But the fact that a court has the ability to put the hearsay of my in-laws before my own parents and siblings testimonies is unbelievable.
This is a state's right issue. Now is the time for us to start reviewing our own state's law and working for a change if needed.
" The Florida definition of "extraordinary means" included gastric tube. "
====
BUT Greer didn't order that the tube be removed and Terri not be fed through it, and if she could be fed and swallow normally, she could live, he ordered that NO nutrition or hydration be given to Terri -- by any means. Does that sound legal to you? He basically ordered the dehydration and starvation of Terri.
You are overlooking the fact that Greer also forbade the provision of oral sustainence. The media canard that Terri had to be fed by the feeding tube is just that--a canard: if she could not swallow liquids, her saliva would have to have been aspirated, and this was not the case.
A spoon or a tippy cup is not an 'extraordinary means'. The jackbooted thugs outside the hospice weren't keeping out rogue physicians who wanted to insert a gastric tube, but ordinary folk who wanted to give a dying woman a sip of water.
There is a nice piece by a Harvard neuropsychiatrist whose job deals with severely brain damaged patients posted somewhere here. (I think the title was "It is ended".) It addresses the real judicial excess in this case.
Greer should be impeached. His order violated Florida statutes which forbid the denial of food and water to disabled persons, and was nothing short of state sanctioned murder.
Generally, I agree with you. Yet when a state law or judicial decision compromises Constitutional rights, I would expect Federal intervention.
Greer's interpretation of clear and convincing doesn't seem to pass the common sense test and did show that the Florida law needs fixing or risk further cynical application.