Yes, it was. I was addressing your ...
They certainly weren't given anything in the first round of filings and, realistically, it was probably too late from a clinical standpoint for Terry when they were given a second chance to intervene.... with the observation that given anything or not, one member of the Federal Circuit Court (even though it wasn't given pleadings in the correct mystical incantation) found an action that the Court could have ordered, before it was too late from a medically clinical point.
I agree, it was probably too late the second time around. I agree, the first pleading didn't expressly ask for a de novo review of the contested factual finding of Terri's wishes. I agree, the 2nd amended complaint was weak in the area of presenting the contested evidence, as one would present at trial.
But since I'm free to wander from the precise phrasing of your contentions, I did. Even if the matter wasn't framed for a de novo review of the facts; following legislative intent as intepreted by the dissenting judge [in the first post-Pal-Sunday-statute go-round at the Fed Circuit] was probably not too late from a medical clinical point.
Part of me says that the federal courts should have remedied all the deficiencies in the filings and the congressional bill, and part of me says that they should have played with the hand they were dealt with.
My strict constructionist leanings make me lean toward the latter.
I know I'm cold and callous but Terri wasn't ever going to contend for a Nobel prize no matter how this case turned out. Full recovery was never a possibility, so the question I have is whether her unfortunate case left us with any lessons. If it did, then her death was not in vain.