The uncertain fate of Terri Schiavo is a subject that a lot of people feel very passionate about. This happens when a large number of people see what they consider a murder happening. It's why opposition to abortion and capital punishment are also so strong and vocal. I was going to sit out this discussion, but I find myself veering towards commenting on other blogs on this point or that rather than just laying out what I believe and why I believe it.

I am going to say my peace here and I will write on the subject no further - including the comments section below. Since the post is somewhat long, I'm putting it below.


Camille and I were discussing the issue of "living wills" and whatnot. These days, it's not a matter of "save me" or "don't save me," but rather a checklists of what should and should not be done as people are ushered out of this world to the next.

Whether one is brain-dead or not brain-dead doesn't seem, in my not-so-expert opinion, to be a black-and-white determination. Whether or not a nearly entirely diminished, but not quite dead, life is something that needs to be held on to at all costs is not an easy decision. Whether bank accounts should be emptied, lives put on hold, and emotional lines kept exposed on the faint whisper of a hope that they might reach a point that might be mildly cogniscent at some point in the future depends on a thousand of undeterminable variables.

Those fighting to keep Mrs. Schiavo alive say that we should "err on the side of life." This is an argument that resonates with me on abortion. It resonates with me on capital punishment. It does not resonate with me here. To err completely on the side of life, it would require keeping people on ventilators for decades diverting all kinds of resources that would be better spent elsewhere. The case with Mrs. Schiavo is not this extreme, but the "err on the side of life" philosophy, taken to its logical conclusion, would include such people.

So absent supporting a single answer to the infinite shades of gray between life and lifelessness, a line must be drawn somewhere. So it's not a matter, to me, of favoring life or the right to die, but rather the degree to which we believe life should be guarded and the recognition that, at some point, we must let go.

There are two questions that surround the drawing of a line between life and death: Where does the line exist and who draws it?

Ideally it would be drawn by the person affected. But not everyone makes their wishes known before they die. Even if they do say "let me go," there is an entire middle-ground between being completely healthy and being completely infirm at the mercy of a ventilator. Hopefully we can have a comprehensive checklist and strong enough understanding that the affected's wishes can be carried out.

But absent that, and with a myriad of uncertainty surrounding the issue, I firmly believe that the decision should lie with the next of kin. If there is a spouse involved, then it ought to be the spouse. If not, the parents or the children. With some exception, they know the person best and they live with the consequences.

It's possible that Mr. Schiavo is the demon that many say he is. It's possible that he's conflicted. It's hard to tell. The Schiavo case has become so political and full of so much noise that there really isn't any way to tell. The actual state of Mrs. Schiavo is similarly indeterminable by those of us that can't do more than read news reports and watch the videos. Those doctors and family members that are closest are divided. Maybe it's crass self-interest, maybe it's an honest disagreement. But from the outside looking in I am not personally in a better position to judge. I would say the same for most of the people that have come down definitively on one side or the other.

But when someone says "I do" in front of God and country, they are putting their life in that person's hands. Even when not their physical life, their existing one. A marriage should be nothing less.

And if my life and death are ever at stake, my trust lies not with politicians, Republican or Democrat, but with the person that I swore my life to. There are times when the government must get involved to settle a dispute, but the burden to overturn the will of the spouse ought to lie with the government, and malicious intent or gross negligence cannot just be inferred but must be proven.

Life and death are messy. If Mrs. Schiavo is not saved, her death will not be a pleasant one. If there is any way to comfort her as she goes, I am all in favor of that. But with the videos I've seen and articles I've read, as messy as the situation is and as painful as it is for those involved, I have not seen sufficient evidence to warrant overturning the faith and trust put in to marriage.