« 29 March 2005 - 8:59 am | Main | 29 March 2005 - 5:49 pm »

I've beat this horse to death, picked it up, and resumed the beating over the last few days, but I wanted to bring one more thing to your attention regarding the whole Terri Schiavo issue. Those of you who think the far right acted out of true moral conviction when they passed "Terri's Law" are fooling yourselves. Case in point: Tom DeLay. The former Texas exterminator and current Congressman on a mission from God acquiesced when his mother wanted to end life support (in this case, dialysis) for his father.

Admittedly, the minutia of pater DeLay's case differs from Terri Schiavo's, but the broad strokes are the same. Both Charles DeLay and Terri Schiavo lacked directives on how to handle end of life situations. Both were reliant on machines to extend their lives. And they both bring to light the most important question for the loved ones of those of who are in end of life situations. At what point do you withdraw life preserving machines? Michael Schiavo waited eight years to ask for his wife's feeding tube to be removed. The DeLay family waited less than a month.

I'm not arguing here that the DeLays made the wrong decision. In their shoes I would have done just the same. But this points out how long Michael Schiavo waited, hoping for some sign of recovery. And how ridiculous it is of Tom DeLay to suggest that his actions are anything but pure.

Sixteen years ago Tom DeLay's mother had her husband's life support withdrawn without objections from her family. Yet this winter Tom DeLay has been quoted as saying "Terri Schiavo's husband has said that she expressed a verbal desire that she not continue in this sort of state. The sanctity of life overshadows the sanctity of marriage. I don't know what transpired between Terri and her husband. All I know is Terri is alive... And unless she had specifically written instructions in her hand and with her signature, I don't care what her husband says." Like many high and mighty moralists, DeLay is a staunch advocate of rules until it comes to him and his family.

The LA Times first broke the story of Charles DeLay's passing (and I found it via commentary on Slate). Reading through the Times article, I couldn't help but feel that the DeLays would probably prefer that the details of Charles DeLay's last days be kept private. Yet Tom DeLay hasn't offered that courtesy to the Schiavo family. Admittedly, this was public long before he came along. Yet he did nothing to smooth things. Just the contrary, in fact. He shone an even brighter light on this matter. And because of that I can offer him no sympathy with regard to this article. "Do unto others..." and all that.

Posted by on 29 March 2005 at 11:23 AM