I am sure most of you have followed the news about Terri Schiavo, a Florida woman who suffered brain damage when she was 26 years old.  Last Wednesday (Oct 15) a judge gave an order for the removal of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube. Unless nutrition and hydration are restored, Terri will die within 10 days to 2 weeks. The media have described Terri's condition as a "Persistent Vegetative State." However there is considerable dispute over that description. According to family members, “Terri recognizes voices and responds. At times, she vocalizes sounds, trying in her best way to speak. Terri is not a brain dead vegetable as characterized by her husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo nor a houseplant as implied by his attorney.” On October 14, Terri's parents released a videotape that indicates that Terri is in nothing like a PVS.

According to Pete Vere, a canon lawyer who specializes in the rights of mentally and cognitively disabled,  “This is just a sad day for every Catholic concerned with the Culture of Life and the rights of those with some form of cognitive or mental disability.  Not only is the state sanctioning involuntary euthanasia, but this sets an awful precedent in which society judges an individual by his or her perceived utility.  God created us human beings, not human doings.  All human life is valuable in His eyes. I am particularly concerned for those who suffer from more severe forms of cognitive and mental disability.  Under this new utilitarian ethic and definition of human life, will their right to life be challenged as well?  In terms of mental and cognitive capacity, how far are they removed from Terri?” 

“Recent video footage clearly shows Terri positively responding to stimulation from her friends and family,” Vere added.  “She smiles, she laughs, and she opens her eyes, turns her head and raises her eyebrows.  A number of medical experts assure me that these are not the responses of one who has fallen into a persistent vegetative state as the courts and Terri’s husband maintain.” 

We must pray for Terri Schiavo – but even more for her husband, her parents and all those involved in this painful situation. I know that none of this is easy – and that all of us may have to face similar decisions. Jesus’ teaching – as expressed in the Catechism – does not require us to use “medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome.” (#2278) My own dad chose not have an operation which could have prolonged his life. I accompanied my mom when she made out her will. We discussed with the lawyer the kind of care she would want at the end of her life. For a Catholic “doctor assisted suicide” or euthanasia is clearly prohibited. At the same time “over-zealous” treatment can and, in fact, should be refused. Here is the full statement from the Catechism:

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.

2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.

Muchos de Uds. han seguido las noticias sobre Terri Schiavo, una mujer en la Florida que sufrió daño cerebral cuando tenía 26 años. El miércoles pasado (15 de octubre) un juez dio el orden para quitar el tubo por el cual recibe alimentación. Si nutrición y hidración no están restaurados, Terri morirá dentro de dos semanas. Los medios de comunicación han descrito su condición como “Estado Vegetativo Persistente.” (EVP) Sin embargo hay disputa sobre la descripción. Según los miembros de su familia, “Terri reconoce voces y responde. A veces, vocaliza sonidos, tratando de hablar. Terri no está muerta cerebralmente.” El 14 de octubre, sus papás mostraron un video que indica que Terri está lejos de EVP.

Tenemos que rezar por Terri – y aun más por su esposo, sus papás y todos envueltos en esta situación dolorosa. Yo sé que no es nada fácil – y que todos quizás tendremos que enfrentar decisiones semejantes. La enseñanza de Jesús – como expresada en el Catecismo – no requiere el uso de “tratamientos médicos onerosos, peligrosos, extraordinarios o desproporcionados a los resultados.” Mi propio papá escogió no tener una operación que podía haber prolongado su vida. Acompañé a mi mamá cuando hizo su último testamento. Hablamos con el abogado sobre el tipo de cuidado medico ella querría al final de su vida. Para un católico “suicidio ayudado por un medico” o eutanasia son claramente prohibidos. Al mismo tiempo se puede y, de hecho, se debe rechazar 'encarnizamiento terapéutico.' Aquí hay la enseñanza completa del Catecismo:

2276. "Aquellos cuya vida se encuentra disminuida o debilitada tienen derecho a un respeto especial. Las personas enfermas o disminuidas deben ser atendidas para que lleven una vida tan normal como sea posible."

2277. "Cualesquiera que sean los motivos y los medios, la eutanasia directa consiste en poner fin a la vida de personas disminuidas, enfermas o moribundas. Es moralmente inaceptable.
Por tanto, una acción o una omisión que, de suyo o en la intención, provoca la muerte para suprimir el dolor, constituye un homicidio gravemente contrario a la dignidad de la persona humana y al respeto del Dios vivo, su Creador. El error de juicio en el que se puede haber caído de buena fe no cambia la naturaleza de este acto homicida, que se ha de rechazar y excluir siempre."

2278. "La interrupción de tratamientos médicos onerosos, peligrosos, extraordinarios o desproporcionados a los resultados puede ser legítima. Interrumpir estos tratamientos es rechazar el 'encarnizamiento terapéutico'. Con esto no se pretende provocar la muerte; se acepta no poder impedirla. Las decisiones deben ser tomadas por el paciente, si para ello tiene competencia y capacidad o si no por los que tienen los derechos legales, respetando siempre la voluntad razonable y los intereses legítimos del paciente."

2279. "Aunque la muerte se considere inminente, los cuidados ordinarios debidos a una persona enferma no pueden ser legítimamente interrumpidos. El uso de analgésicos para aliviar los sufrimientos del moribundo, incluso con riesgo de abreviar sus días, puede ser moralmente conforme a la dignidad humana si la muerte no es pretendida, ni como fin ni como medio, sino solamente prevista y tolerada como inevitable. Los cuidados paliativos constituyen una forma privilegiada de la caridad desinteresada. Por esta razón deben ser alentados."