" See them gawk and squawk all about Terri. They love death. They want Terri gone."
Worse yet, this whole issue has been handled in a way that no one can rationally talk about end-of-life issues.
I've been part of two such family decisions (about whether to treat a loved one, and to what extent, etc). They were awful. In one case, the family decided agains going down the life-support path precisely due to the legal battles in this case. In other words, the laws worked against the patient.
This case, I fear, will prevent any measured conversation about any of these issues for a decade. After all, it's hard to have a conversation with someone you're calling an "ugly buzzard".
If that includes you... too bad for you.
I don't think so. This is different because most/some of us have been involved in 'end of life' decisions when it's involved a terminally ill and dying family member... but the problem here is that this woman is physically healthy. You just can't go around starving and dehydrating perfectly healthy people to death, regardless of their mental capacity.
In my mind, needing to be fed isn't a medical intervention when it's the only physical problem a person has. I've been thinking lately of my great aunt (or even Ronald Reagan) who had to be fed pureed baby food by spoon. She didn't even know her own name and she could barely swallow the food.