I would not hesitate to have my childrens' legs and arms cut off to save their lives. It is grotesque, but the alternative is more grotesque. I would certainly allow that before I would allow them to be starved to death because they were deemed unfit to live due to their being such a burden and imperfect in a country where physical perfection is the gateway to riches and other perks lesser mortals have to work harder to acquire.
Christopher Reeve didn't literally have his arms and legs cut off, but they were as useless to him as if they had been. People moved heaven and earth to keep him alive because his wife evidently loved him, or wanted to do the right thing in the public spotlight, or whatever and it was useful for a variety of reasons to keep him alive which was the humane thing to do. Early on, it was my impression that he wanted them to let him die. At least he was able to communicate his wishes. He was not allowed to have his way and later seemed to be glad he chose to go on in that terrible state. For one thing, it became useful politically, but I do believe he regained his will to live and was glad at least on some days to be able to enjoy the sunshine (and the media spotlight). Terri has been treated exactly the opposite, like scum who doesn't deserve to breathe her quota of oxygen allotted to us earthlings. But then Terri only had a couple home movies made of her and Christopher Reed was a big star, despite some box office flops. And he was more cognizant of his surroundings and maintained most of his intellect. Hence, he was a useful eater, while Terri is considered a uselesse eater and deserves to die for that reason alone.
Physical perfection counts for too much in our society.
I don't know what he said what he did or what were the questions asked that prompted that response. I do know that the statements were made in testimony by Robert Schindler in court in 2000.