tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post111177005594716226..comments2024-03-06T03:15:58.539-05:00Comments on <b>THE NEW REFORM CLUB</b>: Death is Rarely EasyHunter Bakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14961831404331998743noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-1111780217398409452005-03-25T14:50:00.000-05:002005-03-25T14:50:00.000-05:00It will be interesting to see whether Sam has any ...It will be interesting to see whether Sam has any response to this, but here's one answer to the you ask:<BR/><BR/>The standard that the Florida court purported to use when making its determination whehter Terri Schiavo should be fed or not was what the patient would have wanted for herself. The court, though, considered the question (and you present the question) as an abstraction and made its determination based on evidence of the abstract(and off the cuff) statements of Terri Schiavo. It necessarily ignored some critical evidence that almost certainly would have been relevant to Terri were *she* making the decision herself. Specifically, her parents have now litigated this matter for a decade and been up and down the state and federal court system numerous times and even secured private legislation in Congress for her benefit. This fight has clearly become central to their lives and one can infer, from that fact, that the mere fact that Terri Schiavo lives gives them tremendous comfort and hope. Were Schiavo deciding, herself, whether she should live or die she would almost certainly take into account her parents' desperate wish that, even in the state she is in, she remain alive. That fact may have been sufficent, whatever she would have wanted for herself in the abstract, to sway her decision.<BR/><BR/>When such things are discussed in the abstract, one tends to think of them solipsisticly and relevant, but probably important, information is ignored. This is a problem inherent in the standard the court purported to apply. It is an even bigger problem, however, for the religious who, as a matter of faith, must recognize that their own lives do not just have meaning to themselves, they have meaning to others -- to God if no one else -- and that the question isn't, and can't be, whether they, themselves, want to go on under the circumstances.<BR/><BR/>Once this is recognized it must also be recognized that faith may require a heroic sacrifice (the Pope is a prominent current example of such sacrifice). At the same time, the law can hardly require all of us to bear our crosses with the fortitude of a saint. It has to provide some mechanism for coming to a determination about what the best thing to do in such situations is. It's hard to believe that it couldn't provide some mechanism a lot less crappy than the one that exists in Florida though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com