[Sister_T]

Sorry, bub, when the issue is the serious matter of life and death, and where there is genuine doubt as there was in this case, and no documentation, the assumption should be life, NOT death.

Exactly, but the "death with dignity" crowd don't care about that. All that matters is that THEY wouldn't want to live the way she did and because of their projection, murdering Terri was the "right" thing to do.

I'm not going to go back and forth with these folks.

[Jotmo]

I keep hearing this "no documentation" theme come up. What you are all ignoring is that "documentation" is not needed of required. The next of kin, which is established by law, in this case her husband, have the legal authority to make the decision. Her parents tried to have his authority removed, but failed to show sufficient evidence for doing so, despite having a legal battle which lasted YEARS.

Now you obviously disagree with the courts decision, but the fact remains that he had the authority to make the call, and the only way to stop it would have been to VIOLATE the laws that were in place at the time. That's why congress, Jeb and George Bush could do nothing. They would have had to violate the law, an impeachable offense.

And this is not a "death with dignity" or euthanasia issue. It was a "Who has the right to make end of life decisions" issue. And in that regard it was settled properly. The spouse should be the one with that authority, unless sufficient reason can be found to change that. Or do you want to change that? Who do you want to have that authority? The Government? Because by asking them to intervene in this case, that's what you were asking for.

I for one prefer it the way it is. It should be the family's decision, with the next of kin making the final call.