Replies

I will freely admit that I am a Newbie and a Johnny come lately to the Terri Schiavo debate, but it would seem that a divorce would solve your first speculation. I guess the larger question is who should be able to make this decision for Terri? Assuming (and I know it is a BIG assumption, which many here are unwilling to make) that Terri did express a desire not to live as she currently is living to Michael, should he not be the person to now make that decision for her? What about his current situation (another woman and kids) changes his right to make the decision, if that is what Terri expressed to him as what she wanted. Is it because his current situation creates a suspicion of ulterior motive, (even if one does not exist)?

I don't know what you are asking regarding divorce. What I am saying he has a conflict of interest by having another woman and kids. Lets just say he may not be quite as devoted to Terri.

Also, maybe she did say that was what she wanted (to die) but why did it come out after he won the malpractice case? It just doesn't make sense why he would go to court for money for therapy and medical needs for the rest of her life (30 or 40 years). He wins big money and then he suddenly remembers that she wanted to die. The large amount of money was based on her life expectancy and necessary care. Doesn't that seem like he is trying to cheat the system? Add it up. It doesn't make sense.