Stories of Change: Narrative and Social Movements

8. Compassion on Trial: Movement Narrative in a Court Conflict over Physician-Assisted Suicide

EIGHT Compassion on Trial Movement Narrative in a Court Conflict over Physician-Assisted Suicide JEFFERY D. TATUM One of the salutary effects of the recent cultural shift in social movements research has been to focus new attention on the stories told within movements by their members (Fine 1995; many of the chapters in this volume). The study of such “internal narratives” yields insight into many of the movement’s features, including how group culture is developed , meanings are shared, participants are constituted, supportive emotions are called out, and social control is maintained. Relatively less attention, however, has been paid to the way that movements construct narratives for outside audiences. Among other things, stories are also used to recruit new members, to mobilize resources, and when the movement is struggling for state legitimation, to persuade those in authority, be they legislators, voters, judges, or jurors. Analysis of such “external narratives” can shed light on how movements struggle to depict themselves and their agenda to outsiders. Studying storytelling in nonsupportive and hostile arenas can also illuminate dynamics of political and cultural conflict and the strategies of movements to impose their social vision. This chapter is addressed to one significant case, the use of narratives in a contest for state legitimation of physician-assisted suicide.1 In the last twenty years, the struggle to gain acceptance of physicianassisted suicide has emerged as a significant social movement (Filene 1998; Fox, Kamakahi, and Ĉapek 1999; Hoefler and Kamoie 1994). The public 179 narratives told by physician-assisted suicide proponents present several questions that can be asked generally of movements engaged in conflicts over the law: How does the movement use narrative in the judicial system, the public forum where so many struggles for legitimation are being fought? What is the relationship between the narratives told in court and the movements ’ collective action frames? If there are inconsistencies between court narratives and frames, what do these inconsistencies indicate? What advantages might studies of narrative provide in order to understand movement rhetorical strategies for winning over the unconvinced? In order to explore these questions, I analyzed the transcript from the 1996 criminal trial of Jack Kevorkian, a Michigan physician, where Kevorkian stood accused of illegally assisting in the suicide of two persons .2 In particular, I consider the opening and closing statements, and the direct and cross examinations of Kevorkian.3 Because my aim is to gain a better understanding of how the assisted suicide movement uses narratives , I focus on the case presented by the defense which, throughout the trial, used carefully scripted stories to persuade the judge and twelveperson jury that physician-assisted suicide was legitimate in this instance. I begin by briefly discussing the relationship between frames and narratives and the challenges presented by audiences external to the movement . I then consider the significance of the Kevorkian trial and outline the three principal narratives told by the defense at the trial. I conclude with an analysis of these narratives and what their construction and use might tell us about social movement persuasion. FRAMES, NARRATIVES, AND THE CHALLENGES OF AN EXTERNAL AUDIENCE Events, such as the actions of a doctor in intentionally ending a patient’s life, are subject to widely different interpretations. Variances in the framework used to interpret such events can have a significant impact on the meaning attributed to these events and the consequences that follow. Social movement scholars have used the concept of “frames” to denote such frameworks, the “schemata of interpretation” that individuals and collectivities use to render events or occurrences meaningful, and so organize experience and guide action (Snow et al. 1986: 464). In the study of movements, frame analysis is concerned with the manner in which events are collectively interpreted, the ways in which collective action frames are 180 TATUM developed, diffused, and acted on, and the processes through which individuals ’ frames and movement frames are aligned. Frame analysis does not assume a completely static structure of interpretations within a movement. On the contrary, frames are seen to expand, shift, and change as the social ecology giving rise to the movement and its perspectives changes. In framing theory, movements that fail to adapt their frames to a changing environment will ultimately wither away. At the same time, the concept of frames assumes a degree of internal coherence and consistency over at least the near term. Collective action frames are developed through group interaction (at least...