It's the testimony from the original trial that establishes how Terri didn't want to be kept alive by life support. In Florida, the feeding tube is considered to be life support.
However, you fail to include Teri's thoughts on Karen Ann Quinlan which is contradictory to the testimonies of the Schiavo's.
The judge took those thoughts into account, but (as has been posted at least twice in this thread) concluded that since those thoughts were expressed at an age of 11-12, and were ambiguous, probably expressing concern for Ms. Quinlan rather than a preference for her own life-ending choice, those thoughts were not applicable.
Secondly, what machine are you talking about?
In Florida, the feeding tube is considered to be life support.
Nurse Sauer's affidavit, which was ignored explicitly said she was feeding Teri with a baby bottle, puddings, jellos, and ice chips.
Which trial was that from?
If she could not swallow she would die of asphyxiation from her own saliva now.
From what I've read, "reflex swallowing" in PVS takes care of saliva. It can also take down pudding, baby food, etc., if you know what you're doing and are extremely careful in how you feed the patient. That feeding takes a long time though, and that's where you come into the danger of aspirating food into the lungs which causes...pneumonia? I think.
The ONLY thing that makes a difference in this case is Terri's wishes for end-of-life care.
Exactly! And no one knows for sure!
They do know for sure. Terri's wishes were established during the very first trial..
In this case, I think there are serious questions about Terri's desires, specifically because the family disagrees.
The court didn't think there were serious questions. That's why it ruled that Terri didn't want to be kept alive that way.
Note, in Ohio "life support" does not mean nutrition and hydration.
In Florida it does. By law.
(10) "Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous vital function. The term does not include the administration of medication or performance of medical procedure, when such medication or procedure is deemed necessary to provide comfort care or to alleviate pain.
Whenever the family disagreed, or if there were questions about their credibility, the doctor erred on the side of life.
And that's exactly what happened here. When Michael realized Terri was in PVS, would never get better, and was being kept alive in the way she said she didn't want to be, he decided to let her go. Her family disagreed with him. The doctors "erred on the side of life" and kept her alive. And the courts have "erred on the side of life" for all these years of litigation and legislation and multiple appeals. There is "clear and convincing evidence" that she stated, multiple times, as an adult, that she didn't want to be a vegetable and be kept alive hooked up to tubes and machines.
Some people are responding to this case as though it's brand new. It's actually fifteen years old and has come to it's reasonable ending. If not for the sleazy theatrics of the Schindler family and their attorney, no one outside Florida would have ever heard of it. It is long past time to say goodbye to Terri's body and allow the healing process to begin for both families.
I think you have me mixed in with someone else. The vast majority of questions you attributed to me in post 152 were not from me.