Saturday, August 06, 2005

Oh, cool.

I hope the link works. State guardians laud Schiavo for fulfilling Terri's wish to die. If it doesn't, you can create an account to the Sentinel on the spot, they won't pester you. I've said it before and I'll say it again and again - until you have stood in front of a doctor and heard that your spouse is beyond hope and you are holding the guardianship, you can't know what it's like. He turned his life upside down to try to help her, he was an absolutely fierce advocate for her care, he accepted the reality of her condition and tried to get on with his life while still fulfilling his responsibilities as her guardian and husband, and was vilified by so many Good Christians it made me want to throw up. I was lucky - my husband's family was totally supportive and never second guessed me at all. Had my SiL not been a nurse with the ability to research and size up the situation herself, it might have been totally different, and I could have been dragged through the court system with challenges to provide a feeding tube to a massively brain damaged and incapacitated dying man (but for weeks or maybe months, not years - the cancer would have won no matter what, and no legal system can change reality). The Shiavos were in hell, she was caught in a state that barely can be called life, between life and death, and he was stuck in a media and Internet and "Good Christian" driven shitstorm of hate and venom, in which, let's remember, Our President and his henchmen jumped in with both feet because they totally misread the situation. Like Iraq. Like Social Security. Like .... It was all politics to them, and I truly wonder about anyone who can't step back and see that now.

BTW, the Catholic Church on the local, we actually know what's going on level was never anything but loving and supportive in every way. Nobody ever, ever, ever suggested I wasn't doing the right thing at any step of the way. I did the funeral pre-arrangements because one of our priests gently nagged me to go do it every time he came to visit, because he was concerned that I'd throw away thousands of dollars I couldn't afford. That's the kind of grassroots support I really had. The Vatican's (and it wasn't the Pope, it was some bureaucrat's) "statement" was based on thirdhand and biased info, and I'm quite sure that it wouldn't have been the party line if they were there and could talk to her doctors. Because the Catholic Church supports life, but isn't scared shitless of death, and this poor girl was dead in all but primitive brainstem activity. There is a huge and definitely forgotten/misrepresented difference between her situation and caring for the "brain damaged" - this wasn't brain damage. This was a very flukey form of brain death, all but the most primitive, basic functions were gone.

It's a really interesting theological/philosophical point - do we keep a body alive on tubes because it is "alive" only in that the brain function governing respiration has kept going on its own somehow? Is that "alive" enough to put whatever is left of that person through a mindless captive state of tubes in, tubes out, as long as the lungs keep breathing? Do our souls live in our lungs?

We don't have to ignore science to respect life - it's not about being a fundie, it's about balancing science with human dignity. There was nothing at all dignified about keeping that poor woman in a bed to let her parents pretend she was still going to recover. And, at least publicly, they did keep spouting the story that she was going to recover. Even after the autopsy revealed to anybody with even casual medical knowledge that there was NO WAY IN HELL she was ever going to even improve from the state she was in, those people still claimed she could get better. It was macabre and horrible.

The Florida State Guardianship Association deserves huge applause for having the collective backbone to give Michael Schiavo the award - and I know why they did it. Because every damn one of those guardians know how hard this is, and looked at him and thought, "There, but for the grace of God...." I know I did.

5 comments:

  1. I could never decide if Terri Schiavo's parents were loving, but either massively delusional/stupid; or mercenary, i.e, hoping to get something out of someone because their daughter was disabled.

    It didn't seem to me like they could gain anything, and I couldn't see how they could be so damned dumb, no matter how hard it was to let go.

    The idiots that tried to give her water made me shake my head. You couldn't tell them that trying to give her water by mouth would have drowned her. She was past even swallowing on her own.

    ReplyDelete
  2. just out of curiosity, what's your take on the susan torres situation? i agree with you, i laud michael schiavo, for taking care of terri, and doing it in such a way that she was truly cared for. i am disgusted that government was allowed to intervene in the way it was. i'm in the process of getting a living will, and i will NOT be allowed to "live" as terri was. what a horrible thing to do

    ReplyDelete
  3. The finale of the Schiavo saga really illustrated that the parents and their supporters were all about "winning" and not truth, and Terri was just a pawn. Governmental interference and judicial activism was great when it was going their way, when they thought it was going to be on their side, but when the (mostly Republican and Christian) judges went against them and the autopsy report came out and it clearly stated what the doctors and her husband had been saying all along, well, that was "a government lie" and nobody should believe it. I was prepared to give the parents the benefit of the doubt early in the saga but as time passed it became clear that they were waging some insane control game they had to win at all costs, with their daughter as the pawn, and their behavior became increasingly insane and vile - the father standing outside the nursing home telling a reporter that he had talked to his daughter (the one who couldn't swallow and hadn't been able to for years) and told her they were taking her out to breakfast. It's hard to say whether he was really that delusional or if that was a calculated act for the cameras, but at that point any sympathy for them went out the window. Their entire position was never truly "pro life" either! They never said, "We understand the gravity of her condition and we believe she should be kept alive anyway, even in that state, because life is life." Their entire position was based on the false idea that she could recover.

    The Susan Torres story is sad but a totally different set of circumstances - apparently the family was united in the belief that keeping her alive long enough to give the baby a chance was what she would have wanted, and they let her go as soon as the baby was born. Cases like that are rare but they do happen, we are just more sensitized to it after the Schiavo hysteria.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What a pack of lies.

    Perhaps if you people would understand the fact this louse of a "husband" kept changing his story over the years, and wanted her dead only AFTER he received the malpractice money you could strip off your partisan political blinders and actually see this was not about the "right to die" or about "Terri's wishes," but about the RIGHT TO KILL THE PROFOUNDLY DISABLED.

    All you care about is defeating the religious right and never mind you have brought total disgrace on liberalism and civil rights.

    It's embarrassing, reading these moronic talking points of yours and other bloggers who know nothing of what they are talking about in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Um, yeah, Susan, the guardian appointed by Gov. Bush, the court system, the investigative agencies, the coroner, they all must have lied - because you know the TRUTH! The GAL appointed by the Governor wrote a report that is available online, and in it he cleared up the lies about the malpractice money and all the rest of the distortions you were fed. It's public record, and it played out the way it did because we still have a court system that recognizes civil rights.

    The Schindlers' position was never truly pro-life, as I've said - it was based on the utterly false premise that Terri could recover. They never said "We recognize that the situation is hopeless," they claimed all along that her husband was lying about her condition (a fact disputed by endless investigation and THREE court appointed GALs) and that she could recover. Their idea of "pro life" was horribly distorted. But then, I don't expect you to grasp that, since your comments make it clear you didn't read the public record and bought the false version of the story these opportunistic, politically driven "Christians" were peddling.
    Whateverrr... have a nice life.

    ReplyDelete