This is so much like Terri Schivo's case (except it was her parents who wanted to stop the feeding)
..In sum, we conclude that a State may apply a clear and convincing evidence standard in proceedings where a guardian seeks to discontinue nutrition and hydration of a person diagnosed to be in a persistent vegetative state. The Supreme Court of Missouri held that in this case the testimony adduced at trial did not amount to clear and convincing proof of the patient's desire to have hydration and nutrition withdrawn. In so doing, it reversed a decision of the Missouri trial court which had found that the evidence "suggested" Nancy Cruzan would not have desired to continue such measures, but which had not adopted the standard of "clear and convincing evidence" enunciated by the Supreme Court. The testimony adduced at trial consisted primarily of Nancy Cruzan's statements made to a housemate about a year before her accident that she would not want to live should she face life as a "vegetable," and other observations to the same effect. The observations did not deal in terms with withdrawal of medical treatment or of hydration and nutrition. We cannot say that the Supreme Court of Missouri committed constitutional error in reaching the conclusion that it did. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Missouri is Affirmed. United States Supreme Court Decision in Cruzan Case
An erroneous decision not to terminate results in a maintenance of the status quo; the possibility of subsequent developments such as advancements in medical science, the discovery of new evidence regarding the patient's intent, changes in the law, or simply the unexpected death of the patient despite the administration of life-sustaining treatment at least create the potential that a wrong decision will eventually be corrected or its impact mitigated.
An erroneous decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment, however, is not susceptible of correction.
From the ruling you have linked to. This is what the President was talking about-- to err on the side of life.
Judge Greer is not following established case law by the Supreme Court. He is trying to reverse this decision and make new law.
This is what's causing the problem in this case . When you have Activists judges that try to rewrite The Constitution or established case law to suit themselves or their agenda that's when you have major complications.
They have to make it up as they go along.
None of the judges or courts have looked at his basis for ruling the way he did .
They just looked to see if he followed procedures. These activists judges have to go. They are already made it legal to kill babies and now they want to kill the physical and mental disabled.
There is a malignant undercurrent of evil growing in the shadows of our country.
An erroneous decision not to terminate results in a maintenance of the status quo; the possibility of subsequent developments such as advancements in medical science, the discovery of new evidence regarding the patient's intent, changes in the law, or simply the unexpected death of the patient despite the administration of life-sustaining treatment at least create the potential that a wrong decision will eventually be corrected or its impact mitigated.
An erroneous decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment, however, is not susceptible of correction.
From the ruling you have linked to. This is what the President was talking about-- to err on the side of life.
Judge Greer is not following established case law by the Supreme Court. He is trying to reverse this decision and make new law.
This is what's causing the problem in this case . When you have Activists judges that try to rewrite The Constitution or established case law to suit themselves or their agenda that's when you have major complications.
They have to make it up as they go along.
None of the judges or courts have looked at his basis for ruling the way he did .
They just looked to see if he followed procedures. These activists judges have to go. They are already made it legal to kill babies and now they want to kill the physical and mental disabled.
There is a malignant undercurrent of evil growing in the shadows of our country.