"IF" terry and michael had that conversation that michael claims they did, then i could see why he would go to the lengths that he did to honor his wifes requests. i would do the same no matter the opposition.
to me, keeping my word to someone is what will set me apart from others in this life. but then again, my "word" is always based around what i believe is Gods purpose/plan. i would never had agreed with my wife to pull the plug on a sustainable life. the dividing line is "is" there life?, not is there "quality" of life? you cross that line and then you are playing God. there have been certain things about my life that have been unpleasant, and that i would rather had not gone thru but i do realize that it is God that chooses and defines my "quality" of life and not me and because i know that, i have peace. .
i would not want to see anyone (especially a loved one) suffer. but i will always choose to allow God to be God and for him to choose the how and when of anybody, including me. she was still living and they killed her plain and simple. the only time that i would have tried to pull the plug on my wife, was when she became brain dead. if she wasn't, then i would had honored my word to God and my wife by staying married to her and living up to that committment no matter how ugly that road became. but then again i know the "whys" of these kinds of scenarios in life and that knowledge would sustain me thru to the conclusion as finally dictated by God.
there are several factors that i use to weigh in on this difficult issue.
my opinion is that they DID not have that conversation, or if they did, it wasn't as michael "sold it" to the parents and the court(s). i obviously was not there when michael/terry alledgely had the "conversation", but i do find that there are ways to find out over time, who people are and what their true motives are by weighing thier words/actions. .......and this has smelled badly for a long time. there are far too many things that michael has either said or done that indicates anything other than he is trying to cover up something he did ....by getting rid of her.
to me it is far more of an issue of alledgedly honoring her request ( a request that supposedly only he knew of, despite their volatile relationship), then making sure she "goes away". as blunt as that sounds, i believe that he has always acted in his best interest, than hers. if he did something sinister, it would totally account for his choices concerning her. i hope that the autopsy that he probably wasn't counting on (in favor of cremation), finally brings to the surface the "why" of michael shiavo.
i believe that he most likely did something to her, but at minimum i believe that he desperately wanted to get rid of her and it doesn't matter whether it was for financial/personal reasons. if she recovers, she implicates him.
still, it was a collective effort to kill her by michael and our lame justice system. she was brain damaged, not brain dead and therein lies the difference. she was still a living breathing human being .....despite her condition.
i live near a veterinary clinic and i will now avoid going near there so that they don't decide to euthanize me just because i move a little slower than i used to.
20/20 PEOPLEWITHVISIONNEVEROPTFORTHEEASYWAYOUT