[nosofar]

From what I understand, we have nothing to indicate Terri Schiavo wanted to die except her husband's word. Also, what is the issue is merely removing here feeding and hydration (water) tubes. Can this be considered 'forcing' someone to live? It sounds to me it's just being given the necessary food and water we all require. It's not unique that an individual is not able to care for himself (herself in this case). I assume M.S. is the legal guardian and that's what gives him the legal authority to prevent her from being fed. In general, this ultimately means that a guardian can decide if his or her charge can be killed by the simple expediency of claiming they 'chose' to die in and then denying food and water to them. I'm not aware of anyone who would NOT eventually die if denied these things. (As an aside, if she can be denied food and water, can she also be denied oxygen?)

[tuckrdout]

There is also the testimony of her best friend, who said that 2 years before Terri's sudden collapse, Terri and she had been watching a movie on Karen Ann Quinlan, and Terri told her friend, "as long as there is life, there is hope"...and that she did not believe life support should be removed from a person in a coma!

Terri also told a friend that she was thinking of getting a divorce!

Now, if an off handed comment, that MS says Terri made, is enough to have her killed...what about those comments she told her friends? Can't these two comments get her a divorce and save her life?

[KDubRN]

(As an aside, if she can be denied food and water, can she also be denied oxygen?)

According to FL law, yes. Along with aerosol treatments, IV lines, and just about any type of medical intervention, except medication administration, as that is specifically addressed in the law as not constituting medical treatment.

This is state sponsored euthanasia, and it is being shoved down our throats in the name of right to choose, death with dignity, and right to privacy.