Schiavo Triumphalism
Dean
Some months ago I received mail from family members of Terri Schiavo asking for help. I looked at what they had to say, contemplated it for a while, and decided to follow my conscience; it did not appear that the justice system was working properly to me. There was room for reasonable doubt, and I felt I should say something.
Well of course we know what happened. The girl's dead now. What more can be said? I figured it was over. But a few weeks later I got a nasty piece of hate-trackback spammage swearing at me and calling me every name in the book because I'd sided with Terri's parents and siblings. Bizarrely, the writer criticized me for falling silent about her case after her death-by-dehydration. I thought, "Wow, that's bizarre. She's dead. What am I supposed to do? Write daily screeds demanding that they bring her back? The people who wanted her dead got their wish. I hope they were right."
When news came that there would be an autopsy, I thought Patterico's analysis was right on the money, and also hoped it turned out that the right thing was done. What more needed to be said?
Now comes the news that Terri Schiavo's autopsy revealed that she was probably blind and beyond any hope of recovery when she died. Meaning odds are that her parents and those doctors who said there might be hope for her were wrong. Well good. That's a relief.
But now some people are already accusing those of us who sided with Terri's parents and siblings of being "strangely silent" (cheap rhetorical trick, that--it's only been a few hours). According to some folks I generally respect, it means that I, Senators like Bill Frist and Harry Reid, the president, Terri's family and friends, et. al. are supposed to apologize.
For what?
Certainly, some of Terri's supporters might want to apologize for accusing Michael of beating Terri, since the autopsy cleared him of any such accusations. But that is mostly their concern; most of us never endorsed such conclusions.
Beyond those two bloggers, I'm also seeing rants in other places about how "those people" (meaning those of us who didn't think it was quite so obvious that the justice system was working the way it should here) will never face reality or listen to reason, how we're all a bunch of whacked out religious nuts, and so on and so forth. I've seen some people viciously attacking Terri's mother and father and brothers and sisters, too.
I even got (yet another) piece of hate mail today, lying about me and the things I'd said in this case and once again tearing me a new a**hole. I got that letter less than 2 minutes after finding out the autopsy results. Well, at least now I have another address for my spam filter.
What is the point of all this? I have no idea. Making it a left-vs-right issue, or religious-vs-nonreligious issue, also seems pointless. But for the record, I don't apologize. The Schindlers asked for my help, I looked at what they had to say, and I decided that there was enough doubt in the case that I should speak up.
I admire people like Bill Frist and Harry Reid and others for doing the right thing. They have nothing to apologize for either.
I myself would appreciate an apology for all the slams at my character, and at the character of everyone who took the same position I did. I don't expect we'll get one though.
It remains that most of those judges never reviewed the facts in this case, merely the procedure. If nothing else, this taught us all a lesson in the importance of making our desires very clear in these cases--and of remembering that when you go to court you'd best have a good attorney who gets all the information on the table. Because once the judgement is rendered, it's almost impossible to get a later court to re-examine the facts--they'll only look and see if the judge erred on a point of legal nicety or procedure.
So: Is that not enough for you guys? Is it necessary to keep slamming those who disagreed with you? I'm glad to learn that she was (probably) unsalvageable. I hope you on the other side are at least a little relieved too.
* Update * Ahh, I see the "strange silence" has broken. My goodness, these people sure seem hesitant, waiting entire hours before speaking up. See Patterico, XRLQ, LaShawn, Blogs For Terri, Three Bad Fingers and Lilac Rose and and, well, when you hit those sites you'll find more. Me? I'm done. Most people got what they wanted: the girl's dead.
Related Posts (on one page):
Bill Frist's "right thing" Dean, was to look at a video and make what amounted to an armchair diagnosis which was denounced by many doctors.
He should have known better and he should apologize for helping to turn this into politics.
The Schindlers--Terri's mother, father, brothers, and sisters--had a grievance. They petitioned and were answered, arguing that their daughter and sister had had her civil rights violated. There's nothing to apologize for except for excessive, flaming rhetoric, and I saw more than enough of that on all sides.
I said nothing about them.
Can't we just let it go at that? Do we have to keep slamming the shit out of each other over this?
Allowing this would have provided conclusive and final closure if the independent forensic pathologist were to concur with the presiding pathologist.
Would they have concurred? Maybe so. But it seems someone was not so certain.
An old adage returns to mind.. "A guilty conscience needs no accuser."
Perhaps I will long be haunted by the pernicious lawyering that won the initial finding of fact, converting hearsay into a death sentence. In my time, an innocent, fragile woman who broke no laws and committed no crimes was ordered "to be made dead" by an American Judge who had never heard her speak on her own behalf to her own defense. Stunning.
No wonder so many hide in the debate over her final congnitive state. It distracts from the greater tragedy.
I have never wished death on an innocent human being - ever. Nor, I doubt, have many of the other people you say "got what they wanted."
Horrible thing to say. It's like me saying that all you wanted to do was drag out the girl's misery for a few more decades. I know that's not true. That's why I would never say that about you.
Michael: Okay, you didn't want her dead, you believed that only her "husband's" opinion was of any importance in the matter and that, therefore, what you were reasonably certain was her dead and unrecoverable husk needed to be dehydrated until complete systemic collapse despite the wishes of multiple loved ones because they just didn't matter.
Whatever.
We are in bad shape.
I don't know what Dean or Michael looks like, but I overlay the faces of my next door neighbors on them when I write to them. I find that this keeps me polite - even when I disagree with them. After all, the last thing you want to do is piss off your neighbors because you have to live next to them unless you want to move.
The best thing to do with flamers who do not follow this or a similar protocol is to hit the delete key. If you really want to be mean, fisk their comments and make them look like the immature jerks they are.
One of my all time favorite quotes comes from Gerald Ford: "We can disagree without being disagreeable."
Actually, the autopsy didn't "clear him" of anything. There was no evidence found of abuse. But I ask, after 12 years, what kind of evidence would be available? Especially if we're talking about bruises? I'm also not surprised that they weren't able to determine the original cause of her heart attack. AGain, 12 years and numerous changes to her physically make such a finding of cause virtually impossible to make with any certainty.
I'm happy to let the case lie, but it's also important not to read too much into an autopsy report. This isn't Quincy, M.D.
Those who campaigned for the death of Terri Schaivo are still wrong. What you say is true - we didn't have enough information to make an informed decision. But neither did those who so vociferously agitated for the starvation of this woman.
To actively campaign for the death of a woman who had committed no crime is abhorent. The unwillingness of Michael Schaivo to allow conclusive medical tests to be performed raises profound suspicions. Certainly, I could sympathize with his situation. But, it appears to me that he ultimately came to view his wife not as a living human being, but merely an object. He received many thousands of dollars to provide medical care for his debilitated wife. The least he could do before killing her was to order the requisite tests to ensure he was taking the proper course.
At the minimum, his personal pride was too important to order the test, if only to assuage the fears of her parents. He showed complete disregard for Terri's birth family. Even if he was ultimately proven right, he, through the court settlement, had the resources to give them the test they wanted. If they still proved to be intractible (highly likely), then at least the American people would know that they were not committing murder on an innocent woman.
Even with the autopsy report, I still cannot condone the actions of those who, only recently familiar with the case as were most of us, nevertheless rashly rushed to campaign for her forced death. What possible motivation could these disconnected campaigners have? Do they value convenience above responsibility? Are they so antogonistic toward religion and traditional moral values that they too forgot there was a real live flesh and blood woman at the center of the issue? Or did they also view Terri Schaivo as merely an object, a means to an end?
The coldness and callousness of such a position is more frightening than any church I have ever been a part of. How can we turn our backs on the most frail and defenseless of those among us and still retain our humanity? I am glad the autopsy results are what they are. But I am still alarmed at the fervor of my fellow citizens who so quickly and irrevocably decided that life is worth so little.
To pull the food away from a helpless person and watch them die while making no effort to ease their hunger is just inhuman.
There was in this, on the other side, a desire to see her die - to prove some sick and disgusting point. I'm proud of what I advocated during the case - I sleep quietly at night knowing that all I ever wanted to do was the right thing.
One side believed that the demands of mercy would be met by a feeding tube. The other side that mercy resided in a natural death.
That modern medicine can turn human life into a science laboratory seems to be neither merciful nor natural.
Twenty, thirty or more years ago a person like Ms. Terri would have passed away well before 12-15 years of litigation.
Portia speaks in The Merchant of Venice:
"The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes."
While Shylock was demanding his pound of flesh, Portia pleaded for mercy with justice.
I should think the Schiavo case indicates there is more to be done in this area.
But I think the congress WAY overreached on this one. Sure, what they did was perfectly legal but that doesn't make it right. I, for one, don't want the federal governments passing laws aimed at one specific person--even if it's done in good faith. That's government power run ammock. And Dean, you're wrong that they shouldn't appologize. They should appologize, not because of anything the autopsy said but because they misused their power.
I'm relieved that the autopsy confirmed Terri's husbands stance regarding her condition.
I think this is one of those situation where clearly there is no winner - Terri's parents did the right thing as parents -- Terri's husband did the right thing as a husband.
Who can completely grasp the relationship between a husband and wife? I know what my husband wants if he is in that state, and he knows mine. It would be wrong of me to do otherwise should that event happen, and it would be disastrous if I allowed family members to get involved, as well meaning as they might be.
And as an aside:
Dean -
Unsalvageable????
The courts got this one right.
Michael Schiavo extracted his pound of flesh by dehydration.
Its interesting that the autopsy in the toxicology section pages 2 and 3 indicates only the presence of acetaminophen (tylenol) and "basic drugs".
Would it not be appropriate to ask what "basic drugs" ? Any that might paralyze the respiratory muscles ? And in what dosages ?
In my opinion, justice was not served.
What is additionally deplorable is that Mr. Schiavo will not tell Ms. Terri's parents where her remains are buried.