Repub Hypocrisy Reigns

From the blogosphere... more at:

How seriously should we take the concern and outrage of Dubya, DeLay, Bob Schindler (Terri Schaivo's father), and the right-to-lifers? Let's take them one at a time.

First, Dubya. In 1999, as governor of Texas, Bush signed into law , which allows a hospital to discontinue life support, over the objections of the patient's family, if the hospital's ethics committee finds that the treatment is nonbeneficial. (link via Mark A.R. Kleiman) Although the law originally applied only to adult patients, in 2003 the Texas legislature extended it to include children.

This past Tuesday, March 15, the law was used to remove a breathing tube from Sun Hudson, an African-American baby in Houston, against his mother's wishes, causing his death:

The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips.

Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.

"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months. ... They made a terrible mistake." [link via Long Story Short Pier]

Also in Houston, doctors are invoking the law Governor George W. Bush signed in announcing that they intend to cut off life support for Spiro Nikolouzos against his family's wishes:

A patient's inability to pay for medical care combined with a prognosis that renders further care futile are two reasons a hospital might suggest cutting off life support, the chief medical officer at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital said Monday.

Dr. David Pate's comments came as the family of Spiro Nikolouzos fights to keep St. Luke's from turning off the ventilator and artificial feedings keeping the 68-year-old grandfather alive.

St. Luke's notified Jannette Nikolouzos in a March 1 letter that it would withdraw life-sustaining care of her husband of 34 years in 10 days, which would be Friday. Mario Caballero, the attorney representing the family, said he is seeking a two-week extension, at minimum, to give the man more time to improve and to give his family more time to find an alternative facility. [link via Atrios; typo in story corrected]

Has Dubya spoken out against these terrible abuses of the bill that he signed into law? Has he stated that "there should be a presumption in favor" of allowing the lives of Sun Hudson and Spiro Nikolouzos to continue? Has he declared that he made a terrible mistake, and wishes he had vetoed the bill instead of signing it? Nope. He hasn't said a word.

Second, Tom DeLay. He's a Texan, too. Has he spoken out about the taking of Sun Hudson's life, and the threat to take Spiro Nikolouzos's life, both in Texas? Surely he's given enraged press conferences denouncing these as "murder" and "medical terrorism," and introduced legislation to protect the lives of Sun Hudson, Spiro Nikolouzos, and others like them? Nah. Not a peep out of him, either.

An article in today's Washington Post suggests that DeLay and other congressional Republicans' deep concern about Ms. Schiavo might be (gasp!) politically motivated:

In a memo distributed only to Republican senators, the Schiavo case was characterized as "a great political issue" that could pay dividends with Christian conservatives, whose support is essential in midterm elections such as those coming up in 2006.

. . . .

An unsigned one-page memo, distributed to Republican senators, said the debate over Schiavo would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters. The memo singled out Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who is up for reelection next year and is potentially vulnerable in a state President Bush won last year.

"This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue," said the memo, which was reported by ABC News and later given to The Washington Post. "This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats." [link via Talking Points Memo]

Third, Bob Schindler. He's probably too preoccupied with his daughter's case to have heard about Sun Hudson or Spiro Nikolouzos, so it wouldn't be fair to criticize him for not saying anything about them. But it turns out that he pulled the plug on his own mother:

[G]iven the vehemence with which he has been fighting to prolong Terri's life, it is a little surprising to learn that Robert decided to turn off the life-support system for his mother. She was 79 at the time, and had been ill with pneumonia for a week, when her kidneys gave out. "I can remember like yesterday the doctors said she had a good life. I asked, 'If you put her on a ventilator does she have a chance of surviving, of coming out of this thing?'" Robert says. "I was very angry with God because I didn't want to make those decisions." [emphasis added]

Fourth, the right-to-lifers. The inconsistency of Dubya and DeLay and Bob Schindler is very disappointing. But surely the highly principled right-to-life folks have been just as upset about Sun Hudson and Spiro Nikolouzos as they have about Terri Schiavo? No, they've haven't said jack about Sun or Spiro, either. Odd.

But surely the right-to-lifers vigorously opposed that horrible Texas law that allows hospitals to discontinue treatment to Sun, Spiro and others against their families' wishes, right? No, they helped write it:

[O]ne of the co-drafters in both 1999 and 2003 was the National Right to Life Committee. Witnesses who testified in support of the bill in 1999 included representatives of National Right to Life [and] Texas Right to Life . . . .

Digby observes with his usual eloquence:

By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are also aware that Republicans have voted en masse to pull the plug (no pun intended) on Medicaid funding that pays for the kind of care that someone like Terry Schiavo and many others who are not so severely brain damaged need all across this country.

Those of us who read liberal blogs also understand that that the tort reform that is being contemplated by the Republican Congress would preclude malpractice claims like that which has paid for Terry Schiavo's care thus far.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are aware that the bankruptcy bill will make it even more difficult for families who suffer a catastrophic illness like Terry Schiavo's because they will not be able to declare chapter 7 bankruptcy and get a fresh start when the gargantuan medical bills become overwhelming.

And those of us who read liberal blogs also know that this grandstanding by the Congress is a purely political move designed to appease the religious right and that the legal maneuverings being employed would be anathema to any true small government conservative.

Those who don't read liberal blogs, on the other hand, are seeing a spectacle on television in which the news anchors repeatedly say that the Congress is "stepping in to save Terry Schiavo" mimicking the unctuous words of Tom DeLay as they grovel and leer at the family and nod sympathetically at the sanctimonious phonies who are using this issue for their political gain. [link via Atrios; typos corrected]

(Thanks to Nancy G. for this story.)