[jess35]

Excuse me, Mrs Don-o...but your feelings on the matter have clouded your judgement. The court ruled that Terri Schiavo would not have wanted to live for decades in a PVS state. The court also ruled that her wishes should come before those of her parents and strangers. She received Substantive due process...she also received procedural due process. Your dislike of the outcome doesn't change those simple facts.

[Mrs. Don-o]

There was no substantive due process, there was nothing more than some contested hearsay evidence by an estranged husband who had a personal interest in seeing her dead; and there was no trial de novo.

You haven't even addressed the fact that Terri's estranged husband, Michael Schiavo, who abandoned her maritally and lived in open adultery with another woman, with whom he established a household and had two children, should still have been considered, as husband, fit to be Terri's "guardian" -- (or do you think bigamy/adultery, destroying her wedding and engsagement rings, and disposing of all of her personal property, doesn't constitute marital abandonment and doesn't vitiate his claim in the least?)---

Nor have you addressed the fact that Michael swore to devote a substantial financial settlement to Terri's therapy, and THEN (after he got the money) remembered, several YEARS after her collapse, that, oops, oh yeah, she said she'd rather be dead---

Nor have you explained how she could have had "substantive due process" when she wasn't even allowed to have a MRI or PET scan which could have showed the anatomy of her brain BEFORE she was dehydrated for 14 days---

If you would review the shameful case history of Terri Schiavo's situation and continue to support the courts, then I am --- carefully considering my word choice here ---astounded at the atrophy of your sense of justice.