|
"I doubt very much being a woman that she would have wanted what her parents made her endure....."
I guess thats my issue, that little bit of doubt you have. If a judge is going to order to have someone killed, there shouldn't be any doubt, at least not the amount that we witnesed in this case. Without clear and convincing evidence of the person's wishes you err on the side of caution.
Your posts seem to infer that she was aware and suffering in her vegetative state and it was a merciful thing to kill her but that is not what they claimed and not why the court ordered her to be killed. I understand you but that isn't the reason for her death which is why we have the uproar.
If the court said we find based upon the evidence and testimony that it was her wish to die if in this state and gave her a morphine drip and took out the tube, that would have been fine.
If the court said We dont' know what she would want to do so we will leave her alone with her feeding tube, that would have been fine.
But what the court really did here was tell us -We are not sure what she wanted so we will determine whether her life is worth living. they then deterrmined that it wasn't and ordered her to be killed. It seems even the court didn't place too much value on the husband's testimony.Thats why they ordered so many tests to determine her mental state and viewed so many hours of video and had all the experts testify as to her condition, so the court could justify its actions. Thats why I have a problem with it. Talk about an activist court, if you don't provide the evidence it needs to kill someone, don't worry, it will find it all by itself. Take care.
(no more rants from me on this topic, gotta get ready for opening day of trout season this saturday)
|