A recent headline HUSBAND OF PREGNANT WOMAN WANTS HER OFF
LIFE SUPPORT…has caught my eye since it seems to address a number of important
societal issues.
The case involves a 33 year old mother of one who had a
pulmonary embolism and is now on life support in an unconscious state. Her
husband wants he off life support since that is what they, as a married couple,
agreed to; no vegetative state existence.
The problem is that Marlise (woman in coma) is pregnant (18
weeks) and happens to be in the state of Texas which prohibits withholding life
support from a patient, regardless of her wishes.
The first question I have concerns the “sanctity” of a
“married” relationship. By that I mean the “absolute” right of a husband as to
the welfare of his wife and vice versa.
I understand that the state of Texas is extremely regressive
when it comes to social issues especially the issue of abortion but for that
issue to supersede the rights of a husband seems to me, to violate a “natural”
law of nature and our society.
The husband, who is aware of the pregnancy, could opt to
keep his wife alive until the fetus is viable but he chose NOT TO and I can
understand on a number of levels where that would be a preferable decision for
him and his family.
The hospital cannot be blamed; they are just following Texas
law so who does this suffering husband turn to at this time when all he wants
to do is honor his wife’s wishes never to be left in a vegetative state
something my wife and I have also promised to each other.
This matter goes to the central problem with the issue of
abortion and that is that other people, other than the wife and husband who
combined their egg and sperm to produce a fetus, are allowed to dictate what is
done or not done with that fetus.
Opposition to abortion is usually based on some perceived
religious precept and I say perceived because there are no biblical laws
banning abortion but of course you can find anything in the Bible to support
whatever view you want even if those views are contradictory.
In my opinion, no religious law, perceived or actual, can
counter the law of nature. Nature makes possible the act of procreation between
a man and a woman and therefore makes them not only the creators of life but
also the nurturers of that life. But as creators of that clump of cells that
may turn into a human being, they also can be the destroyers of their creation;
it is as simple as that.
You may counter that with a religious belief that only God
creates and destroys life. Well that is OK if you believe in that type of God
but that is only a “belief” and not a “fact”. What is a “fact” is that nature
allows humans to create and destroy life.
Our society puts a huge emphasis on the bond of marriage
whether a bond sanctified by a religion or a civil authority. That bond between
two individuals, once sanctified, becomes a bond (with all the rights inherent
in that bond), sacrosanct and above any other authority…let no man put asunder!
Otherwise, what is the point.
No comments:
Post a Comment