The value of life and how one perceives its application in nature is subject to two distinct systems of rationale. The mystic who believes in a higher power that will judge their application of his edict here on earth sides with caution in his perception of where and when the value of life is applicable. The realist who may or may not believe in that same higher power, but disagrees with this value, holds a perception not nearly as absolute. Whereas the mystic applies the recognition of life in a way that categorizes a non-believer as one who condones murder, the realist does not participate in the discussion using such extremes. It’s this difference in how both perceive and express their beliefs on the topic that prevents any meaningful dialog from taking place.
At issue is where the value is applicable and where it is not. To the mystic everything from the cluster of cells known as an embryo on up to the grown adult being kept alive by machines fall under the same definition. The existence of a heartbeat is not the standard, nor is the ability to perceive one’s own existence. The definition of what constitutes ‘life’ for the mystic is based entirely on the value system of everyone but the organism in question. The mystic’s goal is to empathize with the perceived life, not from the position of what can be known by the embryo, fetus or body on life support, but from their own knowledge or hope of what ‘could be’ in the future. The inability of life to recognize it’s own existence does not come into play in determining whether or not there is any leniency in considering the act itself to be murder. Nor does the possibility of becoming a healthy human being matter in terms of the probability of it actually happening. The man walking down the street is given as much consideration as the embryo that may or may not develop once inserted into a uterus, or the terminally ill patient with half of a brain liquefied and no chance of recovery.
The realist’s perception takes these factors into account and judges on a case by case basis. An organism that cannot be aware of it’s own existence is incapable of feeling, and therefore will never realize the beginning or the end. In the case of a terminally ill patient on life support, the realist who believes in an afterlife will in fact consider the ending of life as the beginning of something else. To them the act of ‘pulling the plug’ is not an act of murder, but instead an act of mercy. They are allowing this life, currently in limbo, to ascend to heaven and therefore are doing the right thing. For the realist who does not believe in an afterlife, but understands that as all life began at one point, so must it end, views ‘pulling the plug’ as a normal and healthy occurence in nature. Whether he fears death himself or not, there is an understanding that to prevent nature from running it’s course would not be for the sake of the patient, but rather for his own sake. By denying reality and allowing emotions to dictate actions, the focus then shifts from the patient’s needs to the maintenance of his own happiness. It is the non-existence of a programed yes or no answer bearing the burden of God’s judgment that provides man the ability to act in a truly empathetical way towards the patient when the time has come to let go.
In the Terri Schiavo case we see this play out almost exactly. As doctors had told the family that she had no chance of recovery for years, and an autopsy posthumously confirmed that diagnosis, the argument in favor of ‘life’ is made with the mystic’s assumption that the reality of nature should be inconsequential in deciding their actions. That Terri was unable to perceive her own existence was not considered by her parents as truth, and in this denial of what nature had made clear over a number of years, they perceived advocacy for their own needs instead as advocacy for Terri. The villain in this case, her husband, recognized the reality that nature had shown him and decided to allow it to run it’s course. Whether or not he believes in an afterlife, I don’t know, but if he did, this would be a perfect example of the realist who feels they are providing mercy by pulling the plug. It is in the public debate of this case though, where the issue of ‘life’ comes into play, and sides are taken in the way I described above. The mystic considers Terri, unable to perceive her own existence, as a life that has not already been lost. The realist considers Terri’s life already over, with nature on hold, waiting for humanity to end the conversation and return her body to the ground.
The amount of space that lies between the mystic and the realist on the topic of life is vast, and there’s nothing I can think of that could bridge the gap besides a philosophical dialog. As we saw in the Schaivo case, facts don’t carry a lot of weight in the politics of the religious-right. Jeb Bush has kept the ball in the air now by opening an investigation into Michael’s actions on the night Terri’s heart stopped. He has also given credence to the diagnosises of doctors who wrongly stated that she could have made a recovery with treatment. One of these doctors by the name of William Hammesfahr, made appearances on Joe Scarborough’s program and Hannity and Colmes from outside of Terri’s hospice. He was introduced as a Nobel Prize nominee, and referred to as such eight times by Sean Hannity in a one hour program. Of course that’s not true, he’s never been nominated for a Nobel Prize. What is true though, is Dr. Hammesfahr said that Terri could eat and swallow, one day walk on her own, and that when he examined her he found injuries consistent with strangulation. He’s been called a “self-promoter” who had “offered no names, no case studies, no videos and no test results to support his claim” that he had successfully treated patients even worse off than Schiavo. These were the words of Florida judge George Greer, who was in charge of the Schiavo case.
And this represents what could be the largest reason for the disconnect between the mystics and the realists in the discussion over what constitutes as ‘life’. Because that’s not what it’s about at all. This issue is the bastard child that came from the consummation of a marriage between the religious-right and the Republican party that never should have been. The politicians have forgotten who they work for, and their actions are increasingly motivated by the idea that God comes before country. They’re in positions of power that are essential towards ensuring this country remains alive and well long after they’re gone. When the struggle for power and recruitment of one religion takes precedent over maintaining the long term well being of the country, the system atrophies, hypocrisy reigns, people suffer. We have the Dark Ages, Middle Ages and Hundred Years War for proof of this. If you add up the number of ‘facts’ that were ‘fixed’ throughout the Schiavo case, it stacks up so high, the only way to keep it from falling is to pretend up is down, wrong is right, and your brother is your enemy. The question now is whether Jeb Bush and his party will continue to soil the sheets and turn what should be a matter of personal privacy into a blasphemous wedge destined to tear the flag in two.
Another excellent post, Chris. 🙂
I think that as medical science and technology become even more sophisticated we will see more and more of these gray areas appear. We need to be having those dialogs you mention in an atmosphere of calm, respect and dignity, so that people are able to see past their points of view (perception filters) to get to the truth. It could be that neither mystic nor realist is “right”….
The more I think about the Schiavo case the more I side with parents, the way medical technology is increasing at some point their might have been a way to bring her out of her vegetative state, unlikely but possible, so why not let these people have their hopes and get them off my TV.
with that said if every person in a vegetative condition was made a ward of the state, and the expense for caring for these people was born by the state, the expense would cripple an already stressed medical system.
And as a snarky comment maybe Terry Schiavo could have been Hannity’s co-host. I doubt she would talk much less than Combs
There was absolutely nothing that modern medicine could have done. And the concept of her parents keeping her alive in this condition for years kind of makes me sick. I can spend five hundred bucks on the lottery tomorrow and justify it to someone that I did it in ‘hope’ that I’d hit the number…but most people would take a realistic stance on what I did and rightly say I was an idiot.
Unless this was another application of the ‘sarcasm font’…
No sarcasm, my point is that it really does not matter. If I was in that state I would want to die, but would I even know I was alive? The fact that Mr Schiavo was willing to endure everything that the parents put him through to carry out his wifes wishes shows he did care. If I am ever in that a vegitative state and someone offers my wife a million dollars for me I would hope she would take it.
Essentially she was an inanimate object, you are right that hoping for a cure is unrealistic but why not let the parents have their hopes.
This case does show that stem cell research might be a good thing, although I think prayer is the only acceptable treatment for the Schindler types.
the realist who believes in an afterlife will in fact consider the ending of life as the beginning of something else.
Would the realist even believe in an afterlife? It’s been a while since philosophy class but I think the realist only believes in the empirical.
The fact that Mr Schiavo was willing to endure everything that the parents put him through to carry out his wifes wishes shows he did care.
Care about money? He had a huge interest in her dying and everything to lose if she lived. It would have destroyed his life if she were to wake up one day, this guy was so conflicted in his interest I don’t see how the left can’t see it, or at least admit to it.
The villain in this case, her husband, recognized the reality that nature had shown him and decided to allow it to run it’s course.
The reality in this case is that if she woke up he would lose almost everything in the ensuing divorce. Just living was threatening his finances and his relationship with his mistress. Again, everything for him was at risk the longer she lived.
The question now is whether Jeb Bush and his party will continue to soil the sheets and turn what should be a matter of personal privacy into a blasphemous wedge destined to tear the flag in two.
The issue is about how we treat the disabled and what rights they have when they can’t speak for themselves. Everyone should have living wills and medical powers of atorney but many don’t. For those who don’t leave directives what do we do with them as a society.
Letting the husband have control over Terri with all the conflicts of interest he had was like letting a pedophile run a daycare center. Are we a society that discards people who can’t speak up? We already do it to children and it’s a disgrace I’d hate to think that people in comas are next.
Then it’s the retarded and then it’s the elderly and then it’s all those who don’t “contribute” to society. The people who had the power to protect Terri fell down on the job and gave her life to someone who needed her dead to move on with his life in a financially comfortable manner.
HA – I was drawing on some memories of books read – and over the years have created my own version of it all. The realist can believe in an afterlife in this situation, as there’s a clear difference between the hardline right-wing Christian and the rest of the Christians out there. I’ve read a lot from moderate Christians who have a point of view that’s very ‘realist’ when it comes to the Terri Shaivo case.
I was reading something a while back about Goldwater conservatives, and something that tends to get lost in the mix when it came to Goldwater was how anti-extreme religion he was. I’d bet that many of the Republicans on capitol hill who sing his praises and side with the evangelicals on this issue would stumble over their words if this was brought up in an interview. Not a Senator…not someone like Frist, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Tom Delay got crossed up with this.
The judge presiding over the case stated that Michael’s devotion to Terri in the years following her collapse was anything but what you described here. In fact, he spent a significant portion of his malpractice money on her care.
It was pretty clear that she wasn’t going to wake up. That is, to everyone but her parents. The reality of this case is that she was never going to wake up, and Michael just managed to accept it when the doctors told him it was so.
Right, it was clear that she wasn’t going to recover. The autopsy vindicated Michael’s actions completely. Half of her bain had liquefied for God’s sake. And if he did believe in an afterlife, forcing the neverending beat of her heart in lieu of heaven was the worst crime in all of this. And I’m sorry, but if I were in that state, Heather would rightfully call the shots regardless of what my parents had to say about it. What’s crystal clear to me in all of this is that the Schindlers are a very disturbed bunch.
It was pretty clear that she wasn’t going to wake up. That is, to everyone but her parents. The reality of this case is that she was never going to wake up, and Michael just managed to accept it when the doctors told him it was so.
You talk in absolutes when you just guessed like everyone else. But there was no way to know this until her skull was cut open. Remember, there were many physicians who said that she wasn’t vegitative or could make progress with the therapy she never got. Once she was dead and the skull cracked open it was just luck for Michael that her condition was bad.
Right, it was clear that she wasn’t going to recover. The autopsy vindicated Michael’s actions completely.
It wasn’t that clear, the autopsy just confirmed some people guessed right and some guessed wrong. You yourself are using the autopsy as proof it was ok to kill Terri. The problem I have is the automatic decision that she was gone. Had we done the samething to that firefighter who came back after 10 years in coma it wold be murder.
Sure, now we know the extent of the damage for sure but an alarming number of people were just fine with ending her life on speculation, if the autopsy showed damage hey, we guessed right, and if the autopsy showed something else then it oh well, I’m no doctor anyway. The next Terri might not be so lucky, so is it our American policy now to assume people are brain dead and end their life with the yank of the tube? Do we say look at Shiavo, she was brain dead, lets get rid of all these other “brain dead” people who are draining our resources just like Terri did?
What’s crystal clear to me in all of this is that the Schindlers are a very disturbed bunch.
America gambled with their daughter’s life by killing her right in front of her parents and hoping the autopsy vindicates the decision. I think I can lend a little compassion to parents who have to bury their child, not that they know where their dead child is buried or that they ddn’t get to go to funeral services.
If I have a daughter, this michael guy is the stuff of my nightmares. A fathers worst nighmare of they type of person his daughter might end up with.
Oh, no – this had been settled a long time ago, and the doctors who treated her knew very well that she wasn’t coming out of it. They just didn’t want to believe it. Have you seen the outrageous claims Dr. Hamisfar (sp?) made about her condition? That she could walk again, that she could eat and swallow…he’d never provided proof that he’d rehabilitated someone in her condition. They were clinging on to whoever would lie to them and tell them that everything was going to be alright.
The autopsy confirmed what doctors had said about Terri for years and years. They refused to accept it.
It wasn’t a ‘guess’. Modern medicine provides us the capibility to know that the human brain is not healthy. A CAT-scan is what they call it I believe. It was a matter of the doctors saying she was in a vegitative state, Michael taking their word for it, and her parents denying reality.
Let’s not pretend that the autopsy was a surprise. The significance of the autopsy was that for once her personal medical condition was able to be released in full to the public. Her medical records were not available to the public, and that’s what allowed for these allegations and claims to gain so much steam. Dr. Hamisfar (sp?) lied. He flat out lied, as did a number of other people.
This was known well before the autopsy came out. The autopsy was official and indisputable…that’s what’s made it significant. Everything before that was whatever anyone wanted to pretend it was.