Could you please address why the film doesn't acknowledge that Hillary Swank's character could ask to be extubated at any time?
I have not seen the movie, but two women who have pointed this out. One of them is a hospital chaplain who has been present at five such extubations over the course of her career.
Now THIS is the kind of thing that bothers me here on FR. Posters who, upon being angered, ACT LIKE THEY OWN THIS WEBSITE.
The BEST THING TO DO when another poster is irrational, is trolling, trying to start a fight, deluded, uninformed, and insistent everyone else is wrong....
Is to ignore their replies. Do not answer them. They seem to thrive on attention. Any kind of attention.
Now, when a poster is arguing with you on an emotional subject and tempers flare, remember that is may just be due to a lack of being able to use our other GOD GIVEN SENSES to properly communicate. As stated before, printed words do not convey things as well as the spoken word accompanied by tone of voice, inflection, and body language.
Slow down, ask the other poster to clarify. Be prepared to find out you just may not KNOW IT ALL.
You've been rude and unduly proprietary (um, maybe Jim Robinson needs to send you a private email informing you that it's not your site, and not your call who's got a "bad attitude" or who's allowed to post on what thread, etc.), but you are fractionally redeemed for publicly stating that you didn't see the movie. Re your extubation inquiry: She asks to "just unplug her," and he says No. So does staff. Once he finally gives her an injection (and much time and wrestling with moral issues goes by), he does extubate her.
It's called artistic license. Many dramas, and even comedies, revolve around artificially removing certain options either through plot twists or just ignoring them. The movie would be kind of boring if they hadn't strategically "forgotten" that she could just order extubation herself, then there'd be no moral quandry for Eastwood's character to navigate.