I generally agree with Steyn.
Not this time.
The court made a finding of fact that Teri is PVS. That may or may not have been accurate, medically speaking.
However, once that finding has been made, under Florida law the rest follows perfectly naturally.
Her husband is designated as her next of kin. As such, he has the legal right to make medical decisions for her.
With the possible exception of the finding of fact as to her medical condition, from what I can see the courts were just implementing Florida law.
If you don't like the way that law works out, change it. Don't whine because the judges didn't overrule the law.
I understand your point, but aren't the facts somewhat in question regardless of whether the courts are relying on certain medical authorities? Kinda like garbage in, garbage out?
The Rule of Terri's Case Strikes Again. -2004- Judge Greer's crimes
MICHAEL SCHIAVO'S lies and contradictory testimony in easy to read format
Exd 20:13
Deu 5:17
And having a second legally recognize wife he has legal standing because of?
End-of-life decisions are tough in the best circumstances. Inserting politicians into them will not make them easier or better. My fear is not that I will be kept alive until I'm 118 as Mr Steyn states, it's that the government will take this opportunity to insert itself into what is a very private decision.
My preference would have been for the Schindlers to take over as Terri's guardians but that didn't happen.
Yes, Greer made a big point out of establishing that this state puts Terri firmly on the "not human" side and therefore she has no legal right to live. I have never heard of any law that states that someone who cannot meet some arbitrary definition of "human being" cannot be allowed to live.
Greer did not follow the law, he set precedent.
Now that the precedent has been set, there is no reason to continue taking care of the thousands of other people whose levels of consciousness are similar to Terri's. Who's going to get Greer or another heartless judge to order their executions? Maybe a taxpayer's group, upset that we spend so many billions on their care every year?
"Her husband is designated as her next of kin. As such, he has the legal right to make medical decisions for her."
And if her husband hasn't bben acting like a true husband, that makes no difference? That is not a factor for a judge to take into account when ruling on this case? Pahleese!!!
However, once that finding has been made, under Florida law the rest follows perfectly naturally.
Her husband is designated as her next of kin. As such, he has the legal right to make medical decisions for her.
Your analysis has a serious omission. The law also has to find, to the standard of clear and convincing evidence, that Terri would choose to stop taking food and water to the point of death. I personally believe that the evidence does not support this legal conclusion.
Your have also mistated Florida law. Maybe it's an honest misunderstanding, or may it's deliberate misinformation. I don't know. But if you are honestly mistaken on your understanding, you will take the time to research Florida law, and back up your assertions with some citations.
The actual Florida law is at: Florida Statutes <-- Link
Before exercising the incapacitated patient's rights to select or decline health care, the proxy must comply with the provisions of ss. 765.205 and 765.305, except that a proxy's decision to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging procedures must be supported by clear and convincing evidence that the decision would have been the one the patient would have chosen had the patient been competent or, if there is no indication of what the patient would have chosen, that the decision is in the patient's best interest.
Actually you don't have it right. The husband doesn't just get to make decisions, there has to be "clear and convincing evidence" of her wishes in the absence of written directives, according to Florida law. Secondly, why has Greer refused to order all available tests as independent, objective opinions of her medical condition?
You really didn't get the point of the article, did you? It mocked those who think like you.