Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Harriet McBryde Johnson, RIP

posted at 9:15 am on June 7, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

The controversial and colorful advocate for the disabled, Harriet McBryde Johnson, died earlier this week at her Charleston home. Johnson first came to national prominence when she publicly challenged Princeton’s Peter Singer on the ethics of euthanizing profoundly disabled infants, and dedicated her life to improving the quality of life for those in institutions she called the “gulag”:

Harriet McBryde Johnson, a feisty champion of the rights of the disabled who came to prominence after she challenged a Princeton professor’s contention that severely disabled newborns could ethically be euthanized, died on Wednesday at her home in Charleston, S.C. She was 50. …

Using a battery-powered wheelchair in which she loved to “zoom around” the streets of Charleston, Ms. Johnson playfully referred to herself as “a bedpan crip” and “a jumble of bones in a floppy bag of skin.”

Rolling into an auditorium at the College of Charleston on April 22, 2001, Ms. Johnson went to the microphone during a question-and-answer session to confront Peter Singer, a philosopher from Princeton, who was giving a lecture titled “Rethinking Life and Death.” ….

An e-mail exchange followed that encounter in Charleston, leading to an invitation to debate Professor Singer at Princeton on March 25, 2002. Their two encounters were the subject of the 8,000-word Times article, which brought Ms. Johnson considerable attention in the disability rights movement and from the general public.

She also drew “considerable attention” when she argued for Congressional intervention in the Terri Schiavo case.   In fact, she gave one of the most dispassionate and logical arguments to stop the efforts by the court to remove Schiavo’s feeding tube, certainly less emotional than many on that side of the debate.  Re-reading it now will recall all of the drama and anger of those days, but Johnson’s example should have served to instruct how the rest of the debate should have been conducted.

Lest anyone think that Johnson was a doctrinaire conservative, one should read the Times’ well-written obituary.  She argued for public financing for home care for the profoundly disabled, calling the nursing-home system a “gulag”.   In 2003, she railed against care facilities where the disabled got parked in front of blaring televisions and ignored by the staff.  “I sometimes dare to dream that the gulag will be gone in a generation or two,” Johnson once wrote.

Johnson always recognized the power of the individual and the spark of the divine in human life.  She never stopped advocating for equality and dignity for those with disabilities of any kind and especially those with severe handicaps.  Johnson maintained a sense of humor and self-deprecating wit that allowed people to see her as the complete person she was.  Harriet McBryde Johnson will be sorely missed in the years to come.

Fausta has more.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

HMJ, RIP

maverick muse on June 7, 2008 at 9:29 AM

hopefully she’s running through the meadows…..

right4life on June 7, 2008 at 9:31 AM

RIP

mythicknight on June 7, 2008 at 9:31 AM

What you can love about HMJ is the utter unpretentiousness. Straight talk from the heart is powerful… sure beats flip-flop politicians.

T J Green on June 7, 2008 at 9:43 AM

May her Soul and all the Souls of the Faithfully departed Rest in Peace.

Zorro on June 7, 2008 at 9:44 AM

The controversial and colorful advocate for the disabled, Harriet McBryde Johnson, died earlier this week at her Charleston home. Johnson first came to national prominence when she publicly challenged Princeton’s Peter Singer on the ethics of euthanizing profoundly disabled infants, and dedicated her life to improving the quality of life for those in institutions she called the “gulag
Ed Morrissey

Peter Singer, Mr. Utilitarianism.

The futility and falsehood of Utilitarianism, as a system of beliefs, is revealed in that utilitarism fails to provide a good reason for why it is evil in allowing a human baby infant to be eaten alive by 6 or 7 hungry rats in a Chicago alley.

On the grounds or criterion of “utility” alone, 6 or 7 hungry rats are being fed at the expense of a single helpless baby infant. Given the “alleged truthfulness of utilitarianism,” why do we find that example intrinsically immoral and despicable? Utilitarianism has no answer.
I believe all versions of Utilitarianism, including Peter Singer’s, are false, and should be rejected.

Harriet Johnson will be missed.

For more information on Harriet Johnson’s philosophical foe, check out this very interesting book.

ColtsFan on June 7, 2008 at 9:44 AM

hopefully she’s running through the meadows…..

right4life on June 7, 2008 at 9:31 AM

Indeed. And dancing, and playing…

From Fausta:

In our culture of death, where universities grant tenure to “ethicists” who advocate killing “defective” infants during the first thirty days after their delivery, it is people like Harriet that remind us that every life has value and dignity.

People like Peter Singer hold truly disgusting views. But for those who fight against the culture of death, the extreme views of the intelligentsia are very useful when exposed like billboards to the rest of the country, to show where the more commonly held utilitarian views on human life lead when taken to their intellectualized, “elite and progressive [gag],” logical conclusions.

inviolet on June 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM

What a truly remarkable woman. The world is worse off with her passing.

pullingmyhairout on June 7, 2008 at 9:56 AM

The background life story of Harriet Johnson ultimately touches on issues of Personhood.

When is a person a person?

HJ may have passed away, but the core issues have not. In our day and age, personhood is being redefined in terms of computational speed or “usefulness to society”, or “utility”, as well as other ways. This has tragic philosophical consequences for the future.

I believe the Imago Dei is more than just a cliche. The tradition, “the Image of God”, actually solves a lot of philosophical problems.

We will see more of these problems pop up when the Bioethics explosion occurs in the near future.

ColtsFan on June 7, 2008 at 9:59 AM

God bless her.

I know that most here are concerned primarily about taxes, free markets, and border enforcement. But I’ll stake my life on the prediction that radical liberalism will hit us hardest in the medical-biological arena.

Watch for increasingly aggressive moves toward genetic “counseling,” prioritization of government health care dispensation based on social utility, and ultimately denial of health care for the weakest among us.

The dam is going to burst soon. Take special notice of leftists’ disdain for “stupid” people, their frequent reference to “inbred” hilbillies, their contempt for people who live in the heartland, their use of the word “retarded” as an insult. Algor himself let the mask come off when he publicly smeared the “extra-chromosome right wing.” Make no mistake, the left has a history of sympathizing with eugenics. Part of the environmental hysteria is to poison our culture with neo-Manichean claptrap that human life is inherently evil. Many radical environmentalists openly advocate reducing the world population from 5 billion to 1 billion. That doesn’t happen without genocide of unimaginable proportions.

There is indeed a culture of death on the left, and it’s a bigger threat than we think it is.

jeff_from_mpls on June 7, 2008 at 10:04 AM

She helped build more of the Shining City on the Hill then most of us ever will. Time to fly, sweet lady. Your good works are your passport to the skies.

Limerick on June 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM

Where she is now, her body is perfect.

Bishop on June 7, 2008 at 10:53 AM

She seems to have been a courageous lady.

That said there is no need to hate Peter Singer. He has a superb mind and has written many excellent articles and books. Whether or not you agree with him (and I largely never have) he has a fine intellect and constructs his arguments extremely well. That is refreshing given some of the utter bilge that comes out of academia.

His central tenet that critically disabled people are non-persons I always found rather unpleasant. When he discovered that his mother had Alzheimer’s he was confronted and forced to effectively disavow that thesis as he would not sanction putting down his own mother. One could say that was abject hypocrisy or one could take a, perhaps, more charitable line and say that he is all too human like the rest of us.

Ares on June 7, 2008 at 11:51 AM

Johnson always recognized the power of the individual and the spark of the divine in human life.

Wasn’t she an atheist? I’m not going to bother looking it up, but I read a (e)book called The Weight of Things: Philosophy and the Good Life that gave that impression. As Ed pointed out, she was also a liberal democrat IIRC.

ninjapirate on June 7, 2008 at 11:56 AM

May she rest in peace, and may her memory haunt Peter Singer and his vile acolytes.

Lest anyone think that Johnson was a doctrinaire conservative, one should read the Times’ well-written obituary. She argued for public financing for home care for the profoundly disabled, calling the nursing-home system a “gulag”. In 2003, she railed against care facilities where the disabled got parked in front of blaring televisions and ignored by the staff. “I sometimes dare to dream that the gulag will be gone in a generation or two,” Johnson once wrote.

Is that really contrary to conservatism? I’m not suggesting that she was a conservative, just that those particular ideas are not unique to liberalism.

His central tenet that critically disabled people are non-persons I always found rather unpleasant.

Ares on June 7, 2008 at 11:51 AM

He thinks all babies were non-persons, ergo it is no less ethical to kill a baby than abort a child.

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 12:23 PM

He thinks all babies were non-persons, ergo it is no less ethical to kill a baby than abort a child.

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 12:23 PM

In that he is consistent.

Ares on June 7, 2008 at 12:35 PM

This makes me think, once again, about that monster who slowly killed his wife, Terri Schiavo.
Liberals want to replace God’s will with their own, but they will pay the piper, eventually.
I’m sure this courageous woman is resting in Peace and offering comfort to dear Terry.

Christine on June 7, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Lest anyone think that Johnson was a doctrinaire conservative, one should read the Times’ well-written obituary. She argued for public financing for home care…

Hmmm… I didn’t know that assigning these people to dispassionate bureaucratic state-run institutions was a conservative position.

Rhinoboy on June 7, 2008 at 1:36 PM

I’m fully convinced that funding for the care of people who cannot care for themselves is an appropriate government use of tax dollars. I don’t see a conflict between that and conservatism.

Russ on June 7, 2008 at 2:31 PM

Russ on June 7, 2008 at 2:31 PM

Lest you think otherwise, I agree with you.

My point was the post could be read that nursing-home care (which I agree, can be pretty horrible) vs. a system allowing for some semblance of freedom and dignity is a conservative advocation.

I also realize that the problem is waaay more complex, and the dissolution of the family who would best care for these people must be taken into consideration. Sometimes there are no good answers.

Rhinoboy on June 7, 2008 at 2:57 PM

May God bless her family. We have lost a true patriot.

Jungliszt on June 7, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Rhinoboy on June 7, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Concur.

Warehousing patients is usually, it seems to me, the healthcare equivalent of the gulag. It doesn’t have to be that way, but that’s sure how it seems to turn out, pretty much every time.

I’ve recently faced (and, thankfully, avoided) the need for permanent fulltime care for myself (and I’m only 46) but I’ve always thought that it’s an appropriate use of government resources — whether local, state, or federal is a different argument — to take care of those who are incapable of taking care of themselves, whether due to physical or mental disability, or due simply to having lived a lo-o-o-ong time.

I’m willing to consider whether the caveat “through no fault of their own” might be appended to the word “incapable.”

Russ on June 7, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Russ on June 7, 2008 at 3:27 PM

All the best to you then, my friend.

Rhinoboy on June 7, 2008 at 3:47 PM

Thank you Harriet.

oakpack on June 7, 2008 at 4:02 PM

What characterizes a life worth living?
Speaking self-centered stupidities which can’t be applied in the real world?
Or speaking truthfully, forthrightly and living out those truths?

least1 on June 7, 2008 at 7:00 PM

Her stance for Terri Schiavo was mine as well.

Err on the side of caution, and human decency, not expediency …or an estranged husband.

May she now be free in a better realm.

profitsbeard on June 7, 2008 at 8:20 PM

hopefully she’s running through the meadows…..

right4life on June 7, 2008 at 9:31 AM

Beautifully said, and echoed by all.

MrLynn on June 8, 2008 at 8:45 AM

Angel departing………

EricPWJohnson on June 8, 2008 at 9:16 AM

Johnson first came to national prominence when she publicly challenged Princeton’s Peter Singer on the ethics of euthanizing profoundly disabled infants, and dedicated her life to improving the quality of life for those in institutions she called the “gulag”

This woman was a TRUE hero and I never knew her name or her cause before this post. The media has no use for those who do truly good works. But God sees it, enjoy your eternal peace Harriet McBryde Johnson.

Maxx on June 8, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.