Has anyone else noticed how the media have slyly turned the Terri Schiavo case into a “right-to-die” story? Terri, who suffered brain damage after a heart attack when she was 29, never expressed a desire to die under her current circumstances, as far as we know. Her husband–with his million-dollar settlement and a long-time girlfriend to consider–claims she expressed such sentiments, but even his testimony was less than firm on this point.
This isn’t about the right to die, but rather a family member’s right to kill. Terri’s parents want her to live and want to take care of her. Her husband wants the state to kill her. There is no living will, no evidence of Terri’s wishes either way.
Why isn’t this obviously a case where, when in doubt, the bias of the state should be towards preserving life? Doesn’t the pro-death’s position in this case–”When in doubt, take her out”–reveal their morbid motives?