|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Culture of life or culture of lies: an exchange
with WSWS readers on the Terri Schiavo case
By Patrick Martin
25 March 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The World Socialist Web Site has received numerous letters
in response to articles on the Terri Schiavo case posted on March
21 and March 23. (See Bush, Congress
intervene in Terri Schiavo case: political thuggery in the service
of reaction, The Schiavo
case: Bush and Congress trample on science and the Constitution,
Democrats complicit with Christian
right, Republicans in Schiavo case).
Many of the letters to the WSWS endorse our criticism of the
Bush administration and express sympathy for Michael Schiavo,
Terris husband, who made the decision to terminate life
support for the severely brain-damaged woman. (See: Letters
from WSWS readers on the Schiavo case).
A majority of the letters to the WSWS, however, support Terri
Schiavos parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, and their efforts
to have the feeding tube restored. Some of these letters are simply
abusive, or express a fundamentalist religious viewpoint raised
to the level of hysteria. But the most characteristic feature
of the letters purporting to defend Terri Schiavo is the lack
of information, confusion, or outright ignorance they reveal.
This reflects several interrelated features of contemporary
America, including the grotesque falsifications pumped out by
Christian fundamentalist and ultra-right groups and their media
mouthpieces such as Fox News, and the refusal of the mainstream
media, as well as the Democratic Party, to mount any serious opposition
to this pollution of public discourse.
This barrage of lies has to some extent disarmed the public.
Many people are instinctively opposed to the campaign of right-wing
hysteria on the Schiavo case, and uneasy over the constitutional
implications of the congressional intervention. Opinion polls
show overwhelming public opposition to the intervention of Bush
and Congress. Nevertheless, there is a general lack of clarity
on how to resist this right-wing offensive. The corruption of
the media and the spinelessness of the liberals combine to disorient
public opinion.
This is bound up with the lowering of intellectual and cultural
standards in the US resulting from a protracted and relentless
assault on science and rational thought. This takes the form of
attacks on the science of evolution, areas of investigation such
as stem cell research, and a serious approach to history. As a
result of this officially sanctioned drive to dumb down
the population, large sections of the public find it difficult
to understand the issues involved in the Schiavo controversy.
The general debasement of intellectual life, moreover, renders
many people vulnerable to religious prejudices.
The falsehoods peddled by the right wing fall into two major
groups: first, claims that Terri is not in a vegetative state,
but conscious, aware, even responsive; second, that she is the
victim of abuse by her husband Michael, who should therefore be
disqualified as her guardian. We will examine each in turn.
Letter writer CR rejects our report that, according to numerous
neurologists, Terri Schiavo has no brain function. This,
I am afraid, is patently untrue. Terri is able to communicate
with sound and facial expressions. The doctors who examined her,
for reasons known to themselves, have dismissed these reactions
as involuntary reflexes!
CR cites an account of an eyewitness who was in Schiavos
hospice room (it isnt clear from the letter if this is CR
herself or someone else), declaring that Terri attempted to respond
affirmatively when asked if she wanted to live. CR writes: She
has been filmed looking deeply into her mothers eyes and
responding with great pleasure to her mother. Doctors and therapists
who have examined Terri also assert that with therapy Terris
condition could improve greatly. Unfortunately, Michael Schiavo
has denied Terri this therapy, despite a colossal payout meant
for such purposes. Not one penny has been used to rehabilitate
her.
Letter writer RR writes: Mr. Martin wrote that Terri
has had no brain function for 15 years. This appears to be a serious
misrepresentation of her condition. That said, when Bush says
We must err on the side of life, he should consider
other tactics to get his way than cluster bombs and depleted uranium
munitions. We cant be pro-life and pro-war.
While RR at least acknowledges the cynicism of Bushs
position, both he and CR are deeply mistaken about Terri Schiavos
medical condition. There is no credible medical evidence to dispute
the diagnosis of a persistent, and now permanent, vegetative state.
Only two doctors have been quoted in the media opposing this diagnosis,
both of them representatives of the Christian fundamentalist right,
one with a direct financial interest in supposed therapy
for the irredeemably brain-damaged.
Dr. Ronald Cranford, a neurologist at the University of Minnesota
Medical School who was called in by the Florida courts to examine
Terri Schiavo, said: Youll not find any credible neurologist
or neurosurgeon to get involved at this point and say shes
not vegetative. He told the New York Times, Her
CAT scan shows massive shrinkage of the brain. Her EEG is flatflat.
Theres no electrical activity coming from her brain.
Repeated neurological examinations have confirmed that Terri
Schiavos cerebral cortex was irreparably damaged by the
oxygen deprivation caused by a stoppage of her heart in 1990.
In the absence of oxygen, the complex cells of the cerebral cortex,
which control all the higher intellectual functions, including
sensation, reasoning, emotion and the feeling of pain, begin to
break down. In Terris case, they have degenerated into a
liquefied state from which there is no possibility of recovery.
As Michael Schiavo asked in one court hearing, Can you regrow
a brain?
There are two bases for rejecting this scientific evidence.
The first is the religious conception that essentially denies
the material basis of consciousness. Even without a functioning
brain, goes that argument, Terri Schiavo has a soul, and to allow
her to die is murder.
This argument is irrefutable by reasoned argument, because
it is irrational. But to make it the basis of medical decisions
and public policy is to destroy the constitutional separation
between church and state and make the dogma of the Christian fundamentalists
and the Roman Catholic Church a law for every American. Moreover,
it would compel the indefinite prolongation of life support for
every terminally ill patient, no matter how bad their condition:
an act of surpassing cruelty, both for the dying and their families.
The second basis for denying the sad reality of Terri Schiavos
condition is the argument made by CR and others, based on her
seeming responsiveness to visitors. The principal evidence
here is the videotape circulated by her parents, which is selectively
edited from hours of footage to give a false impression to the
viewing public, who are not aware how the tape was put together.
Neurologists have explained repeatedly that, unlike a patient
in a coma, the victim of a persistent vegetative state is wakeful,
with eyes open and moving randomly. To immediate family members,
even an occasional apparent response to an external stimulus may
seem proof that their loved one is still with them,
in some sense. This is an understandable misconception, which
is now being cynically exploited by those who care nothing for
Terri Schiavo the person, but seek to exploit her as a right-wing
symbol.
Despite the appearances, a person in a persistent vegetative
state is in far worse condition from a medical standpoint than
someone in a coma, as attested by the measurements of electrical
activity in the brain and other neurological data. To reject this
finding is, once again, to reject science in the favor of self-delusion
or religious mythmaking.
Another reader, JN, writes: I am the parent of a handicapped
boy, and I can tell you, I am completely on the side of Terris
parents. You can bet I would do the same for my son. How would
you like to be starved to death? How would you like to not even
be given a drink? They would not do this to death row inmates
or the worst of criminals. Why on earth is it OK to do this to
a disabled woman?
In a similar vein, PL writes: You do a good job of showing
the normal ugliness from DeLay and company. There are a lot of
problems with this case, however, and you didnt touch on
several of them. There are things like statements by doctors and
ex-girlfriends, and affidavits by nurses saying that the major
media coverage of this is dramatically wrong. For example, a nurse
at the hospice saying she could feed herself sometimes but the
husband was against it and demanded the use of feeding tubes...
The diagnosis of persistent vegetative state
sounds like the usual crap we poor residents of Florida have to
put up with. This shouldnt change anyones take on
the religious right, but this case has the potential for helping
to bring on the economizing we all know is coming for the disabled.
Such comments reflect the impact of the big-lie
technique of the Republican right, which has sought to portray
Terri Schiavo as a disabled person who is the victim of discrimination.
(Senator Tom Harkin, a liberal Democrat from Iowa, has adopted
this stance as well).
Terri Schiavo is not handicapped or disabled in any reasonable
meaning of that term. She does not suffer from autism, mental
retardation, crippling nerve or muscle damage or any other condition
typically categorized as disability. Her brain function is zero.
Her neuro-muscular control is zero. She does not respond to stimulior
more precisely, there is no correlation between her random eye
movements or sounds, and external stimuli.
The other major category of falsification in the pro-life
letters is the claim that Terri Schiavo is the victim of abuse
by her husband Michael, who is supposedly motivated by the hope
of financial gain from her death. Such claims, of an increasingly
scurrilous nature, have been circulated both by the Schindler
family and their fundamentalist backers. A few examples:
Letter writer LR writes: If this is political thuggery
then that is wonderful. You seem to forget, the woman will be
starved to death for about two weeks. Her husband is also under
suspicion of having injured Terri (the reason she is in this condition).
JH writes from Australia: There is a real possibility
that her brain damage was caused by husband Michael Schiavos
attempt to murder her by strangulation in 1990, after discovering
that she planned to leave and divorce him after six years of married
life during which he physically abused her and controlled her
movements... WSWS should not support a cunning and disturbed mans
attempt to use a corrupt legal system to murder his wife.
Such assertions, absolutely unsubstantiated and defamatory,
in large part reflect a campaign of abuse and slander against
a private individual, Michael Schiavo, directed from the highest
levels of the government and media. There is in this witch-hunt
no small degree of incitement to violence against an innocent
man.
There is no truth to these allegations. Terri Schiavos
brain damage is the result of a heart stoppage brought on by a
potassium imbalance believed to be caused by the eating disorder
bulimia. By all accounts, Michael Schiavo was devastated by his
wifes collapse and took numerous actions to try to alleviate
her condition.
According to the 2003 report commissioned by Florida Governor
Jeb Bush and written by Jay Wolfson, a professor of public health
and medicine at the University of South Florida, Schiavo took
his wife to California in 1990 for experimental treatment and
himself received specialized training as a nurse to assist in
her care. Wolfson dismissed accusations that Michael Schiavo abused
Terri, writing, the evidence is incontrovertible that he
gave his heart and soul to her treatment and care.
Wolfson addedwith a human empathy entirely absent from
the right-wing attacks on Michael SchiavoThe Schindlers
and the Schiavos are normal, decent people who have found themselves
within the construct of an exceptional circumstance which none
of them, indeed, few normal people could have imagined.
That leaves the charge that Michael Schiavo is a fortune hunter,
supposedly profiting from the million-dollar malpractice settlement
from a lawsuit which he and the Schindlers filed over Terris
initial medical care. (This is the type of suit that the Bush
administration would eliminate if its planned legislation against
medical malpractice claims passes Congress in the next few months).
Letter writer LRP writes: I wonder, though, why you neglected
to mention that Mr. Schiavo showed no interest in the demise of
his wife for several years, until a malpractice suit was decided
in her favor for $1,000,000. Now, if he has no interest in the
money, he can simply divorce her.
RC from British Columbia writes: Had her husband not
been more interested in the million-plus dollars he got when he
sued the hospital, a girl friend he lives with along with a child,
and had he allowed physical therapy while she could still feed
herselfshe might be further along than she is.
The 1993 medical malpractice award provided $750,000 for Terris
medical care and upkeep, all but $40,000 of which has been spent.
The depletion of those funds is not a factor in the current dispute
over terminating life support, because the hospice is not charging
for her care. Michael Schiavo received in addition a payment of
$300,000 for his suffering from the loss of his wife, and for
the large amount of time he spent taking care of her in her vegetative
state.
Wolfsons report addresses the charges of financial motivation
as well, finding no grounds for them, and reporting there was
no evidence in the record of the trust administration documents
of any mismanagement of Theresas estate, and the records
on this matter are excellently maintained.
There is one final unsigned letter to the WSWS worth noting.
It comments:
Oh shut up. Let them intervene, why on earth do you have
to analyze the crap out of everything? Is it so hard to believe
that maybe, just maybe, people actually sincerely believe in Terry
Schiavos cause? Whoever wrote this is a warped individual.
The writers complaint why on earth do you have
[to] analyze sums up the position of the religious zealots.
They oppose science. They oppose political analysis. Indeed, they
oppose thought itself. They make an appeal to unreasoning emotion.
They wallow in ignorance and prejudice and seek to impose their
bigotry on the American people.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |