Terri Schiavo, the right-to-die and critical Christian response
Do people have the right to die? Terri Schiavo's case centers on this issue. Also surrounding the devatate are issues such as:
* Whether an individual has the right to take their own lives and
* if so under what circumstances and when?
However, we should not forget the important issues that have led up to this debate:
* how and why have we arrived at this point in the road?
* what are the things we have done so far but have left undone?
* what can we as individuals and as a group of believers in Christ do in this case?
How and why we arrived at this point
1. Medical advances: in the last twenty years or so, medical science has advanced to the point where we are abel to sustain the life of people almost indefintely. In the past, we were seldom confronted with this as most people in such medical health could not survive for so long. However, just because we can prolong people's life with medical science, does it mean we should?
2. Medical failures: the advancement of medical technology has not kept pace with pain or palliative care. Part of the problem in cases like Terri Schiavo touches on the issue of pain and long-term care.
3. Societal change. American society has traditionally reserved the right of decision-making most heavily to adults who have reached the age of consent (typically 21 for all purposes that are concerned). When people marry, the right of decision-making most heavily then falls between the husband and the wife. The parents typically have little to say concerning their decisions unless financial distress or other life crisis issues arrive (such as the current debate). However, when certain issues that touch on fundamental human rights such as child abuse, etc. occurs within the nuclear family household, the government has a vested interest to intervene. The right to privacy in such cases cannot trump over an abuse of human rights.
4. Both sides have still framed the discussion in terms of hospital care. This is a reflection of societal and cultural change in America. For many traditional societies around the world still, the supervision of dying people still occurs in the home settings under the presence of family members. We are seeing some return of this even in American society. Economics play a major role in this as well in traditional societies as the lack of finances to pay for hospital care or lack of good medical facilities in such places are a factor. In these settings, not only the family but neighbors may also be involved as a community to help the family undergoing stress and emotional duress. Modern life has shifted the care of dying people to the hospital. While this provides better medical expertise and care, it can come at the expense of community support of not just the dying but also the family undergoing stress.
In light of the above, we have a clash of worldviews between those who advocate her right-to-die and those who would like to continue her feeding and extending her life. Schiavo's right-to-die is framed in terms of (1) personal privacy issues between husband and wife (2) Terri's individfual wishes (according to Michael, her spouse) to die and (3) value of human life (as defined as brain-aware and functioning vs brain-dead or impaired). Taken fairly, these are fundamental American values of freedom of the individual and right of consent to the couple. However, right-to-life advocartes for Terri see it in terms of (1) human right abuse (ending of a human soul, soul being defined not just as brain-dead necessarily) thus (2) the sanction and permission of the state to intervene appropriately.
What are the the things we have done but left undone?
Are both sides right or is one wrong? My contention is that both sides have missed the point if we view it in the totality of history, culture and society in light of the Bible and our job as Christians in response to this issue. What are they?
1. Society has to decide which is more important - the sanctity of the spousal relationship (which is fundamentally Biblical) or the right of the state to intervene on the basis of human rights (which may or may not be Biblical, depending on the case).
2. Right-to-die advocate have bought into the scientific-medical worldview that death is cessation of brainwave activity. This is unbiblical. The Bible notes in Gen 1 that humans are made in the image of God and all people have their dignity in God based first not on what they can do for God but as a fundamental reflection and of our Creator.
3. Both sides have framed the discussion in terms of hospital care. This is not necessarily biblical nnor unbiblical but a relection of the societal and cultural change in America. If Terri's right-to-life advocates win the day, who is there to care for Terri besides the doctors and possible the Schindlers (Terri's parents)? Was there some other reason that originally led Micheal to stop the feeding for Terri (besides her apparent decision to do so?) If so, was it the emotional pain and duress that Michael went through alone that no Christian was there to minister? Also, were there any Christians involved in the hospital throughout these many years?
What you can do
As individuals
1. Pray for all involved. Pray for Michael that God would minister to him and bring him to know God and to a closer experience of God's love and the peace of Christ through the presence of the Holy Spirit. The enemy is Satan, not people, who opposes all kinds of life. People may simply be pawns in his plans. Id we are alive, he may try to rob people of the joy in living to turn them away from God.
2. Raise awareness of the deeper issues involved in this matter. It is not simply a matter of right -to-life or die but how we as a society treat those who are dying. If you already have an interest in this case, make sure the dying and their family members in your community are cared for consistently by you or Christian neighbors. If not, we Christian may have no one to blame but ourselves if in their loneliness and pain, people decide to exit this life.
3. Advocate for laws and changes in medical care for the pained and dying. Yes, petitioning the government to stop tube removal is one step but Christians cannot stop there. Once Terri Schiavo's case goes away from the limelight, does our care and concern for the dying then stop? Are we willing to still advocate and write to the government for laws and changes in medical care and practice that affects the dying? If not, we Christians may be hypocritical in being concerned only for the moment but not do something for the long-term transformation as to how the medical profession treats the dead. Unfortunately, while certain Christian groups have been excellent at organizing protests or raising the issue of Terri's tube removal, they have been silent in these other issues. For example, caring for patients in pain has not been a top prority among the medical procession. If you know of medical doctors of Christians who work in hospitals, petition for them to make it an issue. Write to your doctor, Christian or not as well as HMI who only care for the bottom line and who might benefit from the stopping of such care. Has anyone notices that silence of the HMO on Terri's case? Right-to-die is not just a matter of life but also of economics. True Christian and mission response addresses not just individuals but also transforms society and its practices.
As a church, para-church or non-profit organization:
1. Support and encourage people in your midst to consider hospital chaplaincy as a calling for Christian work.
2. Organize a Christian compassion team to do outreach to hospital and residential care patients to pray and care for them, assist with the chaplains and do Christian mission.
3. Form a cooperative Christian church network in your area to provide medical insurance not just for your organization's staff but also to help the poor among your congregation and possibly neighbors as well who cannot afford such medical insurance when they are unemployed or work only part-time.
4. Strategize with Christians who work in the health and insurance industry to discuss how the church and Christians as a groupo can engage to do more effective partnerships to transform the insurance industry as well.
Conclusion
Someone said once that death has become the new pornography or obscenity. It is taboo to talk about it unles we have to. It might contaminte or touch us. While it may be so for the general public, let it not be for us Christians in other areas. Ironic isn't it? We can feel comfortable talking about death but not so in advocating for changes in laws or medical or economic practices that affect these issues. The Gospel is not just salvation for individuals but also involves caring for others, whether in medical, emotional or economic distress. It is "to preach good tidings to the poor...to proclain release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord" (Luke 4:18).
Recommended resources and reading:
Thomas Kuhn: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
How science has radically changed our thinking but is a product of culture itself.
Christian Medical and Dental Society: www.cmdahome.org
Resources, networking opportunities, education, and a public voice for Christian healthcare professionals and students.
Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity: www.cbhd.org
Academic and professional resources from Christian physicians and academics.
* Whether an individual has the right to take their own lives and
* if so under what circumstances and when?
However, we should not forget the important issues that have led up to this debate:
* how and why have we arrived at this point in the road?
* what are the things we have done so far but have left undone?
* what can we as individuals and as a group of believers in Christ do in this case?
How and why we arrived at this point
1. Medical advances: in the last twenty years or so, medical science has advanced to the point where we are abel to sustain the life of people almost indefintely. In the past, we were seldom confronted with this as most people in such medical health could not survive for so long. However, just because we can prolong people's life with medical science, does it mean we should?
2. Medical failures: the advancement of medical technology has not kept pace with pain or palliative care. Part of the problem in cases like Terri Schiavo touches on the issue of pain and long-term care.
3. Societal change. American society has traditionally reserved the right of decision-making most heavily to adults who have reached the age of consent (typically 21 for all purposes that are concerned). When people marry, the right of decision-making most heavily then falls between the husband and the wife. The parents typically have little to say concerning their decisions unless financial distress or other life crisis issues arrive (such as the current debate). However, when certain issues that touch on fundamental human rights such as child abuse, etc. occurs within the nuclear family household, the government has a vested interest to intervene. The right to privacy in such cases cannot trump over an abuse of human rights.
4. Both sides have still framed the discussion in terms of hospital care. This is a reflection of societal and cultural change in America. For many traditional societies around the world still, the supervision of dying people still occurs in the home settings under the presence of family members. We are seeing some return of this even in American society. Economics play a major role in this as well in traditional societies as the lack of finances to pay for hospital care or lack of good medical facilities in such places are a factor. In these settings, not only the family but neighbors may also be involved as a community to help the family undergoing stress and emotional duress. Modern life has shifted the care of dying people to the hospital. While this provides better medical expertise and care, it can come at the expense of community support of not just the dying but also the family undergoing stress.
In light of the above, we have a clash of worldviews between those who advocate her right-to-die and those who would like to continue her feeding and extending her life. Schiavo's right-to-die is framed in terms of (1) personal privacy issues between husband and wife (2) Terri's individfual wishes (according to Michael, her spouse) to die and (3) value of human life (as defined as brain-aware and functioning vs brain-dead or impaired). Taken fairly, these are fundamental American values of freedom of the individual and right of consent to the couple. However, right-to-life advocartes for Terri see it in terms of (1) human right abuse (ending of a human soul, soul being defined not just as brain-dead necessarily) thus (2) the sanction and permission of the state to intervene appropriately.
What are the the things we have done but left undone?
Are both sides right or is one wrong? My contention is that both sides have missed the point if we view it in the totality of history, culture and society in light of the Bible and our job as Christians in response to this issue. What are they?
1. Society has to decide which is more important - the sanctity of the spousal relationship (which is fundamentally Biblical) or the right of the state to intervene on the basis of human rights (which may or may not be Biblical, depending on the case).
2. Right-to-die advocate have bought into the scientific-medical worldview that death is cessation of brainwave activity. This is unbiblical. The Bible notes in Gen 1 that humans are made in the image of God and all people have their dignity in God based first not on what they can do for God but as a fundamental reflection and of our Creator.
3. Both sides have framed the discussion in terms of hospital care. This is not necessarily biblical nnor unbiblical but a relection of the societal and cultural change in America. If Terri's right-to-life advocates win the day, who is there to care for Terri besides the doctors and possible the Schindlers (Terri's parents)? Was there some other reason that originally led Micheal to stop the feeding for Terri (besides her apparent decision to do so?) If so, was it the emotional pain and duress that Michael went through alone that no Christian was there to minister? Also, were there any Christians involved in the hospital throughout these many years?
What you can do
As individuals
1. Pray for all involved. Pray for Michael that God would minister to him and bring him to know God and to a closer experience of God's love and the peace of Christ through the presence of the Holy Spirit. The enemy is Satan, not people, who opposes all kinds of life. People may simply be pawns in his plans. Id we are alive, he may try to rob people of the joy in living to turn them away from God.
2. Raise awareness of the deeper issues involved in this matter. It is not simply a matter of right -to-life or die but how we as a society treat those who are dying. If you already have an interest in this case, make sure the dying and their family members in your community are cared for consistently by you or Christian neighbors. If not, we Christian may have no one to blame but ourselves if in their loneliness and pain, people decide to exit this life.
3. Advocate for laws and changes in medical care for the pained and dying. Yes, petitioning the government to stop tube removal is one step but Christians cannot stop there. Once Terri Schiavo's case goes away from the limelight, does our care and concern for the dying then stop? Are we willing to still advocate and write to the government for laws and changes in medical care and practice that affects the dying? If not, we Christians may be hypocritical in being concerned only for the moment but not do something for the long-term transformation as to how the medical profession treats the dead. Unfortunately, while certain Christian groups have been excellent at organizing protests or raising the issue of Terri's tube removal, they have been silent in these other issues. For example, caring for patients in pain has not been a top prority among the medical procession. If you know of medical doctors of Christians who work in hospitals, petition for them to make it an issue. Write to your doctor, Christian or not as well as HMI who only care for the bottom line and who might benefit from the stopping of such care. Has anyone notices that silence of the HMO on Terri's case? Right-to-die is not just a matter of life but also of economics. True Christian and mission response addresses not just individuals but also transforms society and its practices.
As a church, para-church or non-profit organization:
1. Support and encourage people in your midst to consider hospital chaplaincy as a calling for Christian work.
2. Organize a Christian compassion team to do outreach to hospital and residential care patients to pray and care for them, assist with the chaplains and do Christian mission.
3. Form a cooperative Christian church network in your area to provide medical insurance not just for your organization's staff but also to help the poor among your congregation and possibly neighbors as well who cannot afford such medical insurance when they are unemployed or work only part-time.
4. Strategize with Christians who work in the health and insurance industry to discuss how the church and Christians as a groupo can engage to do more effective partnerships to transform the insurance industry as well.
Conclusion
Someone said once that death has become the new pornography or obscenity. It is taboo to talk about it unles we have to. It might contaminte or touch us. While it may be so for the general public, let it not be for us Christians in other areas. Ironic isn't it? We can feel comfortable talking about death but not so in advocating for changes in laws or medical or economic practices that affect these issues. The Gospel is not just salvation for individuals but also involves caring for others, whether in medical, emotional or economic distress. It is "to preach good tidings to the poor...to proclain release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord" (Luke 4:18).
Recommended resources and reading:
Thomas Kuhn: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
How science has radically changed our thinking but is a product of culture itself.
Christian Medical and Dental Society: www.cmdahome.org
Resources, networking opportunities, education, and a public voice for Christian healthcare professionals and students.
Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity: www.cbhd.org
Academic and professional resources from Christian physicians and academics.
posted by Beng Cher at 4:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home