[zook]

We can never know for certain what Terri's wishes were, and -- because this is a matter of life and death and because of her husband's behavior and motivation -- the court should have viewed her husband's claim with a high level of skepticism and scrutiny.

If this had been a matter of removing life support technolgy, I'd not contest it. But this is withholding food and water, which for me is an entirely different thing.

I'm imagining where this could lead. Parents of a severely mentally retarded child, one who perhaps lacks the muscle control to feed himself, opt to withhold food. Children of a severe Alzheimer's patient might do the same thing. Because this is a slippery road down which to travel, I support Terri's parents.

[NY-YANK]

If this had been a matter of removing life support technology, I'd not contest it.

Food, water, oxygen it's all the same you die without them. The controversy is the question of whether she is actually "here" or are they just holding her shell hostage using human technology. Seems others may have their own agendas also.

[robertpaulsen]

You do realize that it was the judge that ordered the feeding tube removed after hearing testimony? This was not Michaels decision. He brought it to the judge to decide.

So, your scenario about the parents choosing to withhold food is wrong and is also inflammatory to the discussion.