So I guess you don't believe a person has the right to refuse a feeding tube or other means of medical life support under any circumstances?
Sorry, but according the law you're wrong.
Thank God people are allowed to make their own end of life decisions without interference from the Gov't.
This fiasco is not a legal question. It is a moral, or shall we say, a lack of morals question.
You are correct about Terri should have been allowed to determine her desire of life without the interference of the Judicial Branch of the Government without any justifiable reason to STARVE HER TO HER DEATH.
Do you realize that individuals across the USA who are sentenced to death, for any number of reasons, have their arm swabbed with an alcohol pad prior to the insertion of the needle that delivers the final "juice of death." You know why they wipe the arm with the swab - - - because they don't want the patient to get an infection from the insertion of the needle.
Terri, charged with no crimes, tried for no crimes, convicted of no crimes, never had a lawyer to represent HER interests, sentenced to death by starvation, did not have a single courtesy extended to her by the Judicial Branch of the GOVERNMENT!
I stand on my original statement - - -No one has the Right to STARVE A HUMAN TO DEATH!
Except, of course, when they AREN'T, such as that Grandma in Georgia who, but for the grace of the real God (not the phony one you praise) would have already died.
I note with great interest that people like you seem to have virtually no interest in safeguards with teeth, because you want your own or relatives' "death with dignity" to be easy and hassle free. Heaven forbid that something should have to be sworn!