[Magnum44]

First you answer my question with the argument that 'the Judge heard the arguments and decided'. Next your feign you don't understand my question. Finally, you repeat your first response. You have put your faith, and this woman's life, in the subjective opinion of one judge.

We disagree, and the 'evidence' I see and hear on the news that attests to this woman's awareness of family members around her is far more compelling than anything you've provided supporting the judge here. You are not up to defending his decision, and your correct if you think I didn't expect you to convince me, though I was sincere when I asked someone to try. I do not understand the culture of death being tolerated in this case.

[ContemptofCourt]

Mag: The FL law put this case in the hands of that one judge and told him to make a decision. Tough beans if you don't like the decision he made.

[Tarantulas]

We disagree, and the 'evidence' I see and hear on the news that attests to this woman's awareness of family members around her is far more compelling than anything you've provided supporting the judge here.

Maybe this will help...

After Judge Greer made this ruling stating unequivocally that Terri was in a persistent vegetative state and found clear and convincing evidence of Terri’s wishes in this situation, the Schindlers appealed to the Florida court of appeals. As part of their appeal, the Schindler family submitted a 113-second videotape, accompanied by multiple affidavits from various health care professionals saying patient was not in a vegetative state. Because of these videotapes, and notwithstanding the previous definitive ruling by the trial court judge on Terri’s neurological condition and chances for recovery, the court of appeals ordered the trial court to conduct an extremely thorough evidentiary hearing, the most complex evidentiary process in over three decades of landmark right to die court cases. Many of these affidavits contain the completely erroneous assertion that Terri’s ability to handle her own secretions was incompatible with the vegetative state. None of these medical professionals (including internists, rehabilitationists, speech pathologists, and others) who submitted these multiple sets of affidavits over the years at the behest of the Schindlers, had ever personally examined the patient, reviewed the medical records in any detail, considered the medical opinions of the consulting neurologists, nor looked at the CT scans or EEG’s. They instead relied on the brief videotapes showing Terri apparently interacting with her parents and noting that Terri could handle her own secretions. A few of these medical professionals did go to the bedside with the Schindler family to make observations about Terri’s apparent interactions with her family but none performed a complete neurological examination. All the videotapes released by the Schindlers to the media that I have seen are not only entirely consistent with the vegetative state but also, to the trained eye of any doctor experienced in the diagnosis of the vegetative state and related conditions, are completely compatible with the fact that Terri is in a vegetative state. For example, if one looks at Terri’s eyes closely during these videotapes, it is reasonably evident that she does not sustained visual pursuit, nor visual fixation, even when the mother is directly in front of the patient and Terri apparently “smiling” at her mother. Sustained visual pursuit (visual tracking) is almost always the cardinal feature distinguishing patients in a vegetative state from those with any degree of cognitive functioning. And the first sign of evolving from the vegetative state to a higher level of cognitive functioning, e.g. the minimally conscious state, is almost invariably the presence of sustained visual pursuit on a consistent, sustained, and reproducible basis, a physical finding that Terri Schiavo has never demonstrated.

Reference - lots more good information on that page - written by a doctor involved in the case.