I've stayed out of this because it is emotionally charged and I'm somewhat ambivalent. The one thing I firmly believe is that this issue belonged in court not the legislature. You have a case where the husbands motive's and the parents grasp on reality are obviously in question. The proper place to calmy and unemotionally determine the facts is in court not in legislatures with demagogues with bullhorns chanting out front trying to influence lawmakers. Recent court rounds have faced similar tactics, but the earlier ones didn't. It is quite obvious the lawmmakers are making rash judgments based on questionable data and motivated by the political gain of energizing their base rather than doing the right thing.

I firmly believe the medical evidence supports the husband's statements on her condition. That the parents will not admit this means they can't be trusted in their interpretation of any other facts in the case. No motive other than a parents desire to hold on to their children is needed to explain this. I can only hope that judges without public pressure made a valid assessment that Terri's desire really was to avoid this kind of situation and that her husband has accurately reported her desire.

Regards,
Mark