SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (105443)3/22/2005 5:55:17 PM
From: Thomas A Watson   of 793754
 
I infer from the all I read it was some time after the mal-practice suit was settled. That was a few years into Terri being in her present state. I believe after several months or even less one would quickly come to the conclusion Terri would never improve, was gone. The mal-practice suit took years.

It is possible one could be in denial for a very long time. It is possible the settlement of the case would be a climax event and one could then re think everything, re-evaluate and chose a new course of action.

And without the settlement money, there may have been no money to pay lawyers for the action to remove the feeding tube. The mal-practice was very likely on contingecy. The rest is not. And my last paragraph here may explain why no attempt was made to have the feeding tube removed as Michael could have known early he would have to fight the parents. Gee that was a good question.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News