Replies

especially if Dr. Hawking did not agree but could not say so?

LOL! sure sounds like murder to me. But Hawking's is not what we have with this poor girl.

I am not a doctor and nobody has access to the medical records. In view of that I cannot comment on her condition exactly, but must assume that she meets or exceeds the legalities involved in deciding this issue. (regardless of what the girls family is representing as fact as they are hostile witnesses in this argument)

Common sense is all I really have to decide how I feel about this and my common sense says that others who are in a much more informed position, (other than the girls family) have looked and delved deeply into this matter numerous times.

That is really all I can say and others here have the same info. it is just that others have sided with the family with no legal standing in this issue and they are most definitely hostile to this son in law.

More than one judge has decided over the past years in the man's favor.

If law enforcement, (a tool of justice) had any reservations about this man, they would have stepped forward, don't you think?

If the judges that have made decisions in this case had any reservations at all, they would have delayed or not made any judgment wouldn't you think?

I just can't see this any other way, but perhaps I am wrong. I don't feel wrong, but I have been wrong before, I will admit.

I would need to talk to the son in law to be sure, and his words are a bit scarce in any of the media reports. in fact, he is not defending himself at all. I assumed this to be an effort to keep himself out of the spotlight and probably on his lawyers advice.

They sure are beating him up in the internet press.

Ah, but here's the hangup! Most people on this thread believe that allowing her to die would be wrong no matter what the law says, just as we believe abortion is wrong though the Supreme Court has said otherwise. Moreover, the judge's interpretation of the law is itself in doubt. This is just the sort of case that could be easily influinced by politically a motivated judge; a thing of a sort FReepers have bemoaned for a long time.

Euthanasia is a liberal plank issue, though it tends not to come out in the open often outside of the pacific NW. Had a 9th circuit judge done this in Oregon, the respose would have been even more overwhelming.

We always hope and pray that the law will coincide with what is right, though that is not always the case. Here, though, it seems to me, though I am no authority, that the law is on the side of Terry's family, in that 1) Terry is not what could be considered terminal or beyond recovery and 2) that her husband as a serious conflict-of-interest.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I'm sorry for the loss of your brother, and I hope neither of us ever has to deal such a sad problem ourselves. Thanks for a good debate!

Sincerely,

C13

I am heartilly sick of you trying to equate the death of your terminally ill family member, and your decision to terminate life support, with Terri Schiavo.
Do you seek absolution for your past decisions?
See a priest.
Terri Schiavo is being murdered by court decree, because she is severely disabled, and inconvenient to her "husband".
If that fact makes you second guess your past decisions, oh well.
My store of sympathy has dried up for people like you.
You should seek out professional mental health practicioners, as opposed to advocating the murder of a disabled woman by court order, just to validate your own decisions, and allow you to FEEL better.
Terri Schiavo became terminal,a dying person, on 10/15/03.
Not from a lethal disease,not from devastating physical trauma, and not because she suddenly has no will to live.
Get over yourself!