Suppose Terri had left instructions to withhold treatment. And suppose that her parents objected. Would there still be protests and outrage from those that "support" her?
That would depend, I suspect, on two factors:
- Whether the evidence of Terri's wish to have food and water withheld would be considered clear and unambiguous by a reasonable examiner. There should be no reasonable doubt as to the evidence's authenticity or the actual intentions of the ward when the wishes were expressed.
- Whether the evidence was clear and unambiguous that Terri was in fact in a persistent vegetative state, with the proviso that the evidence can only be considered clear and unambiguous if people who want Terri to live are offered full opportunity to examine Terri and her records.
Both of those conditions would have to be met for Terri's dehydration to be justifiable. Neither has been met to the standard that a reasonable fact-finder should require.