Bad Links?
Other glitches?
Notify Webmaster

Pulling the plug: Whose call is it?

By MICHAEL BOYLAN

Consider this column my living will.

If I am ever involved in an accident where I end up in a persistent vegetative state, do not keep me alive by machine.

If doctors do not think that I will ever recover, let me go. It doesn’t matter if I can breathe on my own or follow your finger with my eyes, if I need a feeding tube or a hydrating tube and I won’t ever talk or walk again, that will no longer be me in that bed and I would want to move on to whatever comes next.

This column obviously comes from the Terri Schiavo case in Florida, and people have very passionate opinions on both sides of this issue.

To recap the story, Terri Schiavo collapsed in 1990; when her heart stopped, it cut off oxygen to her brain. She has been in what doctors call a persistent vegetative state since then.

In 1998, her husband, Michael, filed a petition to remove Terri’s feeding tube, which was keeping her alive.

Terri’s parents didn’t want the tube removed and have fought Michael, who says that, despite not having anything written, Terri would never have wanted to go on living this way.

In 2000, a circuit court judge ruled that the feeding tube can be removed. In 2001, a court of appeals upheld the decision and on April 20, 2001, the circuit court judge ordered the tube to be removed.

The Florida Supreme Court refused to intervene on behalf of Terri’s parents, as did the U.S. Supreme Court and on April 24, the tube was removed.

It was reinstalled two days later when a different circuit court judge ordered it, and the case has gone back and forth ever since then.

The tube has been removed one other time and Florida governor Jeb Bush got Terri’s Law passed by the Florida legislature in 2003 that allowed him to intervene and order the tube to be reinserted.

Last week, Terri’s Law was ruled unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court. The tube may be removed once again and this case will continue seemingly forever.

This is a tough case and there is no easy answer. I’ve tried putting myself in to the shoes of everyone involved.

If my wife became a vegetable, incapable of basic human functions and speech and thought, and had told me that she would never want to go on living that way, I’d let her go.

Hopefully, we will both put something in writing on this matter soon and it will be a moot point.

If my child ended up like Terri, I would be devastated and, yes, I would hope against all odds for recovery, but 14 years later, I think I’d be ready to let her go. I’d rather remember my daughter as a healthy and vibrant person, focusing on the good parts of her life.

We are not meant to grieve forever, and it doesn’t mean we have forgotten someone or stopped loving them just because we have stopped grieving.

I can’t imagine having to visit a shell of a loved one every day and having those images start to replace the images of them at a healthier time.

Look at the before and after pictures of Terri Schiavo and tell me that is the same person. It’s not just appearances though. Terri Schiavo, the woman, is gone. All that remains is Terri Schiavo, the issue, and that really ticks me off.

Focus on the Family Founder and Chairman Dr. James C. Dobson issued a release last Thursday, stating, “This decision is nothing less than a death sentence for Terri Schiavo, a woman who has been denied every chance of recovery from her brain injury for the past 14 years by her husband.”

How did her husband prevent her from recovering? Dobson doesn’t say. What about the eight years that passed before Michael asked a judge to remove a feeding tube?

Inconsequential, I guess, now that he is ready to let her go and move on with his life. You see, life is still going on outside Terri’s hospital room. She may never know it, but why ask someone to sit by her bedside frozen in time, always focusing on that painful moment when life changed for the worse?

I hate that she is being used by right-to-life groups, who claim to care about her well-being but use the situation to advance their beliefs.

They don’t have to visit her in the hospital and remember what she was like nearly 15 years ago. They don’t have to think about what, if anything, is going on in her mind. They march outside and picket and chant, voicing their heartfelt concerns, but all it boils down to is people trying to mind other people’s business.

Hey, if you become a vegetable and want to live by machine for as long as possible, fine, just tell your loved ones and put it down on paper, but this situation isn’t your decision to make.

Does the pro-euthanasia group have an agenda? Sure, it’s to let people decide when they’re ready to go, whenever that is. They basically think that if a person is suffering with a terminal illness and would like to die before the pain gets too great, they have the right to go on their own terms.

What I find so interesting though is that many of the opponents to this belief are very religious. If you have a deeply held belief in heaven, why wouldn’t you want to let someone go there?

I doubt that Terri is going to be a vegetable up there. More than likely, she will find peace and her husband and parents will be able to start healing and find peace themselves.

It’s terrible that Terri never wrote her wishes down, but who thinks about almost dying in their late 20s? I urge everyone to write a living will, so that your loved ones don’t have to endure 14 years of court battles in addition to the heartbreak of losing a family member.