Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LadyMischief
If she's brain dead, it's not like she's aware that she's starving to death. She's BRAINDEAD! If this were a hundred years ago and nobody had the miracles of modern medicine, she'd already be dead and this would be a moot point. Just because we have the capabilities of keeping someone alive, should we? Eventually the cost filters down to the taxpayers, and let's be honest, all the family are doing is prolonging their own suffering. Even her husband said that she wouldn't have wanted to live that way. So now the court systems are tied up and taxpayers are paying so that her parents who refuse to let go can fight to keep her alive (against her own wishes and her husband's), and all it's going to do in the end is cause even MORE grief. What's better, to dwell in the past, or to live in the now and keep the memories of the past in your heart? It's a sad thing, but she should be left to rest.
|
stop drinking the liberal kool aide.
The husband stopped medical care and rehab for her shortly after she won 2.6 million dollars in a law suit.
The parents wanted to continue rehab.
After the so called husband finds a girlfriend, and stands to inherit a couple million, he remembers her saying she didn't want to live in a coma.
There is no written evidence of this and no evidence that this wasn't just two people watching the "karen ann quinlan story" and one of them says, "I wouldn't want to live like this"
And in what world do we live where the parents who have nothing to gain are wrong to want to rehab her but the husband who will inherit millions, upon her death, is right?