IT IS a little-known fact that when God delivered the Ten Commandments to Moses, a little asterisk appeared next to the fifth one, declaring that thou shalt not kill, "except when your wife has brain damage and you need a way to marry your long-term girlfriend without giving up your claim to hundreds of thousands of dollars." At least that's how Florida's Supreme Court interprets it in the Terri Schiavo case.
The Schiavo case involves a bitterly divided family, with Terri Schiavo's parents insisting that their brain-damaged daughter stay alive and receive therapy, and her husband, Michael Schiavo, arguing that she would prefer to starve to death. The case was first brought to the nation's attention two years ago when the effort to kill Terri Schiavo was halted six days into her starvation by an eleventh-hour government action, "Terri's Law," passed by the Florida legislature and signed by the governor in less than 24 hours.
That law has since been declared unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court, and after years of legal wrangling Schiavo is set to die, again, by a removal of her feeding tube scheduled for Friday.
Those toiling to put Schiavo to death like to act as if this is any routine case of unplugging life support from a comatose patient. However, the intensity of resistance in this particular case should show that this is no normal situation.
Among the problems with killing Schiavo, one of the biggest is Schiavo's diagnosis, as being in a "persistent vegetative state." This has been widely disputed, as Schiavo has been shown to respond repeatedly to outside stimuli. Also wrong is the claim that Schiavo's condition cannot improve, as 33 physicians involved in the case have signed depositions stating that Schiavo could improve with therapy, if she were allowed it.
The other big argument used on the pro-starvation side is that the law says that Michael Schiavo gets to decide what to do with his wife, and that's really all that matters. There are a number of problems with this argument. Firstly, it was a favorite of segregations who claimed, "It doesn't matter what you think, all that matters is it's the law." But that's assuming the law is even being followed in this case; it is not.
Florida law explicitly makes illegal "mercy killing," and only allows the denial of "life prolonging procedures." It's awfully hard to construe giving someone food and water as a "life prolonging procedure." As the Vatican states in a report about the case, "prohibiting someone access to food and water represents a ruthless way to kill that person."
Yet that is exactly what is happening to Terri Schiavo. Not only did the court force the removal of her feeding tube, but it also, in a blatantly illegal move, forbid anyone from feeding her by mouth. During her first brush with death in 2003, Schiavo was even barred from receiving a communion wafer from her priest as he performed her last rites.
The kicker is that Schiavo may not even need the feeding tube, as numerous doctors have testified in court that Schiavo could learn to eat from a spoon and swallow liquid with physical therapy. Yet Schiavo's "husband" has intervened to prevent even basic therapy.
I place "husband" in quotation marks because were Michael Schiavo married to someone who could speak for herself, that marriage would be over faster than you can say "creepy adulterer." There is much evidence that Michael Schiavo should not be the one making decisions in this case. Previous girlfriends have testified to abuse and intimidation. Also, shortly after a malpractice trial in which Michael Schiavo convincingly played the devoted husband, he proceeded to kill Terri's two cats, melt down their wedding rings, move in with a girlfriend, deny his wife basic hygiene and therapy and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars from her medical fund on his legal fees. What a guy.
Ironically, Terri Schiavo cannot divorce without his approval. So one would think Michael Schiavo would just divorce on his own, except were he to do so he would no longer stand to inherit the balance of the $1.2 million malpractice settlement that was to be used to pay for Schiavo's medical care -- a condition which makes it much more convenient for Michael to dehydrate his wife to death.
The Schiavo case should force America to reevaluate how we choose guardians who make life and death decisions. It would be better for courts to make sure that laws and standards of care are being enforced, and that a guardian is looking out for the best interests of the patient, rather than blindly enforcing that guardian's will.
Perhaps it would make more sense for guardianship not to automatically transfer to the spouse when there are extraordinary circumstances. But as long as it does, I have advice for Michael Schiavo's girlfriend: Don't get sick.
Herb Ladley is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at hladley@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Virginia’s political parties have left our universities boarded up
By Editorial Board | YesterdayThe destabilizing consequences of the present appointment process have revealed critical and unsustainable fault lines that rest within our political system.
DUTTENHOFER: Cutting research cuts out students
By Lucy Duttenhofer | 3 days agoKneecapping the foundation of the country’s research enterprise just to follow nativist principles is an absurdly self-defeating, short-sighted strategy that is a threat to us all.
KURTZWEIL: Big Brother is infiltrating immigration enforcement
By Paul Kurtzweil | 6 days agoWhile this law does work to restrict the camera use, the data is still very loosely regulated, leaving it exposed to outside interference.
