|
March 31, 2005
BROWNBACK STATEMENT ON THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE
The loss of Terry Schiavo heightens debate on the nature of the individual
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Sam Brownback released the following statement
following the death of Terry Schiavo, who died in Pinellas Park, Florida today
after being denied food and water for nearly 14 days.
“Terri Schiavo will suffer no more. Her death was tragic and unnecessary and I
continue to pray for her and her family.
“With Terri Schiavo, we witnessed the legally sanctioned death by starvation and
dehydration of a living human being. It is now time to look beyond the politics
of the debate in order to see clearly what is really at issue in this case.
“While many in the media have attempted to portray the events leading to Terri’s
death as politically motivated, it is much more significant than this.
Ultimately, one’s position on the matter of Terri Schiavo depends on one’s view
of the human person.
“Few cases have evoked such an emotional response as this one. I think this is
because of the fact Terri’s plight highlights the question at the core of every
issue related to the protection of human life. Is the value of an individual
dependent on their quality of life, their level of sentience, their physical or
cognitive abilities, or is the value of an individual inherent in the fact that
they are fearfully and wonderfully made in the image of their Creator,
possessing a unique, immortal soul, and therefore of infinite worth, regardless
of physical condition or mental state? Is human life sacred per se, or does the
dignity we treat individuals with depend on their physical or mental status as
human beings?
“If the latter, utilitarian notion is true, then life and death decisions about
the most vulnerable among us—the unborn, those with mental and physical
disabilities, the aged and infirm—become relative matters to be determined by
doctors, judges, lawyers, and legislatures.
“If a subjective judgment of quality of life is what determines the value of an
individual or the protections accorded to that individual, this has enormous
implications for every one of us: both for the way we conduct our own lives and
for the way we order our society. If we have a fundamental mandate to protect
the most vulnerable among us—not just those with social or political influence
or those who are regarded as productive—a reordering of our priorities, and our
laws, becomes necessary. Terri’s struggle becomes apparent for what it is: the
forced starvation of a living human being with a diminished quality of life for
the sole reason that her continued existence has a quality that is below some
subjective standard put forth by a judge. If this can be true for any living
person, then God help us all.
“Even with the advances in medical technology of recent years, this is a debate
that has been with us for a long time, much longer than many Americans are
aware. Early in the twentieth century, the euthanasia movement began to spread
the doctrine that quality of life was the determinant of human value, and some
lives—the defective, the racially inferior, the sick—were not worth preserving
and protecting. The first government to widely implement this doctrine of doing
away with “life unworthy of life” was Germany between 1938 and 1945, when the
Nazis were in control. During those years, the German government collaborated
with “progressive thinkers” in the medical community in terminating the lives of
thousands of what they called “empty shells of human beings”—the terminally ill
and mentally retarded, as well as individuals with brain damage or psychiatric
conditions. After World War II, German doctors who worked on this program to
eliminate “useless eaters” were judged guilty of crimes against humanity.
“We should be aware that some of the same ideology is being debated today.
Recent changes in state laws allowing the withdrawal of ordinary means of
sustenance—food and water—in cases of persistent vegetative state have been
driven by ardent euthanasia advocates. Judicial decisions denying the
legislatively-mandated review of the finding of fact that Terri Schiavo is in a
persistent vegetative state are an explicit violation of Constitutional
guarantee that individuals cannot be deprived of life without due process of
law—simply on the basis of quality of life judgment.
“Thankfully, there are many on both sides of the political aisle—including half
of the Democrats who came back to Washington to vote in favor of the bill to
save Terri Schiavo—who understand that this is not a political issue.
“Ultimately, the debate over Terri Schiavo is not about states’ rights or
medical ethics or end-of-life decisions. It’s about whether we measure life by a
subjective or objective test. Is life a test of sufficient value or is it
precious and sacred per se in all its various conditions?”
Sam Brownback
United States Senator - Kansas
303 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-6521
|
