it's also wrong to kill her if she actually has "PVS" - at least your honest about your agenda - Even if she had a living will asking for her life to end - that also falls into 2 camps more - would you follow her wishes or keep her tubed up regardless?
You talk about "agenda" as though you don't have one yourself?
That's not what I said. What I said is that there is no meaningful distinction which 90% of neurologists can recognize reproduceably between "PVS" and "almost-PVS", and, this being so, that the use of "PVS" as permission for killing is not a reasonable basis for public policy.
Even if she had a living will asking for her life to end
Nice try, but I work with "living wills" every day.
A "living will" that asks for death is not a consent to murder-you cannot in fact consent to be murdered, AFAIK, Jack Kervorkin is still in prison.
So the issue does not turn on whether or not you have a so-called "living will", but rather, on the nature of your life and the measures used to end it.
If the nature of your life and the means used to end it are morally licit, you don't need a living will. If they're not morally licit, a living will protects no one.
Just ask Dr. K.