Terri Schiavo…Now The Issue Gets Deeper
March 24th, 2005 | by Todd W |I haven’t commented much on Terri Schiavo, mostly because the notion that she should be kept alive seemed self-evident to me. I have pointed you over to The Bandwagon where Jody has been doing a yeoman’s job banging a drum much in need of banging.
But now that the issue is moving forward, I feel compelled to post.
Unfortunately for me, the stark contrast of the issue has given way to the legalistic gray. I wake to a less clear position.
First, my opinions…
Michael Schiavo is a horrible human being, worthy of the strongest possible opprobrium.
Terri Schiavo, seen in the various videos, is far from a vegetative state. There can be no doubt she is severely impaired, but no reasonable person can maintain that she is comatose and nonresponsive.
Ultimately, Mr. Schiavo’s custody over Terri needs to be examined under the appropriate laws. If her case is not an example of custodial abuse, then the laws are in serious need of modification.
Given all of that, the removal of her feeding tube on Friday was a horrible thing, and like everyone else, I hoped for a speedy resolution to restore the tube.
Unfortunately, I’m not sure that Congressional action is appropriate within the greater context of the function of the Republic.
In essence, we have had a state matter seized by the Federal system, simply because a large section of the electorate was unhappy with the events occurring in a State in which they don’t even reside. My understanding of the situation so far indicates the entire matter was being handled under State law. Congress has now decided to kick the process over to Federal court, superseding Florida law. I’m not entirely clear about what happens next, but we will either have the Custodial issue decided under the Federal system, or the Federal government will order Florida to modify their own law. I’m open to further explanation if someone knows more than I do at the moment.
Fundamentally, I’m not sure this Federal intervention, regardless of the ‘goodness’ of the intent, is the proper way to move forward given the long view of individual liberty. There is a tragic irony in a situation where extending protection to a helpless individual may harm the larger principle of individual freedom. While this isn’t equitable to the Civil War, it does mirror an interesting paradox. The Slave States invoked individual freedom to enslave individuals, while the Federal government invoked the primacy of the Federal Government to subjugate States in the name of individual rights.
The Schiavo case shouldn’t have come to this. The Florida system should have been more responsive to the potential custodial abuse. The Florida electorate should have been more effective at getting the attention of local politicians. Florida voters are now aware of their gutless politicians, and should they retain them next cycle, well…shame on them.
Given all of that, my discomfort is tempered by an unresolved issue. Provided a State fails to observe the basic protections of the helpless, at what point is Federal intervention justified? There is no question in my mind that any Federal action is harmful of our long term freedoms, but when the State fails in its responsibility to safeguard our freedoms, then perhaps we deserve an incremental loss of our rights. After all, the State is composed of officials we select, and it appears that we are failing our own self-interest when we refuse to weigh the seriousness of our choice of local representation.
We shouldn’t be surprised when our Federal government continues to grow. Not when the ethical concern of starving a woman to death becomes irresolvable at the State level. Shame on us all.
