[nickcarraway]

I don't see anywhere in that law that says a judge can prevent a patient from eating. Judge Greer is not just having her feeding tube removed, he is not allowing her to be fed. Isn't that interesting. If she could only eat by feeding tube, it wouldn't matter, she would aspirate if she was fed. But he didn't do that, because she can eat on her won. What Florida statue allows a judge to prevent someone from eating?

If Judge Greer ruled that you not be barred from ever eating again, I suppose that would be legal.

[jwpjr]

re: he is not allowing her to be fed

Excellent point. I don't see how he can prevent her parents from attempting to feed her and hydrate her by mouth. The law gives him the right to order her feeding tube removed, but as you point out it hardly gives him the right to order them not to attempt to feed her or hydrate her. If she is sufficiently aware of her surroundings and condition to be able to make the decision to live or die she can simply refuse to accept the food and liquid. If they attempt to give her something by mouth and are successful then it means either she wants to live, or she's so far gone that she can't make the decision.