An earlier post offered some thoughts on the relationships between politics, religion, and science – three topics people do not often think about together. The debate on the death of Terri Shiavo involves all three in a way that can shed some insight in how closely tied these fields are.

Science and technology have advanced to the point where we can measure many aspects of the human body. In the case of Terri Shiavo science tells us that her brain is so severely damaged that Terri Shiavo is highly unlikely[1] with today’s current technology to ever again lead a life that is remotely human.[2] This issue has already been adjudicated in the state courts of Florida and even in the U.S. Supreme Court. The findings are:

The evidence is overwhelming that Theresa is in a permanent or persistent vegetative state. It is important to understand that a persistent vegetative state is not simply a coma. She is not asleep. She has cycles of apparent wakefulness and apparent sleep without any cognition or awareness. As she breathes, she often makes moaning sounds. Theresa has severe contractures of her hands, elbows, knees, and feet.

Over the span of this last decade, Theresa’s brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this state for many years.

This is what science tells us as determined by our judicial system. Yet there is still life. Science also tells us that Ms. Shiavo’s heart continues to beat and many of her organs continue to function.

Should we as a society maintain this life?

Love, money, politics, and religion all come together. The money is the easiest path to follow. In 1992 as a result of both an out of court settlement and an in court award, an amount of about a million dollars was put in a trust fund to pay for medical expenses.[3] The money is important only because some people have argued that Ms. Shiavo’s husband wants Ms. Shiavo declared dead for what is left of the money.[4]

Both Ms. Shiavo’s parents and her husband love Ms. Shiavo. Her husband believes that he is following Ms. Shiavo’s wishes by allowing Ms. Shiavo to reach the next stage in the dying process. Ms. Shiavo’s parents believe that despite the medical evidence Ms. Shiavo may once again be capable of living a remotely human life. They had their differences adjudicated and the courts findings are above.

Because this is a matter of love for both sides this is where religion and politics came into the case. The case was found by people who believe that allowing Ms. Shiavo to reach the next stage in the death process violates their religious beliefs. These people are politically active and went to the Florida legislature and passed legislation preventing her from having life support removed and to reach that next stage. When ruled unconstitutional by the courts, these same people have now approached the Federal legislature and asked again for legislation.

When life support, the feeding tube, is removed science tells us that sometime in the future Ms. Shiavo may die from lack of nutrition. How long that will take, nobody knows. Nobody can also say whether or not Ms. Shiavo will die from lack of nutrition or some other cause. What we can say is that even a partial recovery for Ms. Shiavo is highly unlikely.[5]

Politics, religion and science all have points of view of when is a person dead. Appearances suggest that birth, life and death are a continuum. Ms. Shiavo when she had her heart attack started to die. The death process was arrested by medicine at a state where the process can no longer be reversed by medicine. Ms. Shiavo is neither fully dead nor alive in the sense of being able to participate in any human activity.[6]

Is Ms. Shiavo today a live human being?

The answer is religious.[7] The decisions as to what steps to take next are political.[8] Her bodily functions can be measured and monitored through technology. Estimates as to her potential recovery can be made based on the knowledge discovered by scientists.[9]