[silverleaf]

but the general claim among Terri supporters is that Michael was nice to Terri until he received the malpractice money

This is not a general claim. It was a finding of fact by Richard Pearse, who was court-appointed as Terri's Guardian ad litem in 1998. It is contained in his report to the court, where he recommended Mickie's removal as Terri's guardian due to financial conflicts of interest in making decisions about keeping her alive and ensuring proper care. His 1998 report to the court is available for review on any number of web sites.

Pearse's recommendation was rejected by Judge Greer and he was dismissed as GAL. He received about $5,000 of Terri's trust fund for his time and effort.

[supercat]

This is not a general claim. It was a finding of fact by Richard Pearse, who was court-appointed as Terri's Guardian ad litem in 1998.

By "general claim", I did not mean in any way to downplay the accusation. Rather, I wanted to be more concise than "While there are many minor differences in the viewpoints of Terri's supporters, one thing that most of recognize is that..."

I did not wish to make the categorical statement that "none" of Terri's supporters dispute that Michael treated Terri well prior to his receipt of the malpractice award, since there are some that do [suggesting that Michael was indeed quite sadistic when nobody was watching]. The key point, though, is that there is--among Terri's supporters--almost universal recognition that Michael's outward behavior toward Terri changed when he got the malpractice award. Consequently, any statement about Michael treating Terri well prior to the award have zero relevance in assessing how well he treated her afterward.