Question: Is it the role of the state to provide health care for people like Terri Schiavo?

Answer: No. It is the role of the state to enforce God’s moral law which prohibits killing. The issue in the Schiavo case is not about state-subsidized medicine. Nor is the issue about using extraordinary measures (a more complex issue) to prolong the life of an individual who is dying. The issue is not even about medicine. The issue is whether it is lawful to deprive an innocent, living, thriving woman of basic care (food, water, shelter). The answer is: To do such is not only a dereliction of the duty of a guardian, but is homicide. Terri is being murdered, and it is the first principle of government (Gen. 9) for the state to protect innocent life and to prosecute parents, guardians, judges — anyone who wrongfully uses their position of authority to kill another. In this case, the state has an affirmative duty to prevent an ongoing crime.

Duty of Care: Biblically, both basic care and health care of every level is a matter reserved to the private sector. There is a fundamental biblical and common law duty of a parent or guardian to provide basic care for all dependents. Parents and guardians with the means of providing food, water, and shelter for their dependents who negligently or willfully fail to do so in a manner that results in their injury or death are guilty of criminal conduct. Under biblical law, the extended family has a duty to provide resources for an indigent family in crisis. If neither the immediate family, nor the extended family are capable of caring for the basic needs of dependents, then the family is to turn to the local church which is charged with a duty of provision and care (1 Timothy 5). The local church, the family, and the individual may be supported by the broader body of Christ where they are lacking in resources. The people of God are to act liberally toward each other, and toward all in society who are in need, especially the sick (including disabled and handicapped), the poor, the widow, and the fatherless.

In the case of Terri Schiavo, the issue of state funding is not germane (contra statements by Gary North). The family has a trust fund and insurance from which Terri’s financial needs are met. Would additional funds ever be necessary, there can be little doubt that these needs would be amply met through donations.

For example, at Vision Forum Ministries, the issue of preservation of life through private solutions is not just theory. Three years ago, we established the Life and Liberty Medical Fund (formerly the Baby William Fund), the goal of which was to assist families with members in a life or death crisis where leaders in the medical establishment have recommended termination of life, but where the family is willing to fight for the life of their loved one. Another condition of the Life and Liberty Medical Fund is that the family must strive to meet the medical needs apart from government assistance. The Fund has been enormously successful and responsible for raising and distributing hundreds of thousands of dollars to families in need, and assisting in the negotiation of reduced medical bills for these families in crisis. I also want to add that donations to this fund are tax-deductible and that none of this money goes to Vision Forum or Vision Forum Ministries. All administrative costs are donated by Vision Forum Ministries to the Life and Liberty Fund.

Last thought: Let’s be careful not to adopt the liberal argument used by pro-abortion activists: “Let’s keep the government off our bodies.” The fact is the government must stay out of all jurisidictions not specifically delegated to it by the Lord. Protecting innocent life from criminal conduct is a specifically delegated duty of the state, both under biblical and constitutional law.