Tuesday, March 22, 2005

TheStar.com - Schiavo: `Not much time'

TheStar.com - Schiavo: `Not much time'

I'm always leery of wading into an issue that gets the "culture war" label stamped on it. I hate politics. Although I do take an abstract interest in ethics issues, and I do not think of ethics as relative when it comes to human behaviour, I also recognize that to a great extent, ethics issues are used by many politicians and public figures to distract the public from big matters of public policy and focus them on easier-to-understand stories that are smaller in scale and scope.

But I suppose life and death are not so small in scope are they? But despite their weightiness, we understand these issues better since they are closer to us than social security and oil-for-food scandals at world bureaucracies.

Why I feel can write about the Schiavo fight is because I can feel an aching sympathy with both Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers. Terri Schiavo is in a kind of limbo. She is not really dead in any sense. She is viable, and she is not on life support, but she cannot move, feed herself, or interact with the world in any meaningful way. In some very rare circumstances, patients that far out can recover at least temporarily, as Oliver Sacks documented in "Awakenings." But it is almost impossible in her case to think that could happen.

But she's not dead. And as a fellow parent, my heart aches with the Schindlers. They may only be able to have a limited interaction with their daughter, but she is dear to them, and every fibre of a parent's being instinctively seeks to protect a child. Belonging to a religion that generally gives human life a primacy in most circumstances has no doubt only added to their resolve. It is not too hard to find sympathy for Michael Schiavo either. Although he did win a lawsuit that provided funds for his wife's care, he's seen her linger in the world in a way that hardly seems human. I imagine it is only natural to look at the state of her life, and for him to look at the state of his own life, and wonder what purpose a feeding tube serves.

The Catholic church (which the Schindlers and the Schiavos both belonged to) does not require people to have their lives prolonged artificially. When Terri first had her heart attack, there might have been an opportunity to "not resuscitate." But a feeding tube is not life support. That's the religious dilemna.

But more than a public or faith debate, this is a personal tragedy. Despite angry accusations from Schiavo that the Schindlers wanted the money, and accusations from the Schindlers that Schiavo is an adulterer, I really think both sides are struggling to do what they feel is right. And the only way I know how to approach it is to step back and ask the question, "What if it happened to us?"

My wife and I had this conversation for the first time the other day. I imagine it is time for us to write a living will.

2 comments:

Irina Tsukerman said...

But can one really predict what one will want under a specific and unforeseeable set of circumstances?

evolver said...

I think you answered your own question. You cannot possibly imagine every kind of end you could have. Still, a living will at least makes your philosophy known and puts it on the record. Nobody can control how they die, but I think a person can express their values sufficiently in a living will in a way that might have prevented this particular dispute. :-)