Glenda Simms
THE BODY of Terri Schiavo became the most recent arena for the historical
struggle to control women's
lives within the framework of a patriarchal society.
The attention of the world had been directed to Pinellas Park in Florida where a woman who
suffered from brain damage in 1990 was in a vegetative state for more than 15 years.
One does not have to be closely connected to this individual to understand the trauma, the agony and the distress felt by Terri's spouse, parents, siblings and friends.
No doubt everyone had hoped that there would have been a dramatic change from Mrs. Shiavo's vegetative state to a plain which would give hope of her revival and for some degree of quality of life.
This miracle did not happen.
Terri Schiavo died 13 days after the feeding tube was removed.
It is against this background that the man to whom Mrs. Schiavo was still legally attached made the
decision to order the removal of the feeding tubes which helped to keep his wife in a state of being alive.
Such difficult decisions are made on a regular basis by individuals or their surrogates in nearly every country of the modern world.
So why did Terri Schiavo become the symbol of the personal, religious and ideological contradictions that humanity grapple with on a daily basis?
It is obvious that all kinds of politicians, religious zealots, holy rollers and others whose mission is to craft the world to fit their view of what should obtain, had a field day. The feeding frenzy that took place on the body of this woman, who was in a permanent vegetative state for 15 years, was not only disgusting, but immoral and crass by any
measure.
MORALITY VS HYPOCRISY
We are forced to question the moral basis on which everyone involved operated.
Where does the moral authority of the state emanate in this issue?
Whose life chances will be protected by the most powerful world leader and his governing apparatus?
If indeed the state has the moral basis on which to intervene in the most personal decisions of its citizens, why are so many people allowed to die in abject poverty? Why is affordable health care not a right of every citizen? Why are so many homeless people allowed to rummage in garbage cans in the subways of New York, in the ghettos of Detroit, Michigan, Atlanta, Georgia and Kingston, Jamaica?
Why is the life of some people more valued than the life of others in all societies of the world?
Why is there so much religious passion around the bodies of women? In other words, why do so-called upright, religious, reactionary and conservative men and their female allies break every rule to get their point of view across on issues such as abortion and the right of the husband to remove the feeding tube from his brain dead wife?
In the case of Terri Schiavo, news reports described how groups who identified themselves as the Christian Right were intent to break through the crowd control and security barriers to bring food and water to Mrs. Schiavo. The television screens were dramatic in their portrayal of hundreds of men and women beating their chests and wringing their hands in the great pretence that they care about the quality of life or the life chances of the majority of women and children.
These pictures were truly vivid moments of 'canned hypocrisy' and indecent deception.
CONTRADICTORY
Another puzzling contradiction of 'Terri's passion' is the fact that the religious zealots who were
questioning the authority of her
husband are the very ones who administer and promote wedding ceremonies based on the theological premise that when a woman marries she must leave her mother and father and become one with her husband.
In this marital space the authority of the mother and father of the bride is secondary to the authority of the husband. It is therefore the husband who has the legal right to make decisions for a wife who is not able to do so.
Of course, there are many a
husband who make all the important decisions even when their wives are not in a vegetative state but that is another issue.
According to some news stories, Michael Schiavo, the husband, has established a love relationship
outside of his marriage and has also fathered children in this new union. On this basis some folks argue that this man lost his moral authority to make decisions about his wife's life.
Some ask, why did he not divorce her since he has obviously moved on? Well, the difference between Michael Schiavo and a lot of other men who have relationships and
children on the outside of their
marriage is that Michael did this without his wife's knowledge, while so many do it while their wives are alert, breathing, salivating and foaming at the mouth with anger, frustration and a passion for life that is honest and true.
In the final analysis whatever our state of being every woman and man deserve dignity, peace and a private space in which to exit this earthly plain when his or her number is called.
Dr. Glenda Simms is the
executive director of the
Bureau of Women's Affairs.
You can send your comments to
infocus@gleanerjm.com
