|
OK, I've read the whole thing over, ever briefly, and I have one question. Feel free to answer this in PM to avoid debate, because I have NO INTEREST in joining the flame war that has become this ethical debate. Please forgive me if this has been answered, but I looked and never saw it mentioned.
I'm not american, so I'm not sure of the whole legal involvement, but what I don't understand is this. The husband is the legal caretaker in the event that the wife enters a vegitative state. How is this even a legal battle? Don't involve personal opinion in this, I'm just curious, why is this even in court? If husband is legal caretaker, and husband choses option A, why is option A questioned?
I'm not going to enter my personal feelings into this, because I feel that this whole debate is turning into a Fark partisan debate. I am just curious as to how it seems to have superceded the legal boundaries that I understand it was bound by.
__________________
"Whoever you are, go out into the evening,
leaving your room, of which you know each bit;
your house is the last before the infinite,
whoever you are."
|