People with the trait described in the article normally die soon after birth, but there have been cases of them living as long as five years.

I don't know what I would do if it were my kid. I've never been there, but I'd like to think I'd grab at the slimmest chance.

Do you think the talking heads know the facts when they accuse him of being a murderer?

There are self-serving statements coming out of both sides, and nobody is filtering the sources. I have not checked things out for data "focal points," something that shows up a lot in scientific controversy. You read an article on how twenty papers support a particular view. Then you look at the citations, and find out that many of them cite the same few sources, and sometimes those sources go further to cite even fewer.

I don't know how many of these trials relied on the same original information repeated over and over again, and how many drew on new medical examinations or information. Do you? I don't expect so, and nobody rational would expect you to. Unless somebody was completely obsessed with this enough to pore over literally years of transcripts and documents, how would they know?

The insistence that Terri wanted to die if left in this condition is apparently based on the word of her husband and two of his relatives. At the same time, we are led to believe that her husband, for years after her accident, fought like hell to keep her alive. There are relationships between legal and medical personnel and other organizations that raise questions. I've looked at her brain scans, and seen opinions on them from other medical personnel. I've read testimony and medical reports on all sides. Some credible, some less so.

I don't know everything that's going on. But my opinion is that something stinks in all this. The constant refrain here that it's all cut-and-dried, and that everything has been decided with no questions, is getting a bit old.