But you were taking her "statement" as true, while questioning anything that might mitigate the WND story.
Yes, best interests is a subjective term, but virtually anything in medicine is somewhat subjective. The fact that doctors in the Schiavo case disagreed on the extent of her PVS diagnosis proves that.
I don't think so, but I can understand how you might reach that conclusion. I used the report to illustrate that "best interests" is subjective, without meaning to accord accuracy to any side.
Heheheh. I was just rereading the thread and noticed this. My "best interests is subjective" point is, I think different from the one you alude to. My point was meant to illustrate that "best interests" can be subjectively taken in diametrically opposite ways.
"Best interests is to be with Jesus sooner, via withholding nutrition and water"
vs.
"Best interests is to choose a medical course of action that has the greatest likelihood of sustaining the patient's life."
The second one involves all subjective medical points and uncertainties. The first is not a medical decision to treat a treatable condition, rather it is an ethical judgement that the patient is better off dead. I must concede that a significant fraction of the medical and legal community holds that withholding of food and water constitutes an acceptable "medical treatment" for otherwise non-terminal patients, in particular, those that it deems to be better off dead.