The courts and Mr. Schiavo could, and did, make suggestions of what Mrs. Schiavo *would have* wanted.
If they'd believed that Mrs. Schiavo would have wanted to live and receive treatment, it would be ridiculous to say, "that therapy wasn't available back then so it doesn't count"...
Your hypothetical doesn't undermine my contention. The base for concluding that Terri's statement was unfairly construed is that the colloquial term "life support" did not (and probably does not, today, for the majority of people) include the basic necessities of food and water, even if given via tube or IV. The difference in construction (imputing to her comment, without the benefit of asking her, the inclusion of food and water) makes a life/death difference.
The court's construction of Terri's comments used statutory language, which Terri did not see or reasonably foresee. Assuming Terri said, "I don't want to be on life support," the burden was put on Terri's family, to prove that she didn't mean to include basic care.
In Georgia, WRITTEN advance directives prepared before 1987 were rendered possibly unenforcible.
Once I've Signed a Living Will, How Long Does it Last and Can I Change My Mind?I believe that the reason some advance directives were potentially unenforcible is that they might contain an express seven year term of enforcibility.Yes you may change your mind after signing a Living Will. As long as your Living Will was signed after 1987, it is good until you revoke it, which means you indicate that we no longer wish to have one. If we do wish to revoke our Living Will, we should tear up our copy and notify other people (family members and doctors) who also have a copy. If your Living Will was actually made and signed before 1987, it is a good idea to talk with an attorney or someone else knowledgeable about this law to find out whether or not you need to prepare another Living Will.
http://aging.dhr.georgia.gov/DHR-DAS/DHR-DAS_Publications/LivingWill.pdf <-- Page 5
The present model forms of advance directive contain express recitations regarding food and water. If common construction of "withhold life support" included "withhold food and water," then the food and water recitations would not be required. The model forms don't recite life support such as dialysis. Why not? Because there is near universal (if not literally universal) agreement that "life support" includes the application of a dialysis machine.
The object of the law is to comply with the patient's wishes. Changing a material term of art behind the patient's back may result in NOT following the patient's wishes.
I wonder if a written advance directive that does NOT recite "you are directed to withhold food and water" is construed as an order to withhold food and water.