Terri Schiavo: The Critical Issue

From LifeDate - Summer 2005

Terri Schiavo: The Critical Issue
by Rev. Dr. James I. Lamb

A Christianity Today poll indicated that 51 percent of “weekly churchgoers” agreed with the federal judge’s March 22 ruling to leave Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube unattached. From calls we are getting at National Lutherans For Life, many Lutherans seem to agree. I believe this is because so many do not really understand the critical issue in this case.

I wonder how many Christians would answer in the affirmative if the question were put this way, “Should Terri Schiavo have been killed because she had a disability?” This is the critical issue.

Some will bristle at this. They do so because the line between killing and allowing someone to die has been blurred. “Pull the plug” some said. But there was no plug to pull. “Her life support should be stopped.” But she was not on life support. “Let her go.” But Terri wasn’t “going” anywhere. To look at the Terri Schiavo case from a Christian perspective, it is critical to understand that TERRI SCHIAVO WAS NOT DYING when her feeding tube was removed.

Certainly, we can and should allow the dying to die. When people are dying, their bodily functions begin to shut down. At this point, some treatments can do more harm than good. Even food and water can be a problem if the body is no longer able to process them. But to remove food and water from someone like Terri, who was very much alive, did not allow her to die, it caused her to die. It killed her.

Should Terri Schiavo have been killed because she had a disability? Some will bristle at this because they did not see Terri as disabled. But is there a fundamental difference between not being able to use portions of your brain and not being able to use your arms? What an insult this is to people with head injuries or mental retardation. People justify such thinking by saying, “I wouldn’t want to live like that.” Well, of course not. No one would want to live like that. But living like that—unable to use your arms or unable to use all of your brain—does not diminish your value as a human being. “Living like that” should not condemn anyone to a death sentence. Would those who supported the decision not to feed Terri Schiavo support a decision by a couple to stop feeding their disabled daughter who couldn’t use her arms because they just didn’t want her to live like that?

Now some would object to the above comparison. “Terri was different than a girl without arms. She was in a Persistent Vegetative State. She had no self-awareness.” Others argued that she was aware and that she was able to interact with her environment. There was much debate about her level of awareness, and people are anxiously waiting autopsy results to answer this question one way or another. But this intense debate also misses the critical issue. Terri was not dying. Her level of awareness was secondary to this.

Another fervently contested issue was whether or not Terri suffered a painful death. Some who were with Terri near the end of her life described it as “terrible.” Others said it was “peaceful.” Medical opinions varied as well. I think this is an important issue, but it was not the critical issue. The critical issue was that Terri was not being allowed to die by dehydration and starvation; she was being killed by these means. What was happening to her was more critical than whether or not what was happening to her was painful.

With all the misinformation and confusion over these ongoing debates, I can understand why some Christians have been led to believe removing Terri’s feeding tube was the right thing to do. Some of this flows from a genuine desire to be compassionate and to bring an end to what they perceived as Terri’s suffering.

But compassion means to “suffer with” not to kill those who we think are suffering. To kill those who are suffering, even for the most compassionate of reasons, is an insult to our God and Savior Jesus Christ. To say things like, “Well, I wouldn’t want to live like that.” or ”What kind of life is that?” denies that our value comes from what God has done and not from what we are able to do. Such thinking denies that God is powerful enough and wise enough to give meaning and purpose to every life regardless of mental or physical condition. Who do we think we are to say that Terri Schiavo would have been “better off dead”? “Do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands?” (Isaiah 45:11). God does not need our advice as to what gives value and purpose to a particular life. He gives value to every life because every life is the work of His hands (Psalm 139:13-14). He gives value to every life because every life is someone for whom Jesus paid the price of redemption (1 Corinthians 6:20). God is the author of life. God gives life meaning and purpose. God determines when His meaning and purpose for a particular life is complete.

Christians, who stand under the cross on Good Friday and rejoice at the empty tomb on Easter Sunday, should know better than to question whether or not God can work in and through suffering. The darkest suffering of all time—Jesus, suffering for humanity’s sins on the cross—brought about the brightest good of all time—humanity, redeemed from sin and eternal life to all who believe. To deny the power of God to bring meaning and purpose to any life is to deny the power of the cross and the empty tomb.

Just as God was hiding in the darkness of Good Friday waiting to reveal His glory, just as He was hiding in the life of the man born blind so that the “work of God might be displayed” (John 9:3), so He hides in the darkness of people’s lives today waiting to reveal how He might be glorified in it all. God was “hiding” in the life of Terri Schiavo and He hides in the lives of those like her who have severe disabilities waiting to be glorified. We do not glorify the Lord of Life by killing such as these. We glorify Him by caring for and serving such as these. For whatever we do to these we are doing to Jesus Himself (Matthew 25:40).