I've thankfully mostly stayed out of the Schiavo case, but just a couple of observations:
1) It seems both sides of the family have entrenched themselves in their positions. I don't buy that the husband is some sort of murderous monster, but I wonder why he is so deadset on having her feeding tube removed. At this point, it just seems like both sides are too emotionally invested in this whole thing to act rationally.
2) The anti-tube removal side has taken a lot of actions that are normally used by liberal groups during a conflict. Appealing to Congress and the Federal courts to intervene in what is clearly a State law matter makes me uncomfortable.
Just my $0.02. I'll probably get flamed by both sides for this :-)
It was Terri's wish that she not live like that. She expressed that wish to Michael, to his brother (Scott), and to her best friend, Joan (Scott's wife).
All three testified under oath to that effect. The judge accepted the statements.
It was the judge, not Michael, who made the decision based on the the testimony and ordered the feeding tube removed (in 2000).