[T'wit]

>> I heard that Florida has a law that a feeding tube is considered artificial life support. Is this true and has this been changed since Terri's death?

The law was changed after Terri's injury but before her death. PEG (feeding) tubes were redefined both to be life support equipment and life-prolonging treatment. Before these changes feeding tubes were not regarded as extraordinary care (and had been around for at least two centuries).

It is not a stretch to suppose that these changes in the law were made with an eye to killing Terri and other patients who could not speak for themselves.

In any case, the change WAS used to kill Terri and to do it "ex post facto." Because of her injury, Terri could not have known about these changes in the law and what they implied for her own case. She could not possibly have given "informed consent" to this removal of her treatment -- but "informed consent" was the original basis of her right to refuse treatment. Her rights were trampled by the Greer Court.

[T'wit]

bttt

[BykrBayb]

It is not a stretch to suppose that these changes in the law were made with an eye to killing Terri and other patients who could not speak for themselves.

Has this law ever been used to discontinue nutrition and hydration per a patient's informed consent? Has it ever been used with the consent of a patient, informed or not? Or has it only been used without the patient's consent?