(1) MICHAEL ONLY ASSERTED THAT TERRI WOULD NOT HAVE WANTED TO LIVE AS SHE IS NOW AFTER HE WON THE MONETARY SETTLEMENT.
(2) ONLY MEMBERS OF THE SCHIAVO FAMILY ASSERT THAT TERRI WOULD NOT HAVE WANTED TO LIVE ON AS SHE IS LIVING NOW. NOT A SINGLE MEMBER OF THE SCHINDLER FAMILY CORROBERATES THIS - ALL DISPUTE IT.
(3) MICHAEL HAS A CLEAR CONFLICT OF INTEREST: HE IS LIVING WITH ANOTHER WOMAN, AND THEY HAVE HAD TWO CHILDREN TOGETHER.
(4) SOME MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS THINK THAT TERRI CAN IMPROVE.
(5) IF MICHAEL'S PAID DOCTORS ARE RIGHT AND TERRI FEELS NO PAIN, THEN SHE IS NOT HARMED BY HER CONDITION, NOR BY HER FEEDING-TUBE WHICH KEEPS HER ALIVE; THEREFORE, HER LIFE "AS IS" IS BENIGN. BUT - IF THE SCHINDLER'S UNPAID DOCTORS ARE CORRECT - AND TERRI CAN FEEL PAIN, THEN STARVING HER IS MORE HARMFUL TO HER THAN KEEPING HER ALIVE.
BOTTOM-LINE:
IS THERE A SINGLE PERSON OUT THERE WHO WOULD GIVE THE POWER OF OUR OWN LIFE TO SOMEONE WHO HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OVER IT (AS MICHAEL CLEARLY HAS IN RELATION TO TERRI AND HIS COMMON LAW WIFE)!?
I THINK NOT.
No comments:
Post a Comment