Last week I tendered an email to the National Right to Life Committee asking them to explain the inconsistency between their opposition to the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube with their support of Texas legislation passed and signed by then governor George W. Bush in 1999 that explicitly gave hospitals and medical professionals the prerogative to disconnect life support measures--including feeding tubes--when they believed further care was futile.
Although NRTCL didn't personally respond to my email they have added a link on their web site attempting to explain their dually competing positions.
Basically their response is that the bill W signed and which the NRTLC helped write was the best they could do and better than existing law. So there.
But this response is just bupkes.
First of all, the ten day window for finding an alternative care-giver doesn't even remotely prevent the discontinuing of life support when in fact, no alternative providers or institutions can be found. The family of Sun Hudson only recently discovered this fact as Sun, a seven month old child, was taken off life support against his mother's wishes and died when no alternative care could be arranged. And as has been documented elsewhere, had Terri Schiavo lived in Texas, the law there would have ensured her a speedier demise than in Florida.
Second, the NRTLC claim that the Texas law was the best they could do is just lame. Texas is well-known for its allegedly conservative values. If the preservation of life was really the issue, it shouldn't have been difficult to line up enough support in the legislature (and from governor Bush) to ensure a law that as the president now says would have allowed the state "to err on the side of life".
If the NRTLC wants to throw charges of murder against Michael Schiavo, the multi governmental level and bipartisan judiciary that has consistently ruled on his side, and congress, then the NRTLC will have to do a lot better than a bill in Texas that is "far from ideal".
On the other hand, as befitting an organization that is above all dedicated to the election of conservative Republicans to high office regardless of their performance, then the flimsy NRTLC defense of themselves and their president is at least partially understandable if not commendatory.