Originally posted by 98 SE:
I see the removal of the feeding tube as a form of killing, as it is pretty much known that she won't survive without it. Just as bad as lethal injection, but far more painful because it happens over a course of weeks and not hours. Something about "cruel and unusual punishment" fits in here ... we don't even starve our criminals to death, why would they want to do that to her?



agreed. i thought she was brain dead, but even if she has the mentality of an infant, allowing her to starve to death would be horrible. she is alive and "kicking". allowing her to starve would be a death sentence and constitute murder, IMO. they "pull the plug" on brain dead patients because they are legally considered dead. the Supreme Court ruled many years ago that a person will be considered "dead" when their brain is no longer functioning. brain damaged does not equal brain dead. i agree, she probably wouldn't want to go on like this, and I'm not for prolonging her condition but starving her to death is no way to do it. unfortunately, lethal injection would be murder for which she is not due. i think that would be the "right" thing to do but i can't imagine the day where someone is ordered killed who hasn't received the death penalty. it's just a plain horrid situation to which there is no real answer.

the argument "see if she can live on her own" just doesn't make sense. that's like when a negligent mother leaves a baby to starve to death. can you imagine saying, "well the baby died on his own." either way it's a helpless person who can't fend for themselves and needs someone's help in order to survive.

Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.