Today’s StarTribune reports that the United Food and Commerical Workers is targeting Target, in particular the new Super Target under construction in West St. Paul. The Super Target is going in on the site where a smaller Target stood – and where my oldest daughter, Faith, worked until the store closed to make way for the new building.
An international labor union that has launched organizing drives at Wal-Mart is now taking aim at Target Corp.
The United Food and Commercial Workers has been quietly laying the groundwork for a major organizing campaign at Target’s store in West St. Paul, which the union hopes will become the first of Target’s 1,330 stores to unionize.
Over the past five weeks, the union has distributed hundreds of leaflets to West St. Paul residents claiming that Target pays substandard wages and health benefits to its workers. And Monday, UFCW Local 789 in St. Paul issued a statement protesting the $731,000 in local tax breaks that Target received to redevelop the West St. Paul store.
The goal is to create a groundswell of opposition to Target before the West St. Paul store reopens this fall as a SuperTarget, said Bernie Hesse, a union organizer with Local 789 of St. Paul, which represents 7,500 workers in the Twin Cities area.
“We want to have people in those stores, organizing, on the day it opens and we want the [West St. Paul] community to support us,” he said.
Target spokeswoman Paula Thornton-Greear said that the company offers a wage and benefit package that is “among the best in the retail industry” and that workers don’t need a union. “We don’t believe that a union or any third-party representative would improve anything, not for our team members, guests or the company,” Thornton-Greear said.
Faith loved working there as a cashier and made a lot of friends among her co-workers, many of them teen-agers such as herself. From the stories she told around the dinner table it sounded like a place where they had a lot of laughs and she liked her supervisors. Whatever they put in the bug juice at the snack bar must have been effective because she now refuses to set foot in the new WalMart that opened just a couple of blocks away from the Target site.
Her starting pay for her first ever job: $7.25 an hour. (Well above the minimum wage, by the way, but that’s a post for another day).
No health benefits, but this wasn’t an issue since (as much as she may hate to admit it) she’s still a dependent and is covered under the benefits from my (non-union) job. She liked the flexibility of her part-time hours and says she thought the 401k plan was nice but not something she was interested in (her immediate goals were saving for her education expenses).
She was there to make some money, not to make a living, and I’d say she found her exploitation acceptable and a fair exchange that fit her current needs and interests – and probably those of many of her co-workers. Target understands this and offers whatever market-based wage and benefits package is required to attract employees. The key word there is “attract” employees, inferring that these workers are happy to accept the jobs rather than take them by force, which seems to be the attitude of the union.
You can use the link to read the entire story and see the adversarial approach the UFCW is already planning and its desires for “a groundswell of opposition to Target before the West St. Paul store reopens this fall.” Oh yeah, getting the local community upset with the store sounds like that’s good for jobs. And what do they think the community’s reaction will be if they have to pay higher prices out of the money left over from their paychecks when the politicians the unions support raise taxes? Did I mention there is a WalMart two blocks away?
Unlike my daughter, I’ve visited this huge WalMart several times and it usually seems to be full of shoppers unmortified by WalMart’s policies. I even have friends and neighbors working there, and they don’t appear as if they’ve been lobotomized. I think most folks around here can appreciate a fair wage and prices that make that wage go further, and aren’t looking for an international union interposing itself on local transactions.
Of course, that’s my long-winded analysis. When I asked Faith what her reaction to the thought of having “her” Target store unionized, I got one of those teen-aged snorts of angst and derision that I can’t even begin to spell for you.
The Night Writer is busy working on something…I think he’s filling out his “Quality of Living” Will, so I’m going to take this opportunity to look around and see what else is making news in the world.
BEMIDJI, Minnesota (AP) — English teacher Neva Rogers finally had found a place where she felt needed, where she could give opportunities to poverty-stricken children who struggled with teen pregnancies, drugs and alcohol.
That place was Red Lake High School, where she died in a school shooting last week. While students crouched under their desks in a corner, Rogers stood out in the open and began to pray.
“God be with us. God help us,” 15-year-old Ashley Lajeunesse heard Rogers say after she told students to hide as gunman Jeff Weise fired through a window and marched into the room.
Hmmm, just a thought, but I wonder what might have happened if there had been more guns and more prayer in the school that day? I’m not saying, but I’m just saying, you know? I’m sure the Supreme Court knows Rights from what’s right and wouldn’t needlessly put defenseless people at risk of death.
I see Time magazine has an article about the Red Lake shootings as well: “The Devil in Red Lake.”
The teacher spoke up. “God be with us,” said Rogers. Provoked, the gunman shot her. He then aimed at another student, Chon’gai’la Morris, and asked, “Do you believe in God?”
“No,” came the answer. The gunman turned away and found other targets, shooting and killing Dewayne Lewis, Thurlene Stillday, Chanelle Rosebear and Alicia White as they huddled on the floor. He left the room and exchanged fire with police officers, who were advancing down the hallway. Retreating into Rogers’ classroom, he yelled, “I have hostages!” Then he turned a gun on himself and pulled the trigger. Silent throughout the ordeal, the surviving students began to scream.
A little bit later on, the article cites some of the killer’s writings…
He also wrote of strange tingly feelings that woke him out of a sound sleep and dark visions of small creatures sitting by his bed that he would reach out to touch before falling unconscious. But whatever demon finally compelled Weise to act also made him plan his assault.
The Devil? Demons? Is Time saying they exist? Is the creeping theocracy taking over the media? I mean, they couldn’t print it if it wasn’t true, could they? Naah, let’s move on.
Now this looks grim. CNN has picked up this story from Reuters:
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa (Reuters) — Animal rights groups have begun fresh public campaigns timed for the start of the annual seal hunt off the coast of Canada this week and suggestions that South Africa may kill elephants for population control…
Canada said last week it would allow hunters to kill 320,000 young seals on the ice floes off its Atlantic coast from Tuesday and earlier this month a South African official told Reuters that national parks were leaning towards an elephant cull.
Anti-hunt activists held protests earlier this month in 50 cities around the world. Groups like the Humane Society International (HSI) said they would press ahead with calls for a boycott of Canadian seafood.
“We are joining in a specific boycott of Canadian seafood products, focusing on snow crabs, and starting on Tuesday, the day the first seal is killed,” HSI vice-president John Grandy told Reuters by phone from the eastern Canadian province of Prince Edward Island.
Big beasts strike a chord with the public, making them the perfect “poster animals” for conservationists who have branded Canada and South Africa as outposts of wildlife tyranny.
“The things that seem to attract the layman the most is the big animals. I think people… connect to them,” said Chris Hails, the Global programs director for WWF International…
Meanwhile, in South Africa…
…national park authorities say the burgeoning elephant population in the flag-ship Kruger National Park has made culling a necessity. The park has an estimated 12,000 ponderous pachyderms, well above the estimated “carrying capacity” of around 7,000.
Animal rights activists are horrified at the prospect of a return to culling elephants, which involves the herding and shooting of entire family groups.
This morning I read Muzzy’s post at Blogizdat and was startled to see that he too is feeling some ambivalence over the traffic his blog has received since he first posted about Terri Schiavo (see 7 Days of Screaming Into the Wind). He’s been blogging a few months more than I have, but we’re both relatively new and I suspect that the combined amount of traffic our sites typically get in a month would barely compare to a slow day for the Instapundit or Hugh Hewitt.
Imagine my astonishment last Sunday evening when I looked at my Site-Meter report before shutting down and going to bed – 110 visits! What the…? With a couple of clicks I discovered that almost all of these were people following links from Google and other search-engines to a post I did last Thursday about Terri Schiavo. The next several days brought more than 250 visitors each and the number still far surpasses anything I experienced in my first month of blogging. Great news, right?
Then why do I feel like I’ve got the binocular concession at the Coliseum for Christians vs. the Lions?
Traffic is an affirming tonic for bloggers, though not quite the same heady elixir as having someone comment on a post or link back to your site. After all, as Joe Carter at The Evangelical Outpost has said, if you don’t care if anyone is reading your blog, then you don’t have a blog – you have a diary. The fact that this surge in visitors comes as a result of a tragedy, however, is sobering.
When I started blogging I had in mind urbane commentary on current events, poking fun at the deficiencies in liberal thought and maybe being able to start some spiritual brushfires in people’s minds. Then a real issue comes along and a topic I never wanted or expected to write about dramatically demonstrates the connectivity of this new media and my own responsibilities.
Readers came out of a desire to know more about the subject at hand, not to see whatever wisdom I may have, and I’m so happy that the main point of entry for them was the “What You Don’t Know About the Terri Schiavo Case” that linked to the National Review Online article detailing the shortcomings in her diagnosis and therapy. I’m glad that once I learned that this was the most requested story I could make it even more effective by adding updates that lead to even more information, such as the affidavit from Dr. Cheshire. I’m satisfied that many people have had a chance to get more information about this travesty. And I’m just so damned discouraged that this was ever necessary in the first place.
I couldn’t tell you whether or not anything that was posted here had an effect on those who visited. I can assure you, however, it has had an effect on me.
This time last year I went to see “The Passion of the Christ” and I can still remember how difficult it was to watch the scourging and crucifixion of the innocent Christ and to witness the callousness and even fervor of his persecutors who were blind to what they were really doing. Even though I knew every bit of Jesus’s suffering was for a just and vital cause, it was hard to look – but even harder to look away.
Though her situation is nowhere near as significant, I have had the same feelings of grief and frustration this week watching the Terri Schiavo passion play. Once again an innocent is flayed on the flimsiest of pretenses, but with a certain horrific inevitability. You have it all – betrayal, distortions, pride, prejudice, the midnight hearings, a fickle populace, the washing of hands. It even appears, again, as if the players have no choice but to play the parts assigned to them. Believe me, I want to look away, but I simply cannot.
Of course, soon enough we all will. Certainly injustice and tragedy are all around, and it’s sometimes hard to know what leads any of us to take up one cause and ignore 10 others. I also know that this life (on earth) is not the one to hold dear, and that God’s plan always results in justice at every level, even if that justice occurs on a grander scale than I can comprehend.
At some point we will realize just what has taken place here, and it may come as soon as the time it takes for the books and movies to come out featuring the suppressed testimony and affidavits from doctors, nurses and others.
Here’s a sneak preview: The National Review Online posts the following affidavit from William P. Cheshire, Jr., MD. Dr. Cheshire is a neurologist and certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology and is an appointed volunteer with the Florida statewide Adult Protective Services team. In that capacity he conducted an independent, 90-minute examination of Terri Schiavo on March 1, 2005.
The link is to a PDF file of the original document and is somewhat fuzzy. I have retyped an excerpt of seven observations made by Dr. Cheshire below. You can use the link above to read the document in its entirety, including the footnotes to clinical studies in the original that I have omitted in my retyping. These observations, again, are from an expert who has been able to visit Terri Schiavo recently, and may be illuminating to anyone who has the impression that she has been little more than a houseplant. Dr. Cheshire says:
Based on my review of extensive medical records documenting Terri’s case over the years, on my personal observations of Terri, and on my observations of Terri’s responses in the many hours of videotapes taken in 2002, she demonstrates a number of behaviors that I believe cast a reasonable doubt on the prior diagnosis of PVS. These include:
1. Her behavior is frequently context-specific. For example, her facial expression brightens and she smiles in response to the voice of familiar persons such as her parents or her nurse. Her agitation subsides and her facial demeanor softens when quiet music is played. When jubilant piano music is played, her face brightens, she lifts her eyebrows, smiles, and even laughs. Her lateral gaze toward the tape player is sustained for many minutes. Several times I witnessed Terri briefly, albeit inconsistently, laugh in response to a humorous comment someone in the room had made. I did not see her laugh in the absence of someone else’s laughter.
2. Although she does not seem to track or follow visual objects consistently or for long periods of time, she does fixate her gaze on colorful objects or human faces for some 15 seconds at a time and occasionally follow with her eyes at least briefly as these objects move from side to side. When I first walked into her room, she immediately turned her head toward me and looked directly at my face. There was a look of curiosity or expectation in her expression, and she maintained eye contact for about half a minute. Later, when she again looked at me, she brought her lips together as if to pronounce the letter “O,” and although for a moment it appeared that she might be making an intentional effort to speak, her face then fell blank, and no words came out.
3. Although I did not hear Terri utter distinct words, she demonstrates emotional expressivity by her use of single syllable vocalizations such as “ah,” making cooing sounds, or by expressing guttural sounds of annoyance or moaning appropriate to the context of the situation. The context-specific range and variability of her vocalizations suggests at least a reasonable probability of the processing of emotional thought within her brain. There have been reports of Terri rarely using actual words specific to her situational context. The July 25, 2003 affidavit of speech pathologist Sara Green Mele, MS, on page 6, reads, “The records of Mediplex reflect the fact that she has said ‘stop’ in apparent response to a medical procedure being done to her.” The Adult Protective Services team has been unable to retrieve those original medical records in this instance.
4. Although Terri has not consistently followed commands, there appear to be some notable exceptions. In the taped examination by Dr. Hammesfahr from 2002, when asked to close her eyes she began to blink repeatedly. Although it was unclear whether she squeezed her grip when asked, she did appear to raise her right leg four times in succession each time she was asked to do so. Rehabilitation notes form 1991 indicated that she tracked inconsistently, and although did not develop a yes/no communication system, did follow some commands inconsistently and demonstrated good eye contact to family members.
5. There is a remarkable moment in the videotape of the September 3, 2002 examination by Dr. Hammesfahr that seemed to go unnoticed at the time. At 2:44 p.m., Dr. Hammesfahr had just turned Terri onto her right side to examine her back with a painful sharp stimulus (a sharp piece of wood), to which Terri had responded with signs of discomfort. Well after he ceased applying the stimulus and had returned Terri to a comfortable position, he says to her parents, “So, we’re going to have to roll her over…” Immediately Terri cries. She vocalizes a crying sound, “Ugh, ha, ha, ha,” presses her eyebrows together, and sadly grimaces. It is important to note that, at that moment, no one is touching Terri or causing actual pain. Rather, she appears to comprehend the meaning of Dr. Hammesfahr’s comment and signals her anticipation of pain. This response suggests some degree of language processing and interpretation at the level of the cerebral cortex. It also suggests that she may be aware of pain beyond what could be explained by simple reflex withdrawal.
6. According to the definition of PVS published by the American Academy of Neurology, “persistent vegetative state patients do not have the capacity to experience pain or suffering. Pain and suffering are attributes of consciousness requiring cerebral cortical functioning, and patients who are permanently and completely unconscious cannot experience these symptoms.” And yet, in my review of Terri’s medical records, pain issues keep surfacing. The nurses at Woodside Hospice told us that she often has pain with menstrual cramps. Menstrual flow is associated with agitation, repeated or sustained moaning, facial grimacing, limb posturing, and facial flushing, all of which subside once she is given ibuprofen. Some of the records document moaning, crying, and other painful behavior in the setting of urinary tract infection.
The neurologic literature has traditionally distinguished between, on one hand, the patterned reflex response resulting form mere activation of spinal and brain stem pain circuits in PVS and, on the other hand, conscious awareness of pain which requires participation by the cerebral cortex, including interpretation, felt emotional awareness, and volitional avoidance behavior that would not be expected to occur in PVS. Recent studies suggest, however, that such a distinction may not be the clear bright line previously imagined. Laureys and colleagues demonstrated, for example, neuronal processing activity in the primary somatosensory area of the cerebral cortex in response to noxious stimuli in patients with PVS.
Regardless of what objective measures may be available, the conscious experience of pain remains a phenomenon directly discernable only trough introspective awareness, which means that one cannot directly know with certainty the pain another person experiences. If, as the authors of a consensus statement on PVS wrote in 1994, there are some cases in which “the absence of a response cannot be taken as proof of the absence of consciousness,” then should not the clear presence of pain be given serious consideration as possibly indicating conscious awareness of Terri Schiavo? The fact that Terri’s responses to pain have been context-specific, sustained, and in the taped example I cited, in response to a spoken sentence, all suggest the possibility that she may be at some level consciously aware of pain.
Terri has received analgesic medication as treatment for her pain behavior. This seems to be appropriate medical treatment if one cannot know with certainty whether her behavior indicates conscious awareness of pain. If a patient behaves as if in pain, then the clinically prudent and compassionate response, when in doubt, is to treat the pain. If a patient behaves at times as though there may be some remnant of conscious awareness, then the clinically prudent and compassionate response, when in doubt is to treat that patient with respect and care. If Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is capable of suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically mistaken.
7. To enter the room of Terri Schiavo is nothing like entering the room of a patient who is comatose or brain-dead on in some neurological sense no longer there. Although Terri did not demonstrate during our 90-minute visit some compelling evidence of verbalization, conscious awareness, or volitional behavior, yet the visitor has the distinct sense of the presence of a living human being who seems at some level to be aware of some things around her.
As I looked at Terri, and she gazed directly back at me, I asked myself whether, if I were her attending physician, I could in good conscience withdraw her feeding and hydration. No, I could not. I could not withdraw life support if I were asked. I could not withhold life-sustaining nutrition and hydration from this beautiful lady whose face brightens in the presence of others.
The neurologic signs are in many ways ambiguous. There is no guarantee that more sophisticated testing would definitively resolve that ambiguity to everyone’s satisfaction. There would be value, I think, in obtaining a functional MRI scan if that is possible.
This situation differs fundamentally from end-of-life scenarios where it is appropriate to withdraw life-sustaining medical interventions that no longer benefit or are burdensome to patients in the terminal stages of illness. Terri’s feeding tube is not a burden to her. It is not painful, it is not infected, is not eroding her stomach lining or causing any medical complications. But for the decision to withdraw her feeding tube, Terri cannot be considered medically terminal. But for the removal of food and water, she would not die.
In summary, Terri Schiavo demonstrates behaviors in a variety of cognitive domains that call into question the previous neurologic diagnosis of persistent vegetative state. Specifically, she has demonstrated behaviors that are context-specific, sustained, and indicative of cerebral cortical processing that, upon careful neurologic consideration, would not be expected in a persistent vegetative state.
Based on this evidence, I believe that, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, there is a greater likelihood that Terri is in a minimally conscious state than a persistent vegetative state. This distinction makes an enormous difference in making ethical decisions on Terri’s behalf. If Terri is sufficiently aware of her surroundings that she can feel pleasure and suffer, if she is capable of understanding to some degree how she is being treated, then in my judgment it would be wrong to bring about her death by withdrawing food and water.
Bear with me a little longer. There are other topics I want to get to, and the Minfidel has been trying to get to the keyboard as well. Soon enough “The End” will appear on this particular movie. And then the credits will roll.
“What we’re offering to the state of California is an even-up trade,” said Bob Schindler, Mrs. Schiavo’s father. “Scott Peterson, who murdered his wife and son, gets to come to this nursing home where he’ll die in a week or two. Our daughter goes to death row in San Quentin, where she’ll likely live a long life as Peterson’s case is appealed.”
Much has been made of the Republican Congress stepping away from its supposed limited government and State’s Rights philosophy in order to seek federal intervention into the Terri Schiavo case. Personally, that’s not the kind of step I would normally welcome, but in this particular case it doesn’t bother me.
Does that make Congress and me inconsistent? I can’t vouch for them, but my way is clear here: laws are to be moral, and the protection of innocent life – especially in the face of direct assault – can’t help but be the foundation of law and liberty. The best government is the government of one’s self, followed by family government, extending outward to church and community government and on from there. Generally the higher the level of government where decisions are made, the lower the rights of the individual become. Yet I don’t have a problem with even the largest form of government turning to focus on the well-being of a single person – especially when every intervening level of government has abdicated its charge.
Personally, I can’t stray far from the biblical exhortation in Micah to “act justly, love mercy and walk humbly with your God.” (And yes I try to apply this to other issues beyond Terri Schiavo, but I’ll not go into those now. After all, I’ve got to have something to write about for the next 10 years or so.) I’ll freely admit that I’m not privy to all the details and decisions that have gone into Terri Schiavo’s situation for the last 15 years, but I have a disquieting sense that justice and mercy have been in short supply. As for walking humbly with your God…
Judges have taken it upon themselves – or been permitted by us – to decide when life begins and when it no longer has meaning. They have cited the rule of law and precedent to justify the painful death of an innocent, while in another case have disregarded these in favor of looking at laws from other countries to determine whether it’s “constitutional” to execute convicted killers. They have felt free to depart from the canon and rule as if they were consulting People Magazine instead of the Bill of Rights.
It should never have come to this point with Terri Schiavo; she should have been restored to the loving arms of her family years ago regardless of the money or the motives of her husband. And yet how ironic that we can’t now find one “activist” judge able and willing to look past all the cold rhetoric and legal sophistry of those determined to put a woman – no matter how damaged – to death and say “This shall not stand!” Is justice too blind to see the fundamental spirit and purpose of the law?
Update:
For greater (and better) insight into this topic, see this post from Learned Foot at The Kool-Aid Report, and the series of Schiavo posts from Doug at Bogus Gold (yes, it is personal).
Actually, it’s Abraham Lincoln referring to Dred Scott, but the parallels are striking (HT: Bill Bennett):
“All the powers of earth seem rapidly combining against him. Mammon is after him; ambition follows, and philosophy follows, and the Theology of the day is fast joining the cry. They have him in his prison house; they have searched his person, and left no prying instrument with him.
One after another they have closed the heavy iron doors upon him, and now they have him, as it were, bolted in with a lock of a hundred keys, which can never be unlocked without the concurrence of every key; the keys in the hands of a hundred different men, and they scattered to a hundred different and distant places; and they stand musing as to what invention, in all the dominions of mind and matter, can be produced to make the impossibility of his escape more complete than it is.”
Dred Scott was a slave who, after moving and living with his master in a free state for a number of years, sued for his freedom after his master died. Initially granted his freedom, his case was appealed to higher and higher courts until, after 10 years, it was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1857. The Court, choosing the rule of law over the principal of the law, ruled against him, citing among other things that because he was black he could not be a citizen and therefore had no legal standing to bring a case. He was the property of another and his humanity subject to that one’s wishes.
Following the decision, Scott and his wife were purchased by the sons of his former owner (who had supported him throughout the trials) and then freed. He died shortly thereafter. The Court’s decision galvanized the anti-slavery citizenry and was a contributing factor to the events leading to the Civil War.
Lives are given for causes all the time, willingly and unwillingly and sometimes serve to bring the issues into sharp relief. The grinding stones of the theology of the day and of doctrine divorced from principle turn these sacrifices into bitter bread for the communion we may all taste of whether we like it or not.
Perhaps Michael Schiavo, but he apparently already believes that the woman he once married is no longer alive, so why does it matter to him if her body lives on or not? There are civil, legal options available to him to relinquish his rights and get on with his life that don’t require taking someone else’s.
Michael Schiavo can get on with his life and still let Terri live.
Who suffers? Michael Schiavo says he is fighting to honor Terri’s wishes to not be kept alive like this. Though I’m not aware of other witnesses or testimony to this desire, let’s grant that Terri at one time made such a statement. I know over the course of my own life, however, that there are many opinions I once felt strongly about with which I no longer agree. Some of these I’ve even put down in writing. Are we 100% certain that this is still Terri’s wish?
Just in case, let Terri live.
Who suffers? Some say that Terri Schiavo wouldn’t want to be kept alive in these circumstances, and justify her termination because the body in the hospice no longer has any consciousness that represents her as “Terri.” But if that is so, then “Terri” doesn’t know or care if she’s being kept alive or not.
Let Terri Schiavo live.
Who suffers? Some people may feel the “right to die” may suffer if Terri is kept alive. Many no doubt think that they themselves would not want to be kept alive like this. Your solution is unaffected, however: put it in writing in a Living Will – and hope that you don’t change your mind before the situation arises.
Sign a Living Will, but let Terri Schiavo live.
Why are so many willing to have Terri Schiavo die, but no one is willing to kill her? If the judge is convinced that terminating the shell of Terri Schiavo is necessary, why not authorize a painless lethal injection instead of death by starvation? If the law doesn’t permit this then why don’t the legislators who feel Terri Schiavo must die schedule their own emergency session and pass a law every bit as narrow as what Congress is considering that says Terri Schiavo may be legally killed without having to starve her to death?
Who suffers by letting Terri Schiavo die?
She does, if she is “in there.” Her parents and family do. The fate of every other vulnerable person in her situation either now or in the future does. The soul of a country willing to sacrifice it’s most vulnerable of any age does. Yes, that’s a heavy argument and a hard risk to quantify, but why even take that chance when the question can be easily avoided in one simple way.
Let Terri Schiavo live.
Update:
Go to this post from Michelle Malkin to find links to audio and video recordings of Terri, along with an illuminating description of Florida’s legal requirements for someone to be diagnosed as being in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS). There’s also a link to James Q. Wilson’s excellent article in the Wall Street Journal.
I haven’t posted much about the Terri Schiavo case in Florida because there’s not much I can add beyond my prayers to the many fine posts and exhortations already out there.
I have been following this closely, however, and I’ve pondered what generally appears to be a shrug-like response from much of country when it comes to the possibility that a profoundly disabled woman may be starved to death.
This, by the way, in a country where death threats are made on the life of someone who proposes legalizing the hunting of feral cats in Wisconsin and where opponents of capital punishment easily capture the ear of the media in an effort to spare the life of even the most heinous criminals. I wonder what the reaction would be if a judge agreed with Michael Schiavo that Terri’s life wasn’t worth living, but instead of going through the mental and legal gymnastics of interpreting food and water as extreme medical measures that can legally be withheld, simply said “you have the State’s permission to shoot her.” Or, what if Scott Peterson’s sentence were to be carried out by starvation? And are there no prominent feminists who find anything of interest in this at all?
To be fair, I think most people simply figure this is an unfortunate situation and assume that the current state of events has come about only after exhaustive medical and ethical deliberation. Now it appears that that may be far from the case, and that Terri’s condition may have been diagnosed on the flimsiest of tests and her treatment has been based – most charitably – on convenience or at worst on an agenda.
Read this article from the National Review Online to find out why several expert, board-certified neurologists are asking for, at the least, a reevaluation of Terri’s condition, citing that even basic tests such as an MRI or Positron Emission Tomography (PET) haven’t been conducted and that there are other gaps in her care that are questionable.
Please read the NRO article. I’ll warn you that it is rather long and may be a bit of an inconvenience. If so, it will be only a minor one and I apologize in advance. There is someone else out there, however, who may find that being inconvenient is a capital offense.
Update:
On Wednesday, March 23 the National Review Online posted the following affidavit from William P. Cheshire, Jr., MD. Dr. Cheshire is a neurologist and certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology and is an appointed volunteer with the Florida statewide Adult Protective Services team, in which capacity he conducted an independent, 90 minute examination of Terri Schiavo on March 1, 2005. To date, the courts have not admitted this affidavit.
The link is to a PDF file of the original document and is somewhat fuzzy. I have retyped an excerpt of seven observations made by Dr. Cheshire below. You can use the link above to read the document in its entirety, including the footnotes to clinical studies in the original that I have omitted in my retyping. These observations, again, are from an expert who has been able to visit Terri Schiavo recently, and may be illuminating to anyone who has the impression that she is little more than a houseplant.
Based on my review of extensive medical records documenting Terri’s case over the years, on my personal observations of Terri, and on my observations of Terri’s responses in the many hours of videotapes taken in 2002, she demonstrates a number of behaviors that I believe cast a reasonable doubt on the prior diagnosis of PVS. These include:
1. Her behavior is frequently context-specific. For example, her facial expression brightens and she smiles in response to the voice of familiar persons such as her parents or her nurse. Her agitation subsides and her facial demeanor softens when quiet music is played. When jubilant piano music is played, her face brightens, she lifts her eyebrows, smiles, and even laughs. Her lateral gaze toward the tape player is sustained for many minutes. Several times I witnessed Terri briefly, albeit inconsistently, laugh in response to a humorous comment someone in the room had made. I did not see her laugh in the absence of someone else’s laughter.
2. Although she does not seem to track or follow visual objects consistently or for long periods of time, she does fixate her gaze on colorful objects or human faces for some 15 seconds at a time and occasionally follow with her eyes at least briefly as these objects move from side to side. When I first walked into her room, she immediately turned her head toward me and looked directly at my face. There was a look of curiosity or expectation in her expression, and she maintained eye contact for about half a minute. Later, when she again looked at me, she brought her lips together as if to pronounce the letter “O,” and although for a moment it appeared that she might be making an intentional effort to speak, her face then fell blank, and no words came out.
3. Although I did not hear Terri utter distinct words, she demonstrates emotional expressivity by her use of single syllable vocalizations such as “ah,” making cooing sounds, or by expressing guttural sounds of annoyance or moaning appropriate to the context of the situation. The context-specific range and variability of her vocalizations suggests at least a reasonable probability of the processing of emotional thought within her brain. There have been reports of Terri rarely using actual words specific to her situational context. The July 25, 2003 affidavit of speech pathologist Sara Green Mele, MS, on page 6, reads, “The records of Mediplex reflect the fact that she has said ‘stop’ in apparent response to a medical procedure being done to her.” The Adult Protective Services team has been unable to retrieve those original medical records in this instance.
4. Although Terri has not consistently followed commands, there appear to be some notable exceptions. In the taped examination by Dr. Hammesfahr from 2002, when asked to close her eyes she began to blink repeatedly. Although it was unclear whether she squeezed her grip when asked, she did appear to raise her right leg four times in succession each time she was asked to do so. Rehabilitation notes form 1991 indicated that she tracked inconsistently, and although did not develop a yes/no communication system, did follow some commands inconsistently and demonstrated good eye contact to family members.
5. There is a remarkable moment in the videotape of the September 3, 2002 examination by Dr. Hammesfahr that seemed to go unnoticed at the time. At 2:44 p.m., Dr. Hammesfahr had just turned Terri onto her right side to examine her back with a painful sharp stimulus (a sharp piece of wood), to which Terri had responded with signs of discomfort. Well after he ceased applying the stimulus and had returned Terri to a comfortable position, he says to her parents, “So, we’re going to have to roll her over…” Immediately Terri cries. She vocalizes a crying sound, “Ugh, ha, ha, ha,” presses her eyebrows together, and sadly grimaces. It is important to note that, at that moment, no one is touching Terri or causing actual pain. Rather, she appears to comprehend the meaning of Dr. Hammesfahr’s comment and signals her anticipation of pain. This response suggests some degree of language processing and interpretation at the level of the cerebral cortex. It also suggests that she may be aware of pain beyond what could be explained by simple reflex withdrawal.
6. According to the definition of PVS published by the American Academy of Neurology, “persistent vegetative state patients do not have the capacity to experience pain or suffering. Pain and suffering are attributes of consciousness requiring cerebral cortical functioning, and patients who are permanently and completely unconscious cannot experience these symptoms.” And yet, in my review of Terri’s medical records, pain issues keep surfacing. The nurses at Woodside Hospice told us that she often has pain with menstrual cramps. Menstrual flow is associated with agitation, repeated or sustained moaning, facial grimacing, limb posturing, and facial flushing, all of which subside once she is given ibuprofen. Some of the records document moaning, crying, and other painful behavior in the setting of urinary tract infection.
The neurologic literature has traditionally distinguished between, on one hand, the patterned reflex response resulting form mere activation of spinal and brain stem pain circuits in PVS and, on the other hand, conscious awareness of pain which requires participation by the cerebral cortex, including interpretation, felt emotional awareness, and volitional avoidance behavior that would not be expected to occur in PVS. Recent studies suggest, however, that such a distinction may not be the clear bright line previously imagined. Laureys and colleagues demonstrated, for example, neuronal processing activity in the primary somatosensory area of the cerebral cortex in response to noxious stimuli in patients with PVS.
Regardless of what objective measures may be available, the conscious experience of pain remains a phenomenon directly discernable only trough introspective awareness, which means that one cannot directly know with certainty the pain another person experiences. If, as the authors of a consensus statement on PVS wrote in 1994, there are some cases in which “the absence of a response cannot be taken as proof of the absence of consciousness,” then should not the clear presence of pain be given serious consideration as possibly indicating conscious awareness of Terri Schiavo? The fact that Terri’s responses to pain have been context-specific, sustained, and in the taped example I cited, in response to a spoken sentence, all suggest the possibility that she may be at some level consciously aware of pain.
Terri has received analgesic medication as treatment for her pain behavior. This seems to be appropriate medical treatment if one cannot know with certainty whether her behavior indicates conscious awareness of pain. If a patient behaves as if in pain, then the clinically prudent and compassionate response, when in doubt, is to treat the pain. If a patient behaves at times as though there may be some remnant of conscious awareness, then the clinically prudent and compassionate response, when in doubt is to treat that patient with respect and care. If Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is capable of suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically mistaken.
7. To enter the room of Terri Schiavo is nothing like entering the room of a patient who is comatose or brain-dead on in some neurological sense no longer there. Although Terri did not demonstrate during our 90-minute visit some compelling evidence of verbalization, conscious awareness, or volitional behavior, yet the visitor has the distinct sense of the presence of a living human being who seems at some level to be aware of some things around her.
As I looked at Terri, and she gazed directly back at me, I asked myself whether, if I were her attending physician, I could in good conscience withdraw her feeding and hydration. No, I could not. I could not withdraw life support if I were asked. I could not withhold life-sustaining nutrition and hydration from this beautiful lady whose face brightens in the presence of others.
The neurologic signs are in many ways ambiguous. There is no guarantee that more sophisticated testing would definitively resolve that ambiguity to everyone’s satisfaction. There would be value, I think, in obtaining a functional MRI scan if that is possible.
This situation differs fundamentally from end-of-life scenarios where it is appropriate to withdraw life-sustaining medical interventions that no longer benefit or are burdensome to patients in the terminal stages of illness. Terri’s feeding tube is not a burden to her. It is not painful, it is not infected, is not eroding her stomach lining or causing any medical complications. But for the decision to withdraw her feeding tube, Terri cannot be considered medically terminal. But for the removal of food and water, she would not die.
In summary, Terri Schiavo demonstrates behaviors in a variety of cognitive domains that call into question the previous neurologic diagnosis of persistent vegetative state. Specifically, she has demonstrated behaviors that are context-specific, sustained, and indicative of cerebral cortical processing that, upon careful neurologic consideration, would not be expected in a persistent vegetative state.
Based on this evidence, I believe that, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, there is a greater likelihood that Terri is in a minimally conscious state than a persistent vegetative state. This distinction makes an enormous difference in making ethical decisions on Terri’s behalf. If Terri is sufficiently aware of her surroundings that she can feel pleasure and suffer, if she is capable of understanding to some degree how she is being treated, then in my judgment it would be wrong to bring about her death by withdrawing food and water.
Go here to read the remarkable account of Kate Adamson, a woman who was incapacitated and had her feeding tube removed after suffering a double brainstem stroke in 1995. She describes the horror of being able to hear what people were saying, understanding what was being done to her, and being unable to react. After her husband succeeded in getting her feeding tube reattached she went on to a miraculous recovery.
