What "Right to Die" Battle?
Have you noticed that most major media outlets are describing the Terri Schindler-Schiavo case as the "right to die" case? I don't claim to have the answer to this complex, heart breaking story, but I have to ask, what is the "right to die" exactly?
Whether it's journalistic laziness, anti-life agenda, editorial groupthink, or simple parroting of one another, just about every headline, everywhere mainstream media can be found, mentions this sad story as THE case at the forefront of the "right to die battle." Link 1 Link 2 Link 3 Link 4 Link 5
Ok, now not only is there a right, but apparently there is a battle too? The only battle I'm aware of is the one Terri's parents are fighting to keep her alive and her husband's fight to convey what he claims she didn't have a chance to communicate.
I have no reason to believe that Michael Schiavo is anything but sincere. I feel sorry for this man. He has suffered greatly. However, if I'm ever incapacitated and my wife is remarried in a common law marriage with kids (like Michael Schiavo), please ignore what she may have to say. Instead, listen to my brother, my sister, and my parents as to what my fate should be. As a father myself, I can not imagine not having a say as to the life or death of my child. A man's love for his ex-wife may run deep, but it's dwarfed by the love a parent feels for a child -- no matter what age the child becomes.
I can't think of a better example of the subtle, yet ubiquitous slants offered by major media. Framing this solely as the right/battle to die leaves no doubt as to who are the heroes, victims, and protagonists in this story. Those opposed automatically become the villains, or at best, the simpletons. For a great discussion on this very topic as it applies to all news and events, see Bernard Goldberg's description of what he terms media "warning labels" in his book, Bias.
Dying may be the right answer for Terri, but it's clearly her parent's decision to make.