to appoint a health-care proxy, also known as durable power of attorney, to someone they trust to carry out their wishes. While either choice could help reduce the likelihood of letting a court ultimately decide, neither completely rules out that possibility.

Medical and legal ethicists in interviews stressed the importance of thinking about such difficult issues and recommended talking with loved ones about values and choices. They also suggest talking it over with more than one person so loved ones knew what you were thinking.

In polls conducted earlier this month by media outlets, a majority of those surveyed agree with Terri’s husband. In a Fox News and Opinion Dynamics Poll, 59-percent would remove the feeding tube if they were Terri’s legal guardian. An overwhelming majority, 87-percent, said they would not want to be kept alive if they were in her place, according to an ABC News and Washington Post poll. And 70-percent said they felt Congressional interference was inappropriate in a separate ABC poll.

It’s time for all adult Americans to answer the hard questions. What do I believe about life and death? What would I do if it were my child? What would I want my family to do if I were in Terri’s place?

Until we can answer those questions as individuals and as a nation, we shouldn’t leave our fate in the hands of strangers.

Donate to nhonews.com Report a Typo Contact
Most Read