Terri's Right

If you think the Terri Schiavo debate is about the right to die, you are sadly mistaken. It is about the right to kill.

Here, where there is a question regarding the wishes of someone who cannot speak for oneself, the default decision is death. Where there is not clear and consistent evidence of a person's wishes, the burden of proof is imposed against life.

But life is the highest of our inalienable rights. Life should be the default choice where wishes are unclear. The purpose of the living will is to define specifically the means by which a person wouldn't want their life supported. Everyone else is presumed to want to live. Is it now our position that if you'd want to live, you'd better specify it in writing?

Some argue that Terri's condition is a poor definition of life. But if you base your argument on Terri's condition, you're missing the point. Her EEG shows a flat line, but what does that mean? The EEG can only tell us what to expect for Terri based on what we've observed in all the other patients who've had the same EEG results. It doesn't provide us with any actual understanding about the experience of being a person with a flat line EEG. While it's reasonable to assume that flat-liners cannot think, it's not hard proof. You may decide that this is enough for you. We have no clear, convincing evidence what Terri would have decided.

This is not to say that there is no evidence at all. Her husband and his family have stated that she made comments, (not conversation) that she wouldn't want to be kept alive by tubes and machines. At best this is hearsay, and wouldn't even be admissible in a criminal trial. And while a spouse's testimony should carry a lot of weight, it doesn't deserve status beyond question. Terri's family has provided reasonable evidence that Michael is a bad agent. What if this case were Laci and Scott instead of Terri and Michael?

We don't know what Terri wanted. The evidence is in debate. If, in the future, we find we were wrong to keep her alive, we can change our course. If, in the future, we find we were wrong to kill her, then what?

P.S. read this at MVRWC