The Schiavo Case: The Aftermath
While Terri Schiavo didn't have a health care directive (power of attorney or living will), her situation has led some commentators to ponder the moral and practical value of such documents.
In this Weekly Standard article, Eric Cohen approaches the following question: "What do we owe those who are not dead or dying but profoundly disabled and permanently dependent?" Here's part of his answer, as it pertains to health care directives:
"...[E]ven if such individuals made their desires clearly known while they were still competent, is it always right to follow their instructions--to be the executors of their living wills--even if it means being their willing executioners? For some, it is an article of faith that individuals should decide for themselves how to be cared for in such cases. And no doubt one response to the Schiavo case will be a renewed call for living wills and advance directives--as if the tragedy here were that Michael Schiavo did not have written proof of Terri's desires. But the real lesson of the Schiavo case is not that we all need living wills; it is that our dignity does not reside in our will alone, and that it is foolish to believe that the competent person I am now can establish, in advance, how I should be cared for if I become incapacitated and incompetent. "
Andrew Sullivan takes Mr. Cohen to task here. I tend to agree with Mr. Sullivan, but I did find Mr. Cohen's opinion to be pretty thought-provoking (once I began to ignore his fairly obvious bias). If we can get past the sloganeering ("murderer" vs. "religious freak"), and really have a public discussion about the morality of end-of-life decisions, that would be a very good thing (is it happening a bit in the Catholic church?). My guest and I try to do this a bit in my first podcast, which should be posted sometime this week.
Bookmark: 
