But you are like a broken record, it interferes with familes, it
interferes with families. Only in very limited circumstances where a
reasonable person might think a family *needs* to be interfered with.
There is nothing new in that concept, you know. Go home tonight and
beat your wife up and you'll discover this real quick. The present law
only interferes in one family, which is demonstrably dysfunctional.

Dana


On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:26:38 -0600, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Dana wrote:
> > we don't know for a fact that she had an eating disorder; at least I
> > don't. But assuming that she did, it's a very interesting question and
> > a troubling one considering that the appeals court thinks she doesn't
> > need her own lawyer given that there has been all this litigation. I
> > submit that one or the other of the parties in this dispute, and
> > possibly both of them, are representing themselves and not Terri.
> >
> 
> So I wonder - let's say your children are adults and you are
> incapacitated such that a medical decision needs to be made.  You kids
> make the call but your second cousin challenges them legally.
> 
> Are you saying that's fine with you, and you think the courts should
> decide your fate?
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Sams Teach Yourself Regular Expressions in 10 Minutes  by Ben Forta 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=40

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:151455
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to