Five years ago, on March 31, 2005, Terri Schiavo died. Terri’s tragic situation caused Americans to think about new questions such as whether a disabled person should have a “right to die” or whether the disabled should be put to death when their “quality of life” is considered to be compromised.
As Christians, we believe that God, not doctors or judges, should determine our moment of death. And we believe that even the least among us deserves quality of care, even when quality of life may be compromised. Terri’s family believed her life had value and promise even in her severely disabled condition. They wanted to care for her and provide her with swallowing and other therapies, believing she could improve. But even if she never improved, her family just wanted to love her and care for her until God called her home. The visits Attorney Gibbs shared with Terri and her family proved to him that she certainly was still able to love and respond to them.
Today, we regularly hear news stories about disabled patients diagnosed with PVS as Terri was, who suddenly “wake up” and begin communicating. Terri already was awake and she already could communicate in her own way. But medical advances in determining various levels of consciousness, such as persistent vegetative state and minimally conscious state (which many believed was Terri’s true condition), have come too late to save her.
Although medical progress has now been made in diagnosing and distinguishing these various levels of consciousness, our society seems to have made little if any progress over the last 5 years in considering the basic underlying questions involved when dealing with disabled people like Terri who are not terminally ill and who are not on traditional life support machines. Does anyone have a right to deny food and water to another human being in order to end life as the court did in Terri’s case? Do patients whose quality of life is less than perfect have a right to take their own lives, either directly or through the actions of others?
These kinds of questions can really be summarized in the most important question for Christians. Is the span of our life in God’s hands or in our own? Should doctors and judges be able to override God’s decision as to when any life will end, particularly when that person (whether unborn or disabled) cannot speak for themselves?
Terri Schiavo’s death displayed to the world the consequences of man’s interference in the life of one of God’s most precious “least of these.” Clearly, Terri was one about whom Jesus warned, “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” (
Matthew 25:40 
) Terri’s parents stood by helpless as the court ordered her death despite the fact that they wanted to care for her and love her until God chose to take her home.
Playing so loosely with the sanctity of life portends more horrific possibilities for our society in a future brave new world of medicine, technology, ethics and the law. How will society deal in the future with the unwanted unborn, the elderly, sick or disabled? Are we willing to care for and love the “least of these,” and to leave the number of their days with God? Who should be given the power to determine whether a person’s quality of life is sufficient to continue feeding them?
We are not talking here about heroic medical interventions when death is inevitable. The question for Terri merely involved ongoing love, care and feeding, based on the sanctity and not on the quality of her life. God used Terri to call all of us to more deeply consider and appreciate the value and sanctity of all life, even the “least of these” whatever their quality of life, as long as God sustains that life.
The life issues we face today are many. In addition to the basic ongoing issues of abortion and euthanasia, there are healthcare and quality of life determinations, assisted suicide (now “legal” in Oregon, Montana and Washington), in vitro fertilization and the moral question of what to do with frozen, fertilized embryos; embryonic stem cell research and much, much more. Will our society answer those questions based on God’s Word or on the slippery slope of our own “quality of life” determinations?
At the Christian Law Association, we had the privilege of standing with Terri’s family and fighting for her life. We know that our founding fathers intended their nation to be a nation that protected “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” For the sake of the future generations, our prayer is that the courts and the medical community would focus on preserving life as opposed to prematurely ending it.
