Burnt Orange Report

March 22, 2005

I Was Wrong About Schiavo

By Andrew Dobbs

After my post on the Schiavo case I read some very interesting comments and resolved to do more research into the matter. I read a variety of sources, and in the end I changed my mind- I was wrong. While I hate saying that a woman should die when so many people clearly love her and wish to see her live, I also must say that it appears that I underestimated Michael Schiavo and insulted him. I was wrong to do this.

Interestingly enough, I found the document that changed my mind from a conservative source- the National Review. The document is the Guardian ad Litem's report to Florida Governor Jeb Bush on Schiavo's case. The GAL is familiar to those of us with divorced parents, even more so to those of us who went through custody battles. It is a person, usually with a background in social work and law, who is appointed by the court to represent a person unable to speak for themselves in legal proceedings- typically children not old enough to take the stand, or in this case Terri Schiavo.

The report is tragic and heart breaking. Elements of both sides should be ashamed of themselves- the Right for defaming a man like Michael Schiavo (who is loving, yet flawed, a man who has suffered a horrible tragedy) and some elements of the Left (though not all) for defaming the Schindlers. Both sides of this battle have one thing in common- they deeply love Terri and both are heartbroken by this cruel twist of fate. The Schindlers desperately want to keep her alive- testifying at one point that they would allow all of her limbs to be amputated and for most of her organs to be transplated (were such necessary) before they would let her die. They love Terri, and the thought of her dying is unbearable for them.

Michael Schiavo, on the other hand, has been underestimated by others, and by me. He sought treatment for his wife, taking her across the country for various experimental treatments, standing with the Schindlers on all of these issues. But after four years of tireless efforts, it appears that he simply realized what many doctors had already said and would continue to say- there is no hope for Terri to recover. Even the Schindlers, in a court proceeding in 2001, admitted that she was in a PVS. He realized that what she was experiencing now was torture, being trapped in a world she could not participate in meaningfully. Perhaps he simply tired of the care, perhaps he couldn't handle the stress, the man isn't a god- he is as weak as any of us. In the end, he and others realized that Terri never sought this kind of existence and he changed his orders- he wished for her to be removed from her feeding tube.

This is where the Schindlers and Schiavo had their falling out. The Schindlers kept trying to have Michael removed as her guardian, but there were no reasons to do so. Not only had he not neglected her, but his obsessiveness over her care greatly annoyed the nurses assigned to her. In 13 years (when the GAL report was written), Terri had never had a bedsore- a common affliction for all immobilized people. Some have said, including me, that his motivation for all of this was money. But that money has now run out, and even before then Michael had offered to divest himself from the trust. He turned down the money. He just wants his wife to die peacefully.

So you have two camps who both love the same afflicted person- one wants to keep her alive and the other wishes for her to be allowed to die. Legally, Michael has the decision-making power and in Florida hea has the right to choose whether she stays on life support. The Supreme Court has upheld the right of states to make their own laws regarding these issues. Morally, even the American Conference of Catholic Bishops says that a feeding tube may be removed in the case of a PVS. Medically, the evidence was "compelling" that Terri is in a PVS and various tests to determine if she could swallow on her own concluded that she could not. The various signs of lucidity cited by supporters of the Schindlers leave out some important information- the responses Terri showed were not repetitive or consistetn. In essence, a PVS can respond to some limited stimuli, but unless they consistently do so, they are not aware of their surroundings and they are in a PVS. She was reflexive, not aware, not conscious. It appears she has not had a conscious action in 15 years. While some people in what appears to be a PVS have partially recovered, no one has come close to being in one for 15 years and then recovering. It appears that Terri will never recover, and the law grants Michael the right to end her suffering.

Her parents have said that they would keep her alive even if they knew for a fact that she said she didn't want such. This is damning for their case- everyone has a right to refuse medical treatment. Courts have ruled that Terri never wanted this kind of treatment, and when Michael realized that she would never recover, he honored her wishes. It pains my soul to have to say it, but Terri Schiavo must be let go. To not do so is to turn the oxcart of law in our country on its head and to let emotion trump facts.

In the end, you all were right- I wasn't listening to a broad enough array of sources on this matter. When I did, it changed my mind. I will make this deal with you all- I will remain open-minded and resolve never to make a judgement based on only one side of the debate if you all will promise never to bash me for disagreeing with you. Most of you all were very nice to me, but some (Kirk McPike sticks out in my head) accused me of being a Republican, which I am not. I refuse to believe anything just because a majority of my party believes in it and I will never reject anything simply because a majority of the other does.

In the end, I was wrong about Terri Schiavo, but my intentions were good. We must err on the side of life, but we also must never let our gut and our emotions beat out the often cold justice of law and order. Such is the formula for chaos and mob rule, for Jacobinism and other vile philosophies. Terri's story is a moving one, but those who value her life, her freedom and her rights must be prepared to allow her to pass away.

May Almighty God keep our eyes on the truth, and prevent us from doing any person, particularly Terri, wrong.

Posted by Andrew Dobbs at March 22, 2005 04:11 PM | TrackBack

Comments

I think you are carving out a new niche in BOR writing Andrew, the long in-depth controversial posts. Keep it up! :)

Posted by: Karl-T at March 22, 2005 06:06 PM

Argh, I was cleaning out spam and I accidently deleted some comments on this entry. Sorry (nate, I think).

Posted by: Karl-T at March 22, 2005 07:34 PM

FLIP FLOP! Is there no end to this? Maybe if there was any depth to Andrews positions they wouldn't change every five minutes. Pick any two posts of Andrew's and there is your proof. There are no standards if you are writing on a blog. You can get it all wrong, change your story, and write things that aren't true. And your fellow bloggers... they will just cheer you on... some more hits and maybe another ad. Andrew has found a new niche: trashy political tabloid with no credibility.

Posted by: Julian Garza at March 22, 2005 07:54 PM

Andrew,

good post, nicely done. being open-minded enough to change one's mind and courageous enough to admit it are what make some humans special in my mind. well done.

Posted by: tony g at March 22, 2005 08:12 PM

I think it's great that Andrew has the integrity to be able to change his mind. Blogging is a forum that supposed to be for changing people's minds. You voice your opinion and try to sway others through debate. You can't decry one person's opinion, then decry that they've changed their opinion after much thought.

Posted by: Nate at March 22, 2005 08:25 PM

At the risk of seeming cold-hearted, the fundamental issue of the Schiavo case is not the moral issue, but the legal one. In my view, moral legislation is cant and hypocrisy, and our Congress has embarassed themselves in this cheap attempt to garner political capital.

This issue, as the Florida courts maintained, must be decided by the legal guardian.

Posted by: Mike at March 22, 2005 09:05 PM

Like most people, I've got an opinion on this one too, but I think that we all need to remember that unless we're faced with these kinds of quandaries personally...we're all just acting as bravely as we'd like to think we are.

I tend to favor turning over control of Terri's life to those people that brought her into this world. It would appear that the medical community is split on the quality of Terri's life and the possibility of some type of recovery. I think that the final decision should rest with her parents, since they're still alive.

I just hope and pray that I'm never faced with this kind of decision...or that I place my children, wife or parents in a position where they're faced with it.

See you on the high ground!

MajorDad1984

Posted by: MajorDad1984 at March 22, 2005 09:24 PM

Thanks for clarifying what I can and can't do. I'll be sure to add it to my blog rulebook.

So lets get two points out here. There is a difference between changing an opinion and going from one extreme to another on almost every important issue. Thoughtful opinion doesn't change every five minutes.

Though blogging may not require much journalistic accountability, a minimum level of respect for your readers requires at least browsing a few Google hits before posting.

If Andrew is too uninformed to make consistent arguments, he should consider writing in question and answer form. Just asking is much more respectable than being consistently wrong -- and constantly doubling back on yourself.

Posted by: Julian Garza at March 22, 2005 09:38 PM

More like guidelines really.

Posted by: Nate at March 22, 2005 11:38 PM

It is not life that we must always err on the side of, but liberty and freedom. Life without liberty is less than worthless.

Posted by: Kirk McPike at March 23, 2005 02:41 AM

This is a case easy to flip-flop on because so many values and ideas are in direct competition. I agree that Andrew was not as informed of the situation as he should have been when first blogging, but like that hasn't happened to anyone. The problem is that too many jump into this argument, using really uninformed opinion about whether or not Terry is responsive to her environment based on a few minutes of video. I see parents give credit to a month-old baby for incredibly high-level cognition, people think machines have personalities, and animals can "talk" to them.

The problem I had with Andrew's first post wasn't his opinion on Terri per se but that he pretty much repeated arguments that I've heard on conservative talk radio for the last week. Then, the criticism on Democrats for not protecting the weak? While I don't doubt Andrew's support of the Democratic party, I sometimes think he overcriticizes Democrats to be fairhanded (though some come across earnest and warranted).

What is wretched are the Republicans like Tom DeLay who turned Terri's case into something about conservatives: "This [the Schiavo case] is exactly the issue that is going on in America, of attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others." The Republicans took no lead on anything except grandstanding and making it about them.

Posted by: Tx bubba at March 23, 2005 03:31 AM

How come no one asks DeLay how many people will have their tubes and plugs pulled because of the $15 billion cut in Medicaid pushed by DeLay last week?? Was the Palm Sunday bill an act of contrition?

Although I think it's sad and hope Terri well, it would be poetic justice to have her Medicaid funding run out before the case is settled.

Posted by: Steve Talbert at March 23, 2005 11:09 AM

Andrew,

Thank you for being brave enough to change your mind and admit that you had not investigated all the facts. We have all been there before but some of us weren't strong enough to admit it. Keep it up!

Posted by: Rachel Weiser at March 23, 2005 11:13 AM

Andrew - Bravo to you for setting down the GOP Kool Aid and finding this wonderful document, which I had not read until you linked to it. Your analysis is right on, and it's clearer to me now that the GOP politicians behind this (Gov. Bush, et al) have known for a while the medical reality behind Terri Schiavo's case, but they are acting for craven political reasons. Even Delay was taped (heard this on Air America this morning) saying to a group of Republicans that God gave them the Schiavo case to show the cruelty of liberals (or humanity...it wasn't clear to me).

One of the great things about blogging is that you have immediate feedback. Andrew took reader feedback, looked deeper, realized he was wrong, and owned up to it. That alone shows he is incapable of being a Republican. As we know, the GOP of today is incapable of admitting error, no matter what evidence surfaces.

Thanks for the follow-up. I pray that Terri Schiavo finds peace soon.

Posted by: Jason Cecil at March 23, 2005 03:13 PM

Another good summary of the legal case-

http://www2.townonline.com/somerville/entertainment/view.bg?articleid=207748

I respect Andrew for being a liberal and seeking evidence from both sides and for being willing to change his mind when presented with more evidence.

I had commented on Andrew's first post that I had some personal knowledge of right-to-die cases and they are personal matters best handled by the doctors and the family without state involement. It is sad that becuase of all the publicity the hospice can't just increase the morphine but must starve her body. The fact that except for the brain stem and some lower portions all her higher brain areas are now just liquid and dead tissue doesn't mean that I wish pain for the equivalent of an animal even unable to swallow on her own.

As I said before to those on the opposite side why are you not demanding Bush and Texas rescind the law they created for Texas that removes any family members from making the decision and leaves it only up to the doctors or hospital? Under Texas law the plug would have been pulled over ten years ago. (The conservative exception - if you are rich enough you can remove the victim to any place willing to take your money.)

Posted by: Easter Lemming Liberal News at March 23, 2005 10:41 PM

Andrew:

I had always supported the decision to let Mrs. Schiavo go in peace, but I read the GAL's report and it also opened my eyes to many facts of which I was not aware. The thing that leaped out at me was that not one the 17 doctors who submitted affidavits to the court supporting her parents' position had ever laid eyes on Mrs. Schiavo in person; they watched the tapes provided and edited by her parents, some of them directly off the parents' website.

And it made me wonder -- is this what we've come to in the age of managed care, diagnosis by proxy?

Posted by: Constance Reader at March 25, 2005 09:41 AM

I don't know if you will even see this as it is 3 months later. But I just want to say how much I admire a person that can admit they've made a mistake.

Good for you!

Posted by: Susan at July 12, 2005 10:43 PM

News, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas

March 22, 2005

I Was Wrong About Schiavo

By Andrew Dobbs