[AaronInCarolina]

Since the Florida Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the Florida Constitution allows Floridians the right to refuse feeding tubes, the quoted argument has been rejected by the courts.

Do you know if the Schindler's attornies ever tried to establish the distinction between having a philosophy of rejecting a feeding tube and excercising that right in a particular instance? Seems to me one could, in fact, hold such a philosophy, yet not excercise the right in every conceivable circumstance. It seems the court made the holding of that philosophy equivalent to a desire to excercise it in all future circumstances. That is a big jump to make in logic.

[george wythe]

Seems to me one could, in fact, hold such a philosophy, yet not excercise the right in every conceivable circumstance.

I absolutely understand your argument, but off the top of my head, I don't recall if the Schindlers raised that issue as clearly as you stated it.

Btw, the Schindlers had an attorney who became burned out because of the emotional drain of this case, and she was not the best legal counsel in many state proceedings, especially in front of Judge Greer.