Well .. if you had bothered to check my page - I don't live in FL I usually don’t check pages because I just don’t have the time, but even if you don’t live in Florida, if you vote you will have the same opportunity in your state.
Greer didn't just abuse "his discretion" - he ignored legitimate testimony against Michael because it suited him - that's irresponsible. I can’t argue that point since I have no way of knowing the Judge’s motives. The press has not reported the intricacies of the law, so it is quite possible that if we were to make a thorough investigation we might find that the problem is with how the law is written and not what Judge Greer did?
For example: "Proxy" means a competent adult who has not been expressly designated to make health care decisions for a particular incapacitated individual, but who, nevertheless, is authorized pursuant to s. 765.401 to make health care decisions for such individual.
(2) Any health care decision made under this part must be based on the proxy's informed consent and on the decision the proxy reasonably believes the patient would have made under the circumstances. If there is no indication of what the patient would have chosen, the proxy may consider the patient's best interest in deciding that proposed treatments are to be withheld or that treatments currently in effect are to be withdrawn.s765.401.
(3) 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.
So you see it is not a simple as it first might appear.
You should find a good book on the separation of powers. I think you will be surprised to find the congressmen do know their limits. The recent emergency law that congress passed, that the President returned to Washington to sign in the middle of the night, was all the Constitutional authority they could exercise.
I know you will hear people making statements about the law, but many of them are just “jailhouse lawyers” do not rely upon what they are saying. It is more rhetoric than law and it is designed more to mold public opinion than it is to educate.
"we might find that the problem is with how the law is written and not what Judge Greer did"
I agree with the above statement somewhat. I believe that not only is the law terribly flawed - but Greer used those flaws to suit his purpose.
I say that because I read several of the former nursing staff reports - which Greer totally discounted and chose to KEEP FROM BEING ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. Why would he do that except that those statements made Michael look like a monster. And .. I believe Michael was and is.
Then .. Greer allowed the husband to use TERRI's JURY AWARDED MONEY for the husband's own purposes. When the parents protested - Michael claimed the parents just wanted the money - yes they did - they wanted the trust fund money to spend on their daughter's care - not like Michael who spent it on lawyers to hasten her death.
I don't know what the judge's motives were - whether it was personal or otherwise. I only know that if Terri was my child I would be livid at how this judge went out of his way to provide an avenue for this husband to have her killed.
Also .. I believe that FL statutes say that the husband has acquired a "common law wife" becauses he has lived with Jody for a certain period of time. That means that he's married to two people. According to the statute I read, the husband has committed a crime by doing this - a crime which would prevent him from being appointed A GUARDIAN OF ANYBODY. Somehow the judge never seemed to take note of this condition, and a Motion [2002?] is still pending before Greer's court to have Michael removed for not fulfilling his responsibilities as mandated by his guardian status.
Greer has basically ignored that Motion - why? From what the nurses were saying and the husband's status of marriage - he should have been immediately removed from the position of guardian. I believe it was irresponsible on the part of the judge to allow Michael to stay on as guardian of Terri.
Now you may support Greer - that's fine with me - I've simply pointed out the problems I personally have with his actions. I'm not requiring anyone to agree with me.