Crystal Clear does a great job exposing the clear bias against Terri Schiavo in the Orlando Sentinel’s article, Courts expected to settle Schiavo's fate this week. Not surprising, the article also contains reference to the feeding-tube myth:
Early this week, the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Lakeland or Pinellas Circuit Judge George W. Greer could end her parents' seven-year legal battle to keep their daughter alive, paving the way for her husband to carry out what he says were her wishes and remove the feeding tube that sustains her unconscious state.Crystal points out the inaccuracy in using "unconscious state" since Terri recognizes and responds to others and makes attempts to verbally communicate. She is conscious.
The feeding tube inaccuracy, eluded to by both Crystal and Lilac Rose, is in the phrase "remove the feeding tube that sustains". This statement, used regularly in the mainstream media, makes it sound like Terri Schiavo is on life support that artificially sustains her.
Terri is healthy and is not on life support. She does need someone to feed her through a removable tube which experts testify would not be needed if she were given therapy. Terri is healthy but requires assistance eating. She currently might not be able to swallow (adequate tests have been blocked) although a nurse testified that she covertly fed Terri Jello and medical experts have stated their opinion that Terri is able to swallow.
This assisted feeding is a natural means of preserving life and not a medical act of life support. In addition, the feeding tube is detachable, only inserted during feedings. Michael will not have to cut the line or withdraw the tube. Rather, he will order health care workings to stop feeding his wife.
Many people, including small children and the sick and impaired, require someone else to feed them, often through feeding tubes. We never talk about this as if it were “unnatural” or an artificial means of sustaining life.
So, let’s call the “removal of the feeding tube” what it truly is: withholding food and water for the purpose of causing death. This latter statement is far more accurate and while strong, not strong enough.
Along these lines, it should be obvious that the only outcome of withholding food and water from Terri is death by starvation or dehydration. This is not "allowing death to occur" but causing it by not giving something that Terri’s guardians are morally obligated to provide.
Did you see the other article Maya Bell wrote trying to compare one case of a feeding tube being removed with this case, it was very obvious she was trying to suggest that since this family removed their daughter's feeding tube, the Schindler's did too. I was so upset and frustrated at the article, I wrote a post about it (of course!), then promptly revised that post into an email to Maya and the editor...keep up the great work Tim in exposing the media's blatant bias against Terri's life and her family!
Okay...I know we are all outraged by the Terri case...but if a video (current one) could be provided that shows Terri active and responding to people and shown on the net it would raise public appeal. Do you have any way of getting a video? If you do I could find a blog to host it. Selah?
Check here:
http://hyscience.typepad.com/hyscience/2005/02/the_video_micha.html
and here:
http://www.terrisfight.org