Replies

How about because her doctors (experts) didn't think it was a worthwhile endeavor and because it didn't even have a 1% chance of working. The judge is not in the position to just let people experiment on a person if they aren't doctors.

So why did he not let the parents try and make fools of themselves? Michael might always have lucked out and had them accidentally choke Terri sooner than she would otherwise have died. And if that had happened, he could have deflected a lot of the blame from himself.

The only way I can see that letting the parents try to feed Terri wouldn't be a win for Michael would be if they succeeded. And since such success would imply that dehydration was never legal, no legitimate motive can take such 'risks' into consideration.

"So why did he not let the parents try and make fools of themselves? "

That's not the business of the court. They aren't trying to prove a point or play games. Your whole point relies on the premise that there is some sort of conspiracy and that Greer had some personal stake in this case. There is no legitimate evidence that he did and if anything I am sure he wishes he never heard the name Terri Schaivo.

Moreover, if the parents were so sure Terri could eat on her own, why didn't they just try and not wait for anybody to give them permission. That way they would show the world. I imagine they didn't because they want to choke her to death. Deep down they know the truth though they are being used pretty pathetically.