Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TheOtherOne
Non written consent is, at a minimum, ambiguity, no?
161 posted on 10/17/2003 6:41:48 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies ]


To: jwalsh07
Non written consent is, at a minimum, ambiguity, no?

It is ambigious.

When did Michael first state that those were her wishes? Does anyone know? I am curious if it was before, during, or after the civil trial for damages.

It is speculated often that he made the claim after the civil case, does anyone know if that is factually supported. I think that would have been a key fact.

(I have to say, as one who would support anothers right to die, I am turned off from Teri's case my the many who throw false and over the top accusations at anyone who might think otherwise. The notion that Teri did actually express her wishes to her husband and that she would have not wanted this type of care - and he is fighting for what she actually wanted does not even seem to be a consideration or a possibility. I think there are many here who would not agree even if those were her wishes and are using this case to promote their own causes.)

165 posted on 10/17/2003 6:51:07 PM PDT by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson