This is exactly what worries me the most about this case- There is NO signed living will, by Terri, saying that she wanted to be removed from life-support if something were to happen to her. Her husband and his supporters are going on an assumption, something that she may or may not have said. And something that there is no proof that she did say. Anybody could use that excuse, it's just crazy that it is being followed. It would be like, for example- if I accidentally hit someone with my car, and killed them, if I went into court and said "Well- I heard from a friend of the victim. He said the victim mentioned one time, I forget how long ago, that he was depressed and had suicidal thoughts, so it's OK that I killed him, right?". I would expect to be convicted of vehicular homocide if I did that, because it is not a rational thing to do- to base your actions on what someone MAY have said. So how is this case any different? And, for what you did for your husband, in respecting his true wishes- I commend you. I know it must have been a horrible situation, but you did the right thing, since he did have a living will and those were his wishes. What Michael is doing, however- in my opinion, it is dead-wrong.
Rich --- excellent points above!
If you will notice, she did not want to die until he got his money from the lawsuit.
People have asked, "Is Michael lying?"
I ask, "Has Michael ever told the truth?"
posted on 10/29/2003 8:08:09 PM PST
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson