| <><> MEDIA CIRCUS<><> |
|
|
|
|
|
Terri Schiavo and Us
by Mary Johnson
The core issues remain the same: Protection of the life and dignity of people under guardianship, and a high standard of proof in removing food and water from a person who can not express their own wishes. These are issues of great concern to the disability community.
When the long-awaited results of Terri Schiavo's autopsy were made public last week, there were no real surprises. The lack of surprise meant really that nothing had changed: the facts of Terri Schiavo's last weeks, like the facts of her life before her trauma, are subject to debate.
All we will ever be able to really know with certainty is how she affected us.
We know that politicians used her for their own ends. We know that she became a symbol both for the right-to-die movement and the right-to-life movement.
We know that she divided the disability community, between those who argued she was a person with a disability and as such should have been afforded disability rights protections, and those who felt the movement was harmed by its insistence on this: that association with right-to-life activists would only hurt the cause of disability rights.
We also know for a fact that most Americans have in truth learned very little from Terri's tragedy: that despite the articles telling us all to be sure our wishes are in writing, and known, the fact is few of us will take action on this: and that is because we don't like thinking of our future disability; don't like preparing for it, believe, probably, that thinking too specifically about it will bring it about.
There's been surprisingly little commentary about the autopsy. The media tired of Terri a few days after she died. Media attention spans shorten a little more each week, it seems; years ago, there'd still be public discussion. No more. The most the autopsy brought forth from the pundits was a kind of "well, that's over; it just proves that (fill in the blank)." What it "proved" was whatever the particular pundit wanted it to prove; nothing more.
What was noticeable, though, was how consistently the point was made that Terri would without a doubt have not "recovered" -- even with "therapy." This point was usually made to justify that Michael did the right thing in removing her food and water to cause her to die. The autopsy showed she was blind as well, it was reported. The blindness went along with the "cannot recover" as justification for ending her life.
Where, one may ask, does that leave disability rights activists?
Some articles:
Autopsy: No hope for Schiavo (U S News & World Report, June 15)
Experts: Recovery was not an option in Schiavo case (June 15)
Our Opinion: Autopsy Vindicates Husband, Doctors, Florida Courts (Miami Herald, June 17)
Lawmakers were wrong to intrude (Newsday, June 17)
Posted June 20, 2005
WHAT DO YOU THINK of what you've just read? Click to tell us. |
ABOUT US | E-MAIL EDITOR | HOME