I have always considered Michael Schiavo a saint. Most other young men, in similar circumstances, would, I am convinced, found some way to walk away from such a tragic situation. Schiavo didn't. He displayed a rare and inspiring courage in upholding his moral and legal obligations to Terri, and in the face of some of the most stressful conditions imaginable.
According to him:
A religious zealot offered $250,000 to anyone who would kill me. My two babies were threatened with death. I was condemned by the president, the majority leaders of the House and Senate, the governor of Florida, the pope, and the right-wing media, all because I was doing what Terri - the woman I loved - wanted.Michael Schiavo met Terri in 1983 when they were both in college. Like any couple they had their ups and downs, even their arguments. Yet when he discovered that she had collapsed in their home in February 1990, Schiavo was certain that she would recover.
But as the days stretched into weeks, then months, it became more and more certain that Terri would never return. In fact, it became more and more clear that the essence of what made Terri, her mind, had ceased to exist. That left Schiavo to deal first with his own grief, then to take up the challenge of acting in his wife's interests.
Schiavo, who knew his wife, knew that she would not want to live as she was. Because she could not ask that her life support be withheld, he would have to act for her. And, by virtue of his being married to Terri, he was the only person with the legal authority to ensure that those wishes would be carried out.
Terri's parents and family did not agree. They clung to the reflexive sounds and movements Terri's body was able to make and did not see, as Michael did, the lack of consciousness behind the eyes that tracked birthday balloons. They believed those sounds and movements meant some part of Terri could yet be called back.
And so a private struggle between a husband and inlaws became more and more public, until - this time last year - the entire nation was focused on the drama going on in a Florida hospice.
Through it all, Schiavo stuck by his wife, did the right thing and did not bow to the pressure of outsiders. It would have been so easy for him to divorce his wife - after all, toward the end, he was involved with another woman and had children with her. Had he divorced Terri, it would have taken him out of a national spotlight in which conservative commentators felt free to call him a murderer for wanting Terri to die with dignity.
But here's the thing: he didn't. Because the only thing that he had to ensure that Terri's wishes would be honored was the legal fact of his marriage. The woman he had married no longer existed but the marriage was a legal entity unto itself, and the marriage gave him the legal authority to act for Terri.
To give up the marriage would mean that Terri's destiny would be controlled by her loving, but misguided parents. It would mean that Terri would continue to live a meaningless life - not meaningless, perhaps, to her parents; but meaningless to Terri, to whom the life belonged. For Terri's sake, he could not divorce her.
Of course, one of the most vexing aspects of this whole matter was how this private tragedy was hijacked by outsiders with a political agenda. It was one of the first examples we have had of how far the conservative moralizers inside and outside government are willing to interfere with an individual's private lives if they disagree with that individual.
As I told the Associated Press a year ago, it was ironic that conservatives - who then, as now, issue public appeals to save and preserve "the family" - were so intent on tearing down the foundation of that which they said needed protection. The rite of marriage conveys certain rights of law to both spouses; those special rights, which include the right to legally act for the other when the other cannot act for herself, is a fundamental to both our family law system and society itself.
Watching some of the things the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress has done in the year since Terri Schiavo died, I am still struck by the irony, if not the hypocrisy, of their positions. Not only do our leaders seem disposed toward a big, intrusive government - a far cry from what Conservatives used to stand for - they also seem to favor a Big Brother with the power to substitute his judgments for our own.