Replies

"...that is how the husband sees it, and he does not want to keep her in a protracted state of absolute misery with no awareness and constant muscular distress as indicated by the more sensible of assessments and the majority assessment as well."

If it is a case of constant intractable pain I could understand that she might be in "misery" but in most cases muscular distress is intermittent and easily managed with the right medications.

This is a very common problem with brain damaged folks..but I guess you know that.

Still..I refer to that smile as my evidence of her will to live.

Hmmmmmmm.....

Still..I refer to that smile as my evidence of her will to live.

I gave up trying to discern things from smiles a long time ago. They mean nothing if a baby does in the womb or if a dog smiles. In her case, it is a natural facial expression IMO. She is certainly not expressing happiness, but that is why the Shindlers put that film together for. They wanted to manipulate public opinion, and they have. It just did not work on me.

I saw a head smiling in 1971.

It had no body attached to it. You learn things as life progresses. Some of the things are not very rosy.

I could give the smile some weight in the argument, if I believed she had any metal acuity to know if she were happy or not.

I see no evidence of that, and neither did the court. I think the anecdotal stuff is hyperbole.