|
You distorted a Texas law signed by George W. Bush (under which a baby was pulled off life support against his mother's wishes) to support the radical religious right's view of the Schiavo case.
Your story explored the issue of whether or not the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube would lead America down a "slippery slope" of recklessly terminating the lives of all sorts of disabled people. The correspondent then said something like, "As a matter of fact, a baby with a birth defect was just removed from life support in Texas against the mother's wishes," as if this event was early evidence of the inception of a disturbing trend. The correspondent DID NOT MENTION that this law was (1) signed by George W. Bush, and (2) permits a HOSPITAL to decide to cut off life support if THE PATIENT CANNOT PAY and the hospital determines it is ethically appropriate to discontinue treatment.
The mother couldn't pay and the hospital cut off treatment, under a law signed by George W. Bush. No litigation. No lengthy appeals over the course of years. No Congressional intervention. Not a peep from Tom DeLay.
This is the epitome of one-sided, biased, inaccurate reporting. It is propaganda, pure and simple.
The Texas law is completely in conflict with Bush's "err on the side of life" statement. To be consistent, the hospital should have no statutory right to cut off treatment against a family's wishes. Period. Ever. You should have called Bush on it. But instead you shilled for him and the radical right.
|