He could have gone to court to get an order to have her feeding tube pulled in 1993 and he didn't. Stop equivocating with this crap about a DNR and an infection.
Are you sure? It might not even have been legal then. When Terri collapsed, feeding tubes were not considered life support. Sometime later, the law's definition was changed. Quite possibly Michael's hands were tied.
Stop equivocating with this crap about a DNR and an infection.
Stop ignoring all information that doesn't suit your personal opinion. The first legal ruling that approved the removal of the feeding tube was in May of 97. Obviously he petitioned the court sometime before then.
And factually speaking, Michael Schiavo passively abandoned his wife from 93-97. He denied her therapy, basic hygene and common decency. He placed a DNR on her chart and refused treatment for life-threatening infections on more than one occasion.
You simply can't dismiss his behavior as equivocation when those actions established a documented pattern which led up to his proactive pursuit of her death.
Oh and by the way, it's proven fact that Michael was quite the philanderer. (Don't argue that he has a right to get on with his life, because that's not my point.) 18 months after Terri's collapse, Michael was involved in a serious relationship with another woman that lasted a year. The summer BEFORE the malpractice suit was to commence, he and this woman were planning to move in together.
My point is this - Michael's behavior in 1992, DURING the malpractice suit, directly contradicted his court testimony where he claimed to love his wife, honor his vows forever, and planned to take her home to care for her for the rest of her life. Another example - two months after the first judge ruled in favor of his removing her feeding tube, in July of 97, he announced his engagement to his current fiance and mother of his two children. And yet this is a man whose motives should be accepted without question?
Talk about suspension of disbelief.