if you have been following the Schiavo’s case, its heart-wrenching. on one side, you have the husband who wants to unplug the feeding tube. and on the other side, you have the family who wants to keep the feeding tube plugged. the case has been going on for years and recently, the court has ruled in favor of the husband. the Congress and the President enacted a special law to keep the feeding tube plugged, but as recent as few hours ago, the Federal judge ruled otherwise.
the CNN snapshot poll indicated that an overwhelming majority of people (78%) wants their spouse to have the right to decide about pulling the plug if they were in a vegetative state. Parent only polled 14%.
President Bush has said that “But in extraordinary circumstances like this, it is wise to always err on the side of life.” I was talking to PK about this issue over msn, and he mentioned Singer’s take on this issue. Singer’s general ethical theory holds that “…the right to physical integrity is grounded in a being’s ability to suffer, and the right to life is grounded in the ability to plan and anticipate one’s future.” However, critics has argued consistently that Singer is in no position to judge the quality of life of disabled people. Singer’s has been compared to the Nazi practice of murdering ‘unworthy life’.
I tend to agree with Bush’s position. The sanctity of life is something that we as a society has to protect, especially in this case. Unplugging the tube will make Schiavo not receiving food and water for around 10 days before she can be pronounced dead. I think it’s cruel. At the same time, I feel empathy towards the emotional trauma her husband has to go through. I would never want to put in his place and assume such a high moral responsibility. Would you?