Replies

"""""""""""

I don't believe Michael Schaivo has Terri's well being or wishes in mind. There is evidence, albeit it questionable, that she doesn't want to die as provided by her parents. I trust her parents more than her husband...

Mike

PS- this is why I have a living will... there is no mistaking my wishes or claims of thing I may have said. It's all in writing."""""

This is an incredibly difficult situation. I think this is why in California, like probably in many states, the decision to "pull the plug" must be something that is done in writing, or appointing someone to make that decision for you must also be done in writing.

Ultimately, I would hope that the law is decided in favor of life, in favor of resolving any doubts whatsoever on the side of life. But, where there is a disagreement between the husband and the parents, etc - sheesh, it's not easy stuff.

Maybe where the husband is opting for death, but the parents opt for life, the law should go for the one choosing life?

Hopefully, all this passion and effort will not die with her, but will be channeled into changing the law.

This situation IS difficult as you say. The circumstances are horrific and compounded with the fact that her husband has not done as he said he would do when he filed the malpractice suit years ago.

He stands to gain a great deal of money upon her death. The money earmarked for her care has been hoarded at the expense of treatments that could have helped her. This alone is reason enough to remove his rights regarding her.

I view this situation as a conflict of interest case and legally it should be viewed the same way. At the point where a doctor was willing to give her therapy at no cost, and Michael refused, that was the point where his true interests came clear. He wants her dead.

I also don't think his approach to refusing to allow the family to see her unsupervised says much for him. To quote a friend... he's lower than whale s#!t in my book.

Mike