Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: maica
not even when the previous court orders have forbidden the parents from having the very medical assessments that would constitute new evidence?

Not even then. That's just not how injunctive relief works.

Please give my your honest opinion of a judge who would forbid any oral nourishment? I call it going beyond the bounds of his authority.

Unfortunately, it looks very much like the judge was basically following the law here - Terri Schiavo simply fell into one of those cracks where the law conflicts with what many people would consider justice. Therefore, in order to get a different outcome next time, simply changing judges won't be enough - the law will have to be changed, and that is not for judges to do.

99 posted on 03/23/2005 7:48:30 AM PST by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: general_re

What body of laws forbids tormenting a prisoner with panties on his head, but allows an total withdrawal of liquids from an innocent person?
Two reasons for Forbidding a drop of liquid to cross her lips:
1) She might actually demonstrate that she is not vegetative, and
2) Any fluid intake will prolong the process of her demise.

To my way of looking at this, any judge who would go so far is similar to the tales we have heard about trials of witches. "If she is innocent, she will live" sort of judgement. Meanwhile ... she dries out


108 posted on 03/23/2005 8:37:13 AM PST by maica (Ask a Death-o-crat: "When did you decide to support death in every situation?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson