The sad case of Terri Schiavo brings to mind the difficult and complex area of end of life decisions. Catholic theology comes into play in many of these cases and is mentioned in one of the most famous cases –that of Karen Ann Quinlan. This is a quote from an amicus curiae filed by bioethicists (who unfortunately support abortion):

“The parties in the right to refuse treatment cases also understood the difference between refusing treatment and suicide. For example, Karen Ann Quinlan was a young woman in a persistent vegetative state, but not terminally ill. Her parents demanded that their daughter's ventilator be discontinued because they believed that is what she would have wanted. The doctors refused. The New Jersey Supreme Court, the country's first to decide a case involving withdrawal of life-sustaining medical technology (sometimes mistakenly called a "right to die" case) agreed that her wishes should be respected, and the ventilator was removed. Neither Ms. Quinlan nor her parents on her behalf, all devout Catholics, ever thought they were involved in suicide. The New Jersey Supreme Court carefully reviewed Catholic doctrine, which adamantly opposes suicide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia, but supports the right to refuse treatment. Pope Pius XII, in his Nov. 24, 1957 allocution, said that withdrawal or nonuse of mechanical ventilation . . . is not to be considered euthanasia in any way; that would never be licit. The interruption of attempts at resuscitation, even when it causes the arrest of circulation, is not more than an indirect cause of the cessation of life; and we must apply in this case the principle of double effect." 70 N.J. at 31, 355 A.2d at 658. See also Amicus Curiae brief of the Medical Society of New Jersey.”

“Similarly, in a New York case, Brother Joseph Fox, an elderly Catholic brother of the Society of Mary, said to his friend and confessor Father Philip Eichner, before surgery, words to the effect, "If I wind up like Karen Quinlan, pull the plug." In re Storar, 52 N.Y.2d 363, 420 N.E.2d 64, 438 N.Y.S. 2d 266 (1981). Since suicide is a mortal sin in the Catholic Church, it is likely that Brother Fox would have been horrified at the notion that his refusal of a ventilator when in a persistent vegetative state (the condition he actually was in after unsuccessful surgery) constituted suicide. Ethics and theology, like the law, recognize the difference between refusing treatment and suicide. “


Brother Fox and Fr. Eichner were both at Chaminade High School which I am always blabbing about. More info can be found from the NYS appeals case:

“For over 66 years Brother Joseph Fox was a member of the Society of Mary, a Catholic religious order which, among other things, operates Chaminade High School in [*371] Mineola. In 1970 Brother Fox retired to Chaminade where he resided with the religious members of the school's staff and continued to perform limited duties. In late summer of 1979 he sustained a hernia while moving some flower tubs on a roof garden at the school. He was then 83 years old and, except for the hernia, was found to be in excellent health. His doctor recommended an operation to correct the condition and Brother Fox agreed.

While the operation was being performed on October 1, 1979 he suffered cardiac arrest, with resulting loss of oxygen to the brain and substantial brain damage. He lost the ability to breathe spontaneously and was placed on a respirator which maintained him in a vegetative state. The attending physicians informed Father Philip Eichner, who was [***18] the president of Chaminade and the director of the society at the school, that there was no reasonable chance of recovery and that Brother Fox would die in that state.

After retaining two neurosurgeons who confirmed the diagnosis, Father Eichner requested the hospital to remove the respirator. The hospital, however, refused to do so without court authorization. Father Eichner then applied, pursuant to article 78 of the Mental Hygiene Law, to be appointed committee of the person and property of Brother Fox, with authority to direct removal of the respirator. The application was supported by the patient's 10 nieces and nephews, his only surviving relatives. The court appointed a guardian ad litem and directed that notice be served on various parties, including the District Attorney.

At the hearing the District Attorney opposed the application and called medical experts to show that there might be some improvement in the patient's condition. All [**68] the experts agreed, however, that there was no reasonable likelihood that Brother Fox would ever emerge from the vegetative coma or recover his cognitive powers.

There was also evidence, submitted by the petitioner, [***19] that before the operation rendered him incompetent the patient had made it known that under these circumstances he would want a respirator removed. Brother Fox had first expressed this view in 1976 when the Chaminade community discussed the moral implications of the celebrated Karen Ann Quinlan [*372] case, in which the parents of a 19-year-old New Jersey girl who was in a vegetative coma requested the hospital to remove the respirator (see Matter of Quinlan, 137 NJ Super 227, revd 70 NJ 10, cert den sub nom. Garger v New Jersey, 429 U.S. 922). These were formal discussions prompted by Chaminade's mission to teach and promulgate Catholic moral principles. At that time it was noted that the Pope had stated that Catholic principles permitted the termination of extraordinary life support systems when there is no reasonable hope for the patient's recovery and that church officials in New Jersey had concluded that use of the respirator in the Quinlan case constituted an extraordinary measure under the circumstances. Brother Fox expressed agreement with those views and stated that he would not want any of this "extraordinary business" done for him under those circumstances. [***20] Several years later, and only a couple of months before his final hospitalization, Brother Fox again stated that he would not want his life prolonged by such measures if his condition were hopeless.

In a thoughtful and comprehensive opinion, Mr. Justice Robert C. Meade at the Supreme Court held that under the circumstances Brother Fox would have a common-law right to decline treatment and that his wishes, expressed prior to becoming incompetent, should be honored. The court noted that the evidence of his stated opposition to use of a respirator to maintain him in a vegetative state was "unchallenged at every turn and unimpeachable in its sincerity."


Some notes: The District Attorney in this case is Dennis Dillon, a very publicly pro-life and devout Catholic.

The brothers and priests named their 6th-8th grade middle school at Kellenberg High School after Brother Fox.

The Brother Fox case involved a mechanical ventilator which may make it different from other cases (especially the Schiavo case).

End of Life situations are complex and I am glad that the Catholic theology involved is as well. This is one of those times when I hate to see Catholics pontificate about a situation in stark, black and white terms. As a Catholic I have no patience at all for dissent, but in these medical cases I have nothing but patience for those who must deal with the details.


More on Terri Schiavo can be found here at the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation site. The more I read on this case, the more black and white this particular case seems to be!