From: "Ronn!Blankenship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> (1) Not everyone agrees she is brain-dead. Some have said that she has > shown reactions to things around her. Were these people doctors with equipment that can measure brain activity or friends and relatives that might be seeing what they want to see because they are possibly in denial? > (2) We have only her husband's word that she once said she would not want > to be kept alive by such means. She did not make out a "loving will" or > otherwise make her wishes known to anyone else. Lots of people who do not want to be kept alive by extraordinary means never make out a "living will" or tell anyone but those closest to them. Most don't think it will take more than that, and most do not actually think that such a situation will ever actually befall them. > (3) Her husband stands to inherit a substantial amount if she dies. If he > divorces her to marry the woman he is with now, he gets nothing. If she > stays in a coma hooked up to machines for many more years (as is apparently > possible), that money will be eaten up by her medical expenses. And you think that allowing the money to be eaten up by the hospitalization is reasonable when the doctors say it is a lost cause? You think it is unreasonable for a man to look for another wife when his own has been unrecoverably comatose for 10 years and would have been dead years ago had extraordinary measures not been used in the first place? > Though I suppose that a web site which calls itself "morons.org" might not > be expected to cover all sides of an issue with equal balance . . . No one can be expected to cover all sides equally. Everyone has their own veiwpoint, and even if the person wants to be impartial, everyone will present things as flavored by their own experiences and bias. Get used to it. Nobody can be truely impartial. Michael Harney [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
