[Magnum44]

In summary of your response, the only thing in there that makes any common sense is the first two papragraphs pointing out that the husband and the parents disagree.

The remainder of your post is a bunch of legalistic crap that says the court can subjectively decide to keep someone alive or condemn them to death, and it assumes a vegetative state, a fact that is clearly in dispute in light of recent public coverage of Terri. The court is clearly out of its jurisdiction here, as the court has no right to deny Terri her right to life.

I am no lawyer, but this much is very clear to me after your explaination.

[ContemptofCourt]

Legalistic crap, eh? Well, then, we can agree to disagree.