Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: dirtboy

Assume you are right, entirely, about Michael. That does not preclude the possibility that she wanted this. And if she did, all of those who fought so bitterly to prevent it - ALL - did her a huge disservice.


63 posted on 03/31/2005 8:25:28 AM PST by lugsoul (Wild Turkey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: lugsoul
Assume you are right, entirely, about Michael. That does not preclude the possibility that she wanted this. And if she did, all of those who fought so bitterly to prevent it - ALL - did her a huge disservice.

Once again, you don't know if this is what she wanted. Neither did I. The law, IMO, should caution on the side of life, especially when it grants the husband powers to decide life or death - and that husband is also a common law husband to someone else, creating a clear potential conflict of interest. I would hope you would see the problems in that situation, where life and death is involved. Had Terri left a living will, had the pro-euthanisia Hemlock Society jackals not been so deeply involved, and had Michael not been in a de facto common law marriage, we would never have heard of this case.

68 posted on 03/31/2005 8:31:34 AM PST by dirtboy (Drooling moron since 1998...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson