That's what the Felos propaganda machine says, but it is not true. The electrodes could and should have been removed, which would have enabled her to have an MRI. The doctor who implanted those electrodes, in fact, recommended that they be removed, for her health, but Michael Schiavo wouldn't do it.
And a PET scan could be done even without removing the electrodes.
Many neurologists are appalled (one even called it "criminal") that a PVS diagnosis done without even an MRI and a PET scan could be the basis for depriving a patient of nutrition and hydration; see: Starving for a Fair Diagnosis
Even GAL Wolfson, who was predisposed to side with Michael Schiavo (before he was appointed GAL had told the press that he thought Terri's feeding tube should be removed), nevertheless recommended in his report that additional tests be done to determine Terri's true condition. But Michael Schiavo & Felos didn't want to permit that, and Judge Greer (as usual) agreed with them.
Thanks for the reply... That makes some sense. But, only in a sick, perverted way.
Another thing I don't understand.. When my beloved 15 year old Yorkshire terrier couldn't walk because of severe arthritis, I took him to a Vet and had him "put to sleep". I wouldn't dream of starving my pet to death. If it is considered "humane" to euthanize a pet, why isn't the same accepted for humans?
If the answer is, "it's not right to aid in the death", then maybe we should be re-thinking whether or not it is correct to let Terri die. Because, the result is the same. The differences are purely semantic.