I’ve pretty much said all I want or need to say here, which is that the case is essentially a family dispute gone very, very bad.
But today I read a piece posted on the blog Horsefeathers that articulated a couple of points that seem not to have been said as yet by anyone (although that’s hard to believe, I guess, with all that’s been written on this one case).
The docs at Horsefeathers are atheists, so they’re not coming at this from a religious point of view. But they still come down on the side of preserving Terri’s life. Here is the quote I find particularly interesting:
We come down on the side of Mrs. Schiavo’s parents. They have, it seems to us, earned the right to assume the burdens of caring for their daughter. They can’t move on to find another daughter, as Mr. Schiavo can move on to find another wife.
I think this is one of the many reasons people find this case so troubling. The idea that a husband–especially one who, as in this case, has “moved on” and begun a new life quite a while ago–can take a child away from parents who cannot “move on” quite so easily, if at all, is, quite simply, heartbreaking.