Her husband insists on following through with her wishes and I stand with him that it should be his decision and only his decision. No I do not want to kill her as some of you are saying it would be. But a persistant vegetative state will take care of things naturally without outide interferance and death will come naturally. I don't know where you get the idea he is going to kill her!
There is nothing noble about death or making a decision to disconnect artificial life support, but artificial life is not natural life and where there is no prognosis of recovery Michael has to make a painful decision and people are going to have to live with it.
These alleged "wishes" were not made known until after he told a jury he needed the award money to take care of her for the rest of her life. Does this not strike you as odd?
But a persistant vegetative state will take care of things naturally without outide interferance and death will come naturally
Well, to HINO, it apparently hasn't come soon enough. He's gonna speed it a long by starving her to death. (btw - your logic is faulty in that last statement - it will take care of itself, yet you support its "artificial" fast-forward by removing the tube.)
but artificial life is not natural life
I recently lost a friend with Lou Gherig's disease - he required a feeding tube near the end because he could no longer swallow (artificial life, according to you.) Death is inevitable *anyway*, but do you think it would have been OK to just let him die faster with no sustainance?
Michael has to make a painful decision and people are going to have to live with it.
Michael is making a decision based on convenience, possibly cover-up, some odd Catholic rule his new squeeze insists on abiding by (Oh, let's MURDER the existing wife so we can be married in the Catholic Church...this isn't a Catholic Bash, really...) to have a "proper" wedding mass because Michael can't be divorced, as well as a money trail.
And no, people are not going to live with it.
A feeding tube is not artificial life support. Why do her persist in thinking because a person needs a feeding tube that this is artificial and grounds to have that person terminated?
A husband certainly should not have sole rights to determine if his wife lives or dies. A wife is not a posession or property.
Your attitude makes a good reason for women not to marry, if their husbands have the right to kill them.
The problem that you don't seem to understand is that the purported "wish to die" is NOT TERRI's wish, but MICHAEL'S WISH---FOR Terri!!!
Since Terri HASN'T died---even after TWO "legal" attempts to kill her (and who knows haw many "illegal" attempts)---Michael NEEDS Terri DEAD in the WORST way! He cannot afford to have her get the $750,000 of THERAPY he POCKETED---she might IMPLICATE him in seveal ATTEMPTS to MURDER her!!!