And No, the Pope Is Not the Same Situation Over Again

An incredibly intelligent being (yes, that's sarcasm) dropped me a note today in e-mail saying (and I paraphrase mostly because the spelling and grammar makes it a puzzle): "You got your wish and killed [Terri Schiavo] - Ed note: gee, you'd think they'd get the name right] - so now I bet you want to kill the pope, too."

Gee, yeah, that's my plan. Reduce world over population by killing off people. I am soooo fucking powerful. ::rolling eyes::

While shades of gray are apt to escape anyone who thinks like this person, let me state the obvious. No, I don't want to "kill" the Pope. I didn't want to "kill" Terri Schiavo either.

After long and frequent court review, Terri's husband was deemed as the person both best able to serve as her guardian as well as telling the truth that his wife had expressed a desire not to be kept alive after some catastrophe took away the rest of her life. I supported her right to choose and a judicial process that - after frequent argument over details - ruled the ending of her life was what Terri would have wanted. Would that we all had the careful judicial review on far more important cases as this one received.

It's never been a matter of me - or almost anyone else - wanting Terri to die. We wanted her rights respected and the direction of her guardian respected. This was FINALLY done after years of interventions and tamperings without legal merit. But I suspect most of us with a similar opinion would have been right there to cheer Terri had she made some miraculous recovery. But we know brains don't do that.

The Pope is a whole other kettle of gold-plated fish. As the head of the church charged with upholding Church doctrine and from his supposedly personal comments otherwise, it's clear that this man would not see a feeding tube as true external life support and that he thinks it is wrong to end life support.

If somebody wants to spend 20, 40, or even 100 years on life support, I don't think anyone has any more right to prevent them from doing so than had the right to insist Terri Schiavo continued to live in her state. For the pope, who will have perpetual care, that's fine. If he lived to age 270, it would be hard for him to wipe out the Vatican City accounts enough to bankrupt the church.

Most people, however, do not have unlimited resources or people who can care for them in a coma or persistent vegetative state years on end. I've helped care for more than a half dozen people in such states and it's grueling even when the family happens to have the money.

Thus, most people do not reach the state of Terri Schiavo where she was still technically alive after more than 15 years in her state. Why? Because there isn't money or people or resources to carry that burden.

The president must recognize this because he signed into law a provision that says health facilities can terminate care - even if the family objects - simply based on whether the patient can pay. No pay, no life support unless you can find another hospital to take you on for free (doesn't happen often). This law has led to the deaths of many people in Terri's shape, or better or worse than Mrs. Schiavo.