Re: MD Schiavo

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Apr 04 2005 - 20:42:58 BST

  • Next message: MarshaV: "Re: MD The Law of Three in MOQ terms."

    Arlo,

    Thanks for a high quality analysis of the Schiavo case. Perhaps
    surprisingly I find little if anything to disagree with. It's good to be
    on the same page for a change. Your thoughts are much appreciated.

    Platt

    > Like you, I've been struggling with making sense of all this. What I've
    > come to over the past few days is that the complexity is that there are
    > three components to all this that get tangled up in the dialogue. But I'm
    > only thinking out loud here, not making any sort of definitive
    > statements...
    >
    > There is the question of "death with dignity". The heart of this component
    > has at its core the morality of allowing even those *with* legal documents
    > to be allowed to die. In cases where there is ambiguity, or an absense of
    > known wishes, it extends to *who* should be allowed to decide? In this
    > case, truly "pro-life" voices were combatting the concept of euthenasia or
    > death with dignity "in toto". Others, giving voice next to these, were
    > dealing with the "who decides when the patient hasn't". Most of these
    > people, I'm gonna guess, were outraged that the parents had no voice in
    > this decision. This is, it seems to me, a more abstracted or universal
    > level of dialogue.
    >
    > Then there is the component that enters the picture when you take a step
    > back and look at the Schiavo family personally. This situation was akin to
    > a Greek tragedy polarized by a husband, who had at best lost hope and at
    > worst wanted too much for his wife to die, and a family, who at best seemed
    > unable to "let go" and at worst seemed to care more about protecting their
    > feelings than considering Ms. Shiavo's. This level of dialogue gets "soap
    > operish" and relates more to the people surrounding this case than the more
    > abstract ideas above.
    >
    > Finally, there is the media/politicization component. Here there is
    > dialogue between those arguing it is intrusive for the government to get
    > involved in cases like this, and those who see this specific situation and
    > believe the system to have collapsed. There is also the dialogue of the
    > obvious use of this to advance political careers. As for the media
    > component, many are outraged that such a personally painful time was
    > exploited, but many more acted as "consumers" and bought everything the
    > media doled out.
    >
    > Anyways, I think talking about it has been difficult because these
    > components tend to get mixed. This is somewhat evidenced by the array of
    > comments on this thread. In many ways, these situations are intensely
    > personal. In other ways, they are part of the abstract dialogue about
    > euthenasia and the "right to die". And in still other ways, they are about
    > social/political policy. And in the end, this situation seemed to fail all
    > three.
    >
    > As for where I am on this *right now*, I think that if the individual's
    > wishes were to be allowed to die, then I think we must respect that, as the
    > individual must outweigh the social. In the absense of the individual's
    > wishes, then I think we should, as Bush said (I can't believe I just said
    > that), "presume life". That is, even if the spouse *and* the family wanted
    > to pull the plug, the individual should be kept alive. But the cost and the
    > burden of this should be carried by society, and we as a society should
    > agree that bearing this burden is "right". In some ways, I think we should
    > mandate "living wills", to minimize ambiguous or unknown cases.
    >
    > As to the specifics of the Schiavo situation, I can't understand why, given
    > the desire and willingness of the family to support their daughter's care,
    > the husband wouldn't "sign off" on the whole thing, be allowed to get his
    > divorce, and have his financial ties severed. That would have, to me, been
    > the "best" outcome of this debacle. That it did not happen, is to me, very,
    > very, very sad.
    >
    > Arlo
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 04 2005 - 20:41:18 BST