The Changer and the Changed

"Political change is different. I think it tends to happen against one's will, often very much against one's will." This important observation sets the tone for a very enlightening series at Neo-Neocon.

Agents of change. "Therapists are change-agents by definition, and it helps if a therapist actually believes that people can change. But every therapist knows a bitter truth, and that is that true and fundamental change is both difficult and rare, and that it is often exceedingly painful for the person who changes, and for everyone around him/her."
- Part 1

Mechanisms of change. "Different schools of therapy approach clients through different parts of this troika of cognition, feeling, and behavior. For example, (surprise, surprise!) cognitive therapists work on changing thought patterns, many psychotherapists work on feelings, and behavioral therapists work on--well, behavior. But a therapist can also work eclectically and choose to approach on any of these dimensions, and that's the method that made most sense to me, choosing the point of intervention based on the particular presenting problem. Intervening to change one dimension could end up changing another, and ultimately changing them all. The idea was that lasting change could start anywhere, but would then (at least, ideally) cause a ripple effect ... "
- Part 2

Roots of identity. "So, what did I learn in my childhood about politics? I learned to affiliate with my family's beliefs on an emotional level, but I learned very little except generalities about the reasoning and factual basis behind those positions. I learned that politics could be a very contentious subject, but that people still liked to discuss it. I learned that some people were fanatics and didn't listen to reason or argument, and I knew I never wanted to be like them. And I knew the world was a dangerous place, and that (at least in my mind) there was an excellent chance I wouldn't live to grow up, because a nuclear conflagration would stop me. There was fear involved in politics, but it seemed important--perhaps a matter of life or death."
- Part 3

Go check it out.

George Felos Reviewed on NRO

Eric Pfeiffer reviews "Litigation as Spiritual Practice", the book by Michael Schiavo's lawyer George Felos, here at National Review Online.

The Writing on the Wall

Mohammed is reminded of the novel In Evil Hour by Gabriel Garcia Marquez in this post. Read it to find out what "open secret" Mohammed would like to expose.

"An Object of Beauty and Envy"

Syria's foremost heretic meditates on the role of individualism and creativity in this post. As America's civil rights leaders observed, "the personal is political" and vice versa. Be sure to read Amarji's poem (linked in the post). I was reminded of the Terry Gilliam movie "Brazil", in which the young man's struggles for identity and individuality are thwarted by the oedipal mother-state. Take some time with Amarji's writing, and think about the risks he is being forced to take, just for the privilege of trying to be human.

On Terri Schiavo

NOTE: I'm re-posting this earlier piece on Schiavo, which I had temporarily pulled in the hopes of putting together something a little better. At the moment, I'm unable to devote the attention to the matter that it deserves, due to various personal factors including a serious illness in the family. I believe the issue is important and needs to be discussed freely and intelligently. My own position has not changed; however, please see Kai Jones' and Joshua Gibson's responses in the Comments section. I look forward to rejoining the Schiavo discussion at a later date.

I don't have time to write a full piece on Terri Schiavo at the moment, but I do feel I need to say a few words on the case - and to say why I am convinced that Terri's life must be preserved.

I am not a right-to-life absolutist. Nor does one need to be, to see many gravely troubling aspects to the Terri Schiavo case. In fact, I would argue that those who do believe in "death with dignity" should look at this as an example of all that can go wrong without proper safeguards.

Terri Schiavo left no "living will". A "living will" is a document spelling out instructions for the family as to what to do - or, in particular, what not to do - in the event that an individual becomes permanently incapacitated or comatose. My mother took great care to draw up a living will in the last months of her life; she explained its provisions to me, asked me to repeat the instructions back to her, and showed me where the document was kept. (Another copy was on file with her lawyer.) But if a living will is to have any meaning at all, surely its absence, too, must mean something.

I'm worried by what I've read about Michael Schiavo's financial interests, allegations of his abuse and neglect of Terri, and indications of a premeditated killing.

I used to think the Terri Schiavo case was "some kind of right-wing cause". I'm no longer thinking of it in these terms. (Andrew Sullivan, for example, sees the case as a sign of the demise of conservatism.)

The following blogs have information on the Terri Schiavo case:
Straight Up With Sherri
Discarded Lies


UPDATE: Reader Kai Jones has contributed some very enlightening links on the other side of the debate.

Respectful of Otters - "A court has determined, based on the testimony of several witnesses, that Schiavo's wish would have been to remain unviolated by a feeding tube if she had no hope of recovering. That ruling has been affirmed and re-affirmed. It is our best estimate, our only estimate, of what Terri Schiavo would have wanted. If we want our own rights to bodily integrity preserved, we have no choice but to uphold hers." Rivka notes that she is " strongly opposed to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide."

Obsidian Wings -

In 1990, Terri Schiavo suffered cardiac arrest, probably as a result of bulimia. (If any of you have been wondering why a woman in her twenties had cardiac arrest, that seems to be the answer. The underreporting of this aspect of the case is a real missed opportunity to educate people about the consequences of serious eating disorders.) As a result of the cardiac arrest, her brain was deprived of oxygen, which caused severe brain damage.

Eight years later, after various attempts at therapy and a successful malpractice suit (based on the doctors' failure to diagnose Terri's eating disorder), Michael Schiavo petitioned the court to determine whether her feeding tube should be removed. Many press reports talk as though he just decided that it should be removed; in fact, he left that decision to the court. He and others testified that Terri Schiavo had said that she would not want to be kept alive in a condition like the one she was in; her family of origin testified that she had said that she would. The judge found (pdf) that there was 'clear and convincing evidence' that Terri Schiavo would not have wanted to receive life-prolonging care in her current condition, and ordered that the feeding tube could be removed. (If you are wondering how the judge could have found 'clear and convincing evidence' given conflicting testimony, I urge you to read the pdf, which explains why the judge did not find her parents' testimony credible. In one case, for instance, they testified that she had made a remark supporting their position when she was an adult, but it turned out that she had said it when she was 11 or 12.)

I'll take some time to read through the materials on both sides, and will post again when I get the chance.

Liberal Hawks Meet-Up

The Portland meet-up was a resounding success, attended by no fewer than three people! We met at a local pub and schmoozed over beer and dinner. It was great to meet other similarly-minded folks in person. Conversation was warm, interesting, and pleasant. (I had promised myself in advance that I wouldn't talk about Terri Schiavo, and I didn't.)

Thanks to the others who attended - all two of you - and also (especially) to those who said they would like to come but weren't able to make it. Hopefully we'll be able to get another one together before too long. I'll be looking forward to it.

Readers, there's a lesson here for all of us! You may think you are alone, but you're probably not. Judith got a group together in New York; I figured we'd never be able to get anything together in Portland, but I'm pleased to say I was wrong. Just goes to show.

Best Anti-Feeding-Tube Post So Far

You already know I'm on the "Save Terri" side. But just so you know I'm keeping an open mind, I'm posting this Terri Schiavo FAQ page presented by the always sensible Ocean Guy. It addresses many of the questions raised by the "Save Terri" people. Who's right? I honestly can't say for sure. But why couldn't more of the "pull the feeding tube" folks have started with this?

I didn't start following the Schiavo case with any preconceptions or sympathies. As I've said before, I'm not a pro-life absolutist. But some serious questions were being raised about the Schiavo case, and they deserved serious answers. How hard could it have been for the other side to say, "Look, we understand your concerns, but it's not what you think. Here's why ... "

Ocean Guy doesn't spend a lot of time pontificating, he just says, "Go read this - you'll learn something." That's what I appreciate, and would have liked to see more of. Meanwhile, I'll be interested to see what the "Save Terri" side says in response to this.

Still More on Terri Schiavo

As you may have already figured out, I'm declining all those kind invitations to shut up.

I'm glad that MJ at Friday Fishwrap finds this amusing. I don't. In fact I think it's disgusting. Jon Stewart (consistently referring to "Terri Shyvo") thinks it's cute to comment on how many people are calling Terri by her first name, and wonders what all those people would call her if they actually knew her. Well, I don't know, but I bet they'd at least pronounce her f*cking name correctly. Moron.

Cox & Forkum disappoint as well.

On the bright side, Peggy Noonan has a splendid column about the culture of death. I really want to talk about this more (it'll get its own post), because I think it's critical for all of us liberals to understand the danger posed by those destructive demons that live at the heart of the far left. To want to reform society because you have a vision of a better world is one thing; to try to throw civilization into the abyss is something else. Here's Peggy Noonan:

I do not understand the emotionalism of the pull-the-tube people. What is driving their engagement? Is it because they are compassionate, and their hearts bleed at the thought that Mrs. Schiavo suffers? But throughout this case no one has testified that she is in persistent pain, as those with terminal cancer are.

If they care so much about her pain, why are they unconcerned at the suffering caused her by the denial of food and water? And why do those who argue for Mrs. Schiavo's death employ language and imagery that is so violent and aggressive? The chairman of the Democratic National Committee calls Republicans "brain dead." Michael Schiavo, the husband, calls House Majority Leader Tom DeLay "a slithering snake."

Everyone who has written in defense of Mrs. Schiavo's right to live has received e-mail blasts full of attacks that appear to have been dictated by the unstable and typed by the unhinged. On Democratic Underground they crowed about having "kicked the sh-- out of the fascists." On Tuesday James Carville's face was swept with a sneer so convulsive you could see his gums as he damned the Republicans trying to help Mrs. Schiavo. It would have seemed demonic if he weren't a buffoon.

Why are they so committed to this woman's death?

They seem to have fallen half in love with death.

Please go read the whole thing at the link.

And that's all I have on Terri Schiavo.

For now.

Terri Schiavo and Persons with Disabilities

From someone who knows a thing or two about disabilities, there is this:

Healthy people have a horror of disability. I feel this horror myself, and I am the parent of two children with autism. When my first son was diagnosed, my immediate reaction—this is intimate, but I have published one article revealing this—was that I needed to kill him and kill myself.

The thought that ran through my head, over and over again, was: “He has no life, and neither do I.”

I was in a clinical depression. By the next morning I was still in a clinical depression, but at least my mind had cleared on the rationality of two people needing to die because one small boy had been diagnosed with a developmental disability.

My psychiatrist talked me through.

“Why would you assume that your son will have an unhappy life?” she asked me.

...

My psychiatrist told me that there had been a fair amount of research done with disabled & mentally ill people—she had done some of it herself—and they all have the same level of well-being anyone else does. (People with clinical depression, she said, are the one exception. Extremely low ‘quality of life’ is almost the definition of depression.)

Since then I’ve followed this research, and it’s true of suddenly-disabled adults as well. After they adjust to their injuries, which seems to take two years’ time, they are as happy as anyone else. A healthy person will say that he would rather die than live life as a quadriplegic. But in life, people who become quadriplegics are like Christopher Reeve, not like the character in MILLION DOLLAR BABY.

The mistake we make is to experience our horror of disability, which I share, and our concern and care for their condition, which motivates those who wish to see Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube removed, as the emotion felt by the disabled person himself.

But ‘quality of life,’ like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. The fact that we are horrified by the sight of Christopher Reeve does not mean that Christopher Reeve is horrified by the sight of Christopher Reeve. And it is Christopher Reeve’s opinion that counts.

The same can be said of my own life, as a matter of fact. When people realize I have two children with autism they react with horror. I would, too, in their shoes! But I myself am not horrified. I’m as happy as anyone I know, and happier than some. This strange life I lead, which I wouldn’t recommend to anyone else, is normal to me.

This is from Catherine Johnson's guest post at Kesher Talk. I immediately thought of this post when I read Charles Krauthammer's column this morning. Even more interesting is something Catherine says elsewhere - and I hope she won't mind my paraphrasing it here: That even severely disabled people, after that two-year adjustment period, consider themselves fortunate by comparison with people even more gravely incapacitated. Now think about that and read the quadriplegic Krauthammer's opening sentence in his column:

If I were in Terri Schiavo's condition, I would not want a feeding tube.

Krauthammer makes this assertion with absolute confidence - as many of us would - because, like almost all of us, he shares this wonderful basic trait of human nature. He has the ability to see his life as blessed. And so, with almost no use of his arms and legs, he can look on Terri Schiavo and say: "Wow ... she's really got it bad! I wouldn't want to live her life!"

But Krauthammer possesses two other beautiful human traits as well: humility and compassion. He knows that he is not Terri Schiavo, and he wants her to have what is best for her. And so he immediately continues:

... But Terri Schiavo does not have the means to make her intentions known. We do not know what she would have wanted. We have nothing to go on. No living will, no advance directives, no durable power of attorney.

And if you haven't yet, go read his full column.

What Charles Krauthammer and Catherine Johnson both understand is that, no matter how unbearable another person's life may look to us, it is only the person living that life who actually knows.

Neo-Neocon
Kesher Talk
Charles Krauthammer

President Bush Appoints Goli Ameri to UN Human Rights Commission

Yeah!!!

Hot off the e-mail: Iranian-American businesswoman Goli Ameri, who ran last year as the Republican candidate for the US House of Representatives (representing my district, 1st Oregon) has been appointed as a delegate to the UN Commission on Human Rights:

Goli Ameri Appointed by President Bush as one of Three Public Delegates
to the UN Human Rights Commission

March 23, 2005
Office: (503) 968-8437

Goli Ameri has been appointed by President George W. Bush as one of
three public delegates to the United Nations Commission on Human
Rights. The 2005 meeting of the UN Commission on Human Rights will
take place March 14 through April 22 in Geneva, Switzerland.

The US delegation is headed by former Senator Rudy Boschwitz who has
been nominated by the White House for the position of Ambassador to
the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR). Senator Boschwitz served in
the US Senate from 1978-1991. Former Ambassadors to the UNCHR include
Ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick who served in the Geneva post in 2003.

"The United States wants the Commission to better fulfill its mandate
to strengthen human rights and fundamental freedoms around the world.
I am honored to have been appointed by the president and to represent
the United States on the Commission," said Goli Ameri former
Republican nominee for Congress in Oregon's first district. "I look
forward to actively participating in the upcoming session."

The Commission's annual meeting is an opportunity to focus attention on
countries where there are significant human rights problems. The US
delegation is also committed to promoting democracy worldwide. In
this regard, the United States plans to work with other countries to
encourage discussion of ways that the Commission can foster reform in
nations that are determined to advance democracy and human rights.

Go to this link to read the Full Text of Goli Ameri's Speech.

An Army of One

Happy belated blogiversary to Jane Novak, Commander-in-Chief of the Armies of Liberation. Jane is a native New Yorker who took 9/11 personally, and vowed to bring the fight to the enemy by challenging Osama bin Laden on his own ground. She is a passionate and eloquent advocate for democracy in the Middle East. Her philosophy is: "Okay, Osama, you come to my hometown and knock stuff down, I'll go to your hometown and build stuff up." She has published numberous articles and essays in English-language print journals in the Middle East (she has a particular obsession with OBL's native Yemen) and recently played a leading role in the campaign to free Abdulkarim al-Khaiwani and other imprisoned Yemeni journalists. Jane has also played a key role in keeping Sudan on our maps. (And for whatever it's worth, she also inspired yours truly to stake out this humble corner of the blogosphere that you're reading right now.) And she's done all this in just her first year of blogging.

Happy blogiversary, Jane! Readers, be sure to add Armies of Liberation to your browser favorites.

Krauthammer on Schiavo

Charles Krauthammer, who is himself a quadriplegic, has this to say:

Let's be clear about her condition. She is not dead. If she were brain-dead, we would be talking about harvesting her organs. She is a living, breathing human being. Some people have called her a vegetable. Apart from the term being disgusting, how do they know? How can we be sure of the complete absence of any consciousness, any awareness, any anything ``inside'' this person?

     The crucial issue in deciding whether or not one would want to intervene to keep her alive is whether there is, as one bioethicist put it to me, ``anyone home.'' Her parents, who see her often, believe that there is. The husband maintains there is no one home. (But then again he has another home, making his judgment somewhat suspect.)

     The husband has not allowed a lot of medical testing in the last few years. I have tried to find out what her neurological condition actually is. But the evidence is sketchy, old and conflicting. The Florida court found that most of her cerebral cortex is gone. But ``most'' does not mean all. There might be some cortex functioning. The very severely retarded or brain-damaged can have some consciousness. And we do not go around euthanizing the minimally conscious in the back wards of the mental hospitals on the grounds that their lives are not worth living.

     Given our lack of certainty, given that there are loved ones prepared to keep her alive and care for her, how can you allow the husband to end her life on his say-so?

Krauthammer makes it very clear that he's not happy with Washington's attempts to circumvent due process; it is, he says, a no-win choice between a legal travesty and a moral tragedy. Read the whole thing.

Hat tip: Neo-Neocon.