Over the last few days I've heard people commenting on the timing of John Paul's passing away yesterday and Terri Schiavo's death a week ago, and on the sharp contrast between the two headline-making stories. Not a coincidence, people say. I have to agree.
There are many who will argue that there is no basis for comparison. The Pope, they say, was conscious and alert in his last days, and so all attempts to prolong his life were worthwhile. On the other hand, Terri had irremedial brain damage--according to her husband and most of her doctors, and the court that allowed her feeding tube to be removed and prohibited its reinsertion. What Terri's parents and siblings had interpreted as responses to their voices, to music, to their presence--all that was merely reflexive.
Perhaps.
Terri Schiavo's husband, who has in the past few years fathered two children with another woman, insists that in asking the court to remove Terri's feeding tube, he was only carrying out her wishes.
Perhaps.
As an Orthodox Jew, I am bound by and believe in the precept of preserving life, even if that life doesn't appear to have "quality."
And theology aside, here's the thing: Who determines "quality of life"? Is it possible for a young woman in her twenties who is in good health to anticipate what she would want if she were no longer able to respond to the people around her? Is it possible that, given her condition two weeks ago, Terri Schaivo may have wanted, in spite of her ferocious limitations, to live?
Perhaps.
Terri's parents believed that their daughter's life had quality. They were convinced that she responded to them.
I do wonder why Terri's husband didn't divorce her and allow her parents to care for her.She wasn't in pain. She wasn't on a ventilator.
I think about Terri. I think about Pope John Paul. I think about Hunter Thompson, a writer who took his own life less than two months ago, and about Carolyn Heilburn, who did the same in October of 2003.
Last rights?
Comments