Source? So, how do you account for Terri not drooling, if she couldn't swallow? I'd read (tho it would take some digging) that it was easier to put a tube in her than to feed her.
Source is the GAL report:
"Three, independent sets of swallowing tests were performed early in Theresa’s medical treatment: 1991, 1992 and 1993. Each of these determined that Theresa was not able to swallow without risk of aspiration (and consequent infection)... The recognized gold standard test is the modified barium swallowing test, generally done in a hospital or at a facility that has radiology equipment. Theresa’s three previous tests were barium swallowing tests... The ability to orally ingest food and water – to swallow substances other than saliva, is predicated on a level of cognitive capacity. Without cognitive capacity, the intentional act of oral nutrition and hydration is likely to lead to aspiration. Eating and drinking are not unconscious processes."
If there is a risk that a patient might choke given oral food and hydration, doctors will prescribe a feeding tube. For patients with difficulty swallowing, feeding tubes are more convenient than oral feeding for patient and staff alike. Because feeding tubes are safer and more convenient than oral feeding, doctors are apt to prescribe them even when they are not absolutely necessary.
The fair way to resolve the dispute would have been to remove the G-tube but allow Terri's parents to either attempt to give Terri water and orally or to hire a doctor to so. Even if such attempts had an 80% chance of fatal complications and a 1% chance of success, that would still improve Terri's odds of survival by 1%. If it doesn't work, nobody is harmed by the attempt, but Terri's family gets to feel better for the attempt. And if it does work, it would show that Terri was able to take food orally and thus that starving/dehydrating her would not have been legal.
The only reasons I can see for refusing such efforts are (1) Michael hated Terri's family and wanted them to suffer [a possible reason, but not a legitimate one], or (2) Michael was afraid that such efforts might succeed [another possible reason, but again not a legitimate one]. Care to offer any legitimate reasons?