[KDD]

All the annual swallowing tests up to 1997 showed she could not eat without a high probibility of aspiration.

[Destro]

All the annual swallowing tests up to 1997 showed she could not eat without a high probibility of aspiration.

that means she would choke.

[flowergirl]

which is better..
starving and dehydration
or
aspiration?
Why wasn't she allowed hydration through an IV which would have made it more merciful?

[supercat]

All the annual swallowing tests up to 1997 showed she could not eat without a high probibility of aspiration.

So, even if there were a significant probability of aspiration, what would be the purpose of forbidding the attempt unless one did not want the person to survive if they happened to be able to take liquid by mouth? Since it is illegal to fatally dehydrate someone who would be able to survive on oral hydration, what legitimate basis is there for denying the attempt even if the probability of success were only 1%?

[Note that oral feeding/hydration would be clearly contraindicated if there were a 5% chance of aspiration, even if there were a 90% chance of success; therefore, the fact that swallowing tests were 'unsuccessful' does not mean swallowing wouldn't be possible--merely that it would be less safe that g-tube feeding]

[Dolphy]

I'm looking at Wolfson's report dated December, 2003 and he said that there were three swallowing tests administered, 1991, 1992 and 1993. In fact, he determined that if that issue could be resolved it might address the core issues of the dispute. He recommended a swallowing test be administered. It wasn't and one has to ask themselves why.