She is not a dog or a horse to just be put out of her so called "misery". Use to be a law against kiling someone.
Who is to say what medical break through could occur in the next ten years that would give this women back some mobility. As long as she is alive there is hope for a recovery. If she is killed all hope is gone and her life is over. No one has the right to make that decision for her. She was awarded money to be able to get treatment. From what I have read she has not been given any treatment. So who is to say what her quality of life really could be if M. Schiavo was not denying her medical treatment. There is more to this than what meets the eye.
To give you an idea how far some people go to try to preserve biological, but not cognative life, consider the case of some children around the country.
These children were born hydrocephalic. That means that their brain never develpped due to excessive celerbial fluid retention in utero. Not to be overly graphic, but they literally do not have brains, or often, even the craniums to hold a brain. Often their skulls curve down to the vertical about 2 or 3 inches aft of the eye socket line. This can be treated in some children in utero but once they are born, especially to druggie mothers with no prenatal care, there is no hope.
They have no brain, but unfornately, they do have a brain stem. They can breathe. They can have a hartbeat, but that's about it. Again, sorry to be graphic, but what else can you expect from a child with a face but no skull behind it. There physically is no brain, only a brain stem.
Years ago, these children died within 12 hours of birth. Now, in some states, they are kept alive for 20 to 30 years! They are even sent to school under the mainstreaming provisions! (Their heads are kept covered so as to not alarm the other students.) They require 24/365, texpayer-paid-for care. They never do anything but respirate. Luckilly, they feel no pain. That takes a brain.
There is a time to let go of people who do not have any reasonable change of recovery. To go after some judge because he makes a decision you do not agree with is wrong.
There are two sides to this story, and if we just concentrate on the one, we miss the opportunity to learn, and to learn how to be effective when we need to argue a case we have a hope of winning.