From WorldNetDaily, Fr. Frank Pavone points out two critical differences between the Terri Schiavo case and what most of us think of when we consider the termination of life support for someone brain dead (and Terri wasn't brain dead, by the way):
'Laws vary from state to state,' he said, 'but one of the most dangerous flaws in the law is that which considers food and water to be 'medical treatment' rather than ordinary human care. When we return from a meal, we don't say that we just 'returned from our latest medical treatment.''
Fr. Pavone, who is national director of Priests for Life, and president of the National Pro-Life Religious Council, continued:
'We also see, in policy and practice, a confusion between 'futile treatment' and 'futile life.' If a person is not able to communicate or interact with others, many consider treatments which would keep that person alive to be 'futile,' not because the treatment would be ineffective at preserving life, but because they don't see a purpose to that life,' he said.
'Certainly there is such a thing as a worthless treatment. But there is no such thing as a worthless life,' he said.
Terri Schiavo was dehydrated and starved to death, which is a lot different than turning off a heart and lung machine of someone who's brain is so lifeless it can't maintain even those autonomic functions.