- #71
GENIERE
adrenaline said:…
And as sad as it may be for her parents, the law is very clear on the matter, as far as who has the responsibility of making these decisions in the absence of a living will.
You likely presume I am not in favor of pulling the plug. With the minimal knowledge I posses of the medical facts, it seems pulling the plug is the correct decision. Normally the husband wishes are the determining factor.
The new law specifically refers to this case and this case only, as it should. If it were not specific to this case I would not favor it. In this specific case the husband may not, note I state “may not”, be acting in the best interests of his wife. I think that even the Catholic Church would agree to an annulment given the husbands plight. His lack of attempting to sue for divorce is suspicious in my mind. The large insurance premium paid after her death may be a motivating factor. Lacy Peters should serve as a reminder that a spouse may not always act in their mates beat interest.
Medically speaking I think she has been denied a PET scan, the best means (TMK) of detecting the origin of brain activity. If no cerebral activity exists, then her body should be allowed to die.