Joseph Sobran’s
Washington Watch

Mr. and Mrs. Schiavo

(Reprinted from the issue of March 31, 2005)

As I write, time is running out for Terri Schiavo. She may die as her family makes last-minute appeals for her. We don’t know exactly what she is going through; but we have some idea of their anguish. And that deserves some separate attention.

In warfare, “collateral damage” means unintended injury and destruction to people and property who happen to be too close to an intended military target. Most murders likewise cause severe unintended suffering to those close to the victim, though the murderer typically cares little about that.

I thought of the phrase “collateral damage” for the pain the Schindler family felt as Michael Schiavo tried to get the courts to end the life of his disabled wife. At the moment, she is reported to be fading fast; her plight has suddenly seized the complete attention of the whole country, which had hardly noticed it for years.

The Schindlers’ suffering appears not to concern Schiavo. His only goal seems to be to relieve himself of Terri. On the other hand, nobody thought Terri’s parents were acting out of malice or callousness toward him: Their only goal was to save their daughter. If he has ceased to love her as a spouse, they still love her as their child.

Why didn’t Michael Schiavo, then, just divorce Terri, allowing them to care for her? “That will never happen,” he told a CBS interviewer; “I made a promise to Terri.”

Can he be serious? He also made a promise to be faithful to Terri unto death, but he’s living with another woman by whom he already has two children and whom he calls his “fiancée.” That word tells us his intentions toward Terri. Ah, the sanctity of the marital bond! While living in adultery, he actually uses his wedding vows as an excuse to seek her death.

Are we to think she would have wanted her family to go through this? (And for all we know, she is aware of what is happening.)

Michael’s legal position, according to his lawyers, is that he is “protecting” Terri’s rights; which implies that her parents are trying to violate her rights — by preserving her life! But we have only his highly dubious word that Terri told him she’d prefer death to living in her present state (which she could hardly have imagined at the age of 26, when a heart attack disabled her). And he only “remembered” this seven years after she was stricken. Now he also “remembers” pledging to honor this wish?

And, by the way, did she also make a reciprocal pledge to him? Before Terri was stricken, they were both young, and such a situation must have seemed hypothetical. If they discussed it seriously, they couldn’t have known which of them might be afflicted; why would they assume it would be Terri rather than Michael whose life would hang in the balance? Did they somehow know in advance, when they were both healthy, which of them would need help?

All this is even fishier than Robert Blake’s alibi about his wife’s murder (somebody shot her while he was ducking back into the restaurant to retrieve his pistol).

One of the nurses who has treated Mrs. Schiavo has recalled that her husband was visibly elated whenever her condition took a turn for the worse; he didn’t even conceal his hope, expressed in language too crude to quote here, that she would die as soon as possible.

This nurse also says that Terri seemed to be far more conscious of and responsive to external stimuli than the media have reported; she seemed to be upset, even sweating, after being left alone with Michael. Despite her condition, this nurse also says, Terri also made some efforts to speak.

That is, if this nurse is telling the truth, Michael Schiavo made it clear, even to his wife, that he wanted to be rid of her. He apparently said nothing about having promised to “spare” her a damaged existence.

It seems appropriate, somehow, that Michael Schiavo works as a prison nurse; his conduct would darken a prison warden’s view of human nature.

Yet opinion polls show most Americans on his side; he also enjoys the support of the mainstream media, which monotonously repeat that Terri is in “a persistent vegetative state.”

The media have suddenly rediscovered the sanctity of the marital bond, just in time to serve Michael’s turn. They want to support his legal rights while ignoring his character and the clear pattern of his behavior. He appears cynically ruthless toward both his wife and her parents.
 
The Culture of Death

The merciless American judiciary continues its promotion of the Culture of Death. In a sense, Terri Schiavo was sentenced to die in 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the right to choose supersedes the right to live. With that principle at stake, we can understand the silence of the feminists in a case where a woman’s life is at the mercy of the very man who seeks her death. By the same token, opponents of abortion have rallied to her cause. Both sides realize what’s what.

As Congress tried to save Mrs. Schiavo by emergency legislation, the leading voices in opposition were liberal Democrats, who abruptly recalled that our system is based on federalism, states’ rights, and the separation of powers.

This rang with all the sincerity of Michael Schiavo’s talk of his wedding vows. At bottom the progressives sensed that if Terri could be protected by law, we might be put on a slippery slope that would eventually result in the legal protection of unborn children. Just when you think there is no important difference between the two parties, the Democrats always remind you that there is.

Meanwhile, a leaked Republican memo exulted that the Schiavo case was “a great political issue.” Cynical as that sounds, it may be true — and not necessarily in a good sense. This issue may rally Christians for the Republicans in much the way abortion has; that is, it may energize those enraged and frustrated voters — as long as nothing actually gets done. [But see the correction in the Wanderer column for April 7, which will be posted April 28.   — Ed.]
 
Legal Presumption

The law quaintly presumes an identity of interest between spouses. It presumes that they will naturally want the best for each other, especially when one of them is in a parlous state. Generally this is true, but the exceptions are too common to ignore.

To put it simply, who really wants what’s best for Terri — her husband or her parents? The answer is only too obvious. Michael Schiavo has long since ceased considering himself her husband, except for legal purposes. The only “duty” toward her he acknowledges is one that would conveniently release him from all further duties as a husband.

His “fiancée” would be well advised not to rely too heavily on his devotion, in sickness or in health.


SOBRAN’S asks whether “till death do you part” now means “till one of you decides to pull the plug.” If you have not seen my monthly newsletter yet, give my office a call at 800-513-5053 and request a free sample, or better yet, subscribe for two years for just $85. New subscribers get two gifts with their subscription. More details can be found at the Subscription page of my website.

Already a subscriber? Consider a gift subscription for a priest, friend, or relative.

Joseph Sobran