Complex workings in deciding Schiavo case
He sees it as simply a case of good and evil as opposed to a complex weighing-up of the sometimes contradictory interests of a human being, and backs up his judgment with a clairvoyance beyond most of us.
For example, his assertion that “the death of love in a husband” is a factor in Terri Schiavo’s case is flabbergasting. How can he make a judgment on what was going on in the heart of a man he has never met?
He described Mrs Schiavo as a slave to her husband’s will. How does Mr Mullen know that Mr Schiavo is not telling the truth when he says he was attempting to carry out her wishes?
He refers to Mr Schiavo’s new relationship as “adulterous”. The implied assertion that Mr Schiavo was not entitled to take comfort from a new relationship after caring for his comatose wife for five years is unworthy of anyone with a functioning moral compass.
The explicit assertion that this new relationship removed Mr Schiavo’s right to act as his wife’s next of kin is unexplained, unfounded and uncharitable.
There is a lot to discuss in the Schiavo case that might be helpful in the more general debate on the sanctity of life, the rights of the dying, and the rights of those left with difficult decisions to make on their behalf. Mr Mullen’s schoolyard innuendo has contributed nothing to that argument.
Jaime Hyland
Heinrich-Mann-Str 26
13156 Berlin, Germany
