David P. Rundle: Starving Terri Schiavo to death no act of love

 

 

(Note: This article and the three that follow it, below, are different viewpoints, which is fine. The difference, though, is that two of them promote killing Terri Schiavo by starvation and two of them recognize that this is murder and WRONG. The first and last articles are, in my considered opinion, the ones that readers should champion -- like fighting to get Terri out from under the murderous grip of her would-be killer ... and after all, isn't that Michael Schiavo's goal? And George Greer's? And definitely George Felos'? One must wonder what Jodi Centonze -- the mother of two of Michael Schiavo out-of-wedlock children and the product of adultery -- wants done with Terri. Perhaps she hasn't realized that the same thing could happen to her in the blink of an eye -- after all, on February 25, 1990, Terri was alone with Michael.)

 

October 8, 2004

 

By David P. Rundle

 

The Wichita Eagle

 

Wichita, Kansas

 

To submit a Letter to the Editor: letters@wichitaeagle.com

 

Leonard Pitts did a good job outlining the case against keeping Terri Schiavo alive in his column "Schiavo decision personal, not political" (October 4 Opinion).

To him, Terri's 'husband', Michael Schiavo, is only carrying out her wishes. No one would want to live in a 'persistent vegetative state', as Michael and his medical allies term it.

Further, Michael claims that Terri told him as much verbally. Pitts asserted that if we really cared for the sanctity of marriage, society would let him withdraw her feeding tube and let her die in peace, because couples alone have the right to make such decisions.

That is the classic liberal argument, and those who hold it surely must believe the only ones opposing it are her emotionally involved relatives and pro-lifers seeking to exploit the case for their own political ends.

Now, let me say here that I thought the "Terri's Law" passed a year ago, enabling Florida Governor Jeb Bush to have the feeding tube reinserted, was very flawed. I wasn't a bit surprised when the Florida Supreme Court struck it down.

But Pitts' argument is flawed as well on two points.

First, he ignores the fact that society and married couples are constantly being affected by each other's choices. From family size to tax and divorce laws, what one group does, changes things for the other.

But Pitts and others say that removing the tube was a medical decision best left to Michael Schiavo and Terri's doctors.

I was not aware that getting food and water was a medical act.

I thought it was a biological one.

If one cannot get those, one does not die quickly.

One takes days to die, and horrid changes occur to one's body.

Terri's death will not be a peaceful one.

But Michael Schiavo and his medical experts tell us that Terri won't feel a thing because of her state. They argue that she hasn't been aware of anything in years. Responses such as smiles [that] she gives to her mother are mere reflexes, they say.

Her mother has many backers, too. One is the Reverend Rus Cooper-Dowda.

No, you're wrong. Cooper-Dowda is not a member of the religious right.

She is a woman who was in a coma years ago when she heard her then-husband and her doctors conferring about when to pull the plug.

She somehow made it clear she was not ready to cash in her chips and has since become an activist in the disability rights movement.

When Cooper-Dowda and others fight for Terri, they feel a real life-or-death stake in the battle.

They feel many in society might one day end the lives of the less-than-physically-perfect for economic or other reasons.

Absurd? Melodramatic? Hysterical?

In the early 20th century, eugenics advocates got many states to pass forced sterilization laws to keep the "mentally unfit" from procreating.

These laws were hailed by the likes of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.

The last of these laws were not repealed until the Vietnam era.

Michael Schiavo does not know the true state of Terri's mind, and neither does her mother.

But he could end this tragic fight by just divorcing Terri and letting her mom become her guardian.

That would end this nightmare, reaffirm the value of human life and reject the hellish notion that starving an individual is 'an act of love'.

 

David P. Rundle of Wichita is a freelance journalist.

 

Copyright 2004, The Wichita Eagle

 

http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/news/editorial/9862220.htm

 

 

The Leonard Pitts piece referred to above:

 

 

Leonard Pitts: Terri Schiavo case: It's a personal decision

 

 

October 5, 2004

 

By Leonard Pitts

 

The Southern Illinoisan

 

P.O. Box 2108