Posted on 03/24/2005 3:26:10 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past
townhall.com
Printer-friendly version
Killing Terri Schiavo
Thomas Sowell (back to web version) | Send
March 24, 2005
People who say that the government has no business interfering in a private decision like removing Terri Schiavo's feeding tube somehow have no problem with a squad of policemen preventing her parents (or anyone else) from giving their daughter food or water.
Do those who want to keep the government out of private decisions think that the police are not the government? Do they think that the judges who authorized this are not the government?
Sadly, this is not the only Alice-in-Wonderland confusion of words and deeds in this tragic case.
We are being told that Terri Schiavo is being "allowed" to "die a natural death." Such an argument might make some sense if this were a terminally ill person. But Terri Schiavo is not dying from anything other than a lack of food and water, from which any of the rest of us would die.
She is not dying a natural death. She is being killed.
What is being kept alive artificially is the liberal media version of events. One side of this story is being repeated endlessly, as if it were gospel, but anyone saying something different -- including doctors and nurses who have actually seen or taken care of Terri Schiavo -- is unlikely to be reported.
The nature of death by starvation and dehydration is also being depicted as "gentle" in the words of the New York Times -- the same New York Times which in 2002 reported starving people in India dying "clutching pained stomachs."
This "gentle" death is the story line in the liberal media but a priest who has actually seen Terri Schiavo tells a wholly different story of her visibly deteriorating condition. If this is such an easy death, why not videotape it and show those of us who are less enlightened how mistaken we are? Instead, there is a ban on anyone's photographing Terri as she dies.
Despite the oft-repeated claim that Terri Schiavo is being "allowed" to die, supposedly in accordance with her own wishes, the only person who says that these were her wishes is the one person who wants her dead and who personally stands to benefit from her death -- her husband, Michael Schiavo.
When Sean Hannity said this on the Fox News channel's "Hannity & Colmes" program, he was assured by a lawyer who was defending the removal of the feeding tube that Michael Schiavo was not the only one to hear Terri say this. But, when Hannity demanded to know the name of just one other person, the lawyer followed an old lawyer's maxim: "When your case is weak, shout louder!" He shouted and waxed indignant -- but did not produce the name of any other person.
This case is one where many people speak with certainty about very uncertain things -- and the certainties of one side contradict the certainties of the other.
Many seem certain that Terri Schiavo is vegetative, does not understand what is going on around her and cannot respond. But Carla Sauer Iyer, a nurse who attended Mrs. Schiavo for more than a year, has contradicted all of this. Moreover, she has painted a very different picture of Michael Schiavo than the one he presents to the courts and to the media.
But you are not likely to find her eyewitness account of events in the mainstream media.
According to this nurse, Michael Schiavo complained that his wife wasn't dying fast enough -- only the word he used was not wife or woman but a word that cannot be repeated in a family newspaper.
The nurse's sworn statement, under penalty of perjury, is that she reported to the police that she had found Terri in both medical and emotional distress after a closed door visit by her husband -- and that she also found a vial of insulin, as well as needle marks on Terri, after Michael Schiavo's visit.
The same mainstream media that will scour the country to find individuals to quote in support of killing Terri Schiavo will not lift a finger to investigate the chilling charges this nurse filed with the police years ago. It might disturb the picture they are trying to paint.
Terri Schiavo is being killed because she is inconvenient to her husband and because she is inconvenient to those who do not want the idea of the sanctity of life to be strengthened and become an impediment to abortion. Nor do they want the supremacy of judges to be challenged, when judges are the liberals' last refuge.
©2005 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Contact Thomas Sowell | Read Sowell's biography
townhall.com
What is being kept alive artificially is the liberal media version of events. One side of this story is being repeated endlessly, as if it were gospel, but anyone saying something different -- including doctors and nurses who have actually seen or taken care of Terri Schiavo -- is unlikely to be reported.
As usual.
Indeed.
We are assured (I can almose hear the dulcet tones), that this is simply a case of Terri being allowed to refuse medical treatment. Really, that's the legal issue, which Judge Greer decided based on testimony from Michael and his witnesses that Terri had made casual comments noting that she wouldn't want to be hooked up to a machine. No big deal, why get all excited?
Well, I'll even concede that's the legal issue, but in this case, THE LAW IS WRONG.
The state is allowing the killing of a woman who has committed no crime, who was not terminally ill, who was not in pain, who had left no clear, uncoerced written "living will", and was not on "life support".
If that ain't clearly wrong, I don't know what is.
Sad to say, it looks like Terri's troubles are just about over. But we can't forget this. Things have to change.
So who is making things up now?
Wow. I didn't know the parents had requested a separate motion to give Terri food and water by natural means and that it was denied. Can you explain why he denied this motion by the parents? And why hasn't the media reported this?
I was listening to Dr. Bill Bennett on his radio show earlier this a.m., and he stated that if he was the Governor, he would use the State Police or the National Guard to remove her from the hospice, even if it meant the risk of impeachment. I'm afraid that that is what it comes down to for our political leaders. If they really believe in their heart of hearts that this is a state sponsored killing of an innocent human being, than they must put that believe above any considerations of their future political career. I'm disappointed to have to say that the same can also be said with regard to W's lack of action. If I recall, when Janet Reno snatched Elian Gonzalez, she did not have full approval of the courts. Sometimes you have to act, and sort it out later.
You are absolutely right. Thomas Sowell is America's greatest living intellectual. And totally unrecognized because he is blak and doesn't fit the MSM's vision of what black people are supposed to be.
Wanna take the challenge? I thought not. More fun to make things up, isn't it?
From Abstract.com:
"Another motion resolved last week was the Schindlers' motion to permit Terri to be given food and water orally once the feeding tube is discontinued. You can read that motion here from the Terri's Fight site. The motion included the following lines:
"Discontinuing her "artificial life support" in the form of assisted feeding should not also automatically sentence her to death. Instead, Terri should be permitted to attempt to eat and drink by natural means. Ill people often get well, or at least get better. The opportunity to attempt to feed Terri by natural means may demonstrate Terri is able to swallow and to eat and drink naturally.
"In denying this motion, Judge Greer stated wrote that the motion appeared to ask for an experimental procedure and that the documents provided in support of this motion were the same ones provided with another motion based on new medical evidence. The court ruled that this motion was thus duplicative and that whether new tests should be conducted will stand or fall with the other pending motion. You can read the order here.
"Frankly, that ruling surprised me. I had read the motion as a request that she be given food, as any person in a medical care setting might, even if her feeding tube is removed. The language quoted above, though, does make the motion seem as if the request is actually for a form of therapy, rather than as a basic human right."
So, who's lying now?
Exactly.
Schiavo MUST put her to death,
She will receive NO drop of water, NO morsel of food,
Anyone trying to feed her WILL be arrested, lest they CHOKE her.
Here's another Italian expression, in the dialect of this proud peasant here: e roba da patze, hard to translate, but loosely speaking it means, this stuff could only be fed to lunatics and nuts.
No, it is incomprehensible to me and I won't try to rationalize a legal argument that propounds it. Sorry.
And why hasn't the media reported this?
:-}
God help this Country is no one, if President Bush or Governor Bush or the director of CFS has the grit, determination and b@lls to stand down this arrogant Judge.
Sort of an Italian version of "Honest, I'm not making this up!"
The freepers defending the judiciary give me the creeps. I think there is a wheat v chaff thing going on here right now in Freeperland.
I think you're getting the hang of it!
God bless you Tax-chick on this Holy, Last Supper, Thursday.
And the same to you! My husband and oldest son went to Mass this evening, while I'm home with the babies. I get the Good Friday service and the Easter Vigil, and he gets Sunday.
Anybody seen winston?
A feeding tube is arguably "heroic measures", just as a ventilator is, but if a person is able to eat & drink by mouth, that's a horse of a totally different color.
This article by Thomas Sowell is exceptionally good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.