Mr. P,
Your comment on not making assumptions would have some validity in this conversation if the court had not already based its ruling on them.
We have no idea, neither does Michael Shiavo, if Terri Shiavo would have wanted to be kept alive if it meant being fed through a tube. The situations in which Terri supposedly made comments about not wanting to live were all involving completely different situations...one involving a respirator being used completely against a persons express written wishes, and another about a person in a coma.
The Court ASSUMMED that Terri ALSO meant, if my husband doesn't give me rehab and I am on a feeding tube.
The Court ASSUMMED that Terri's husband was working in her best interest, despite sworn affidavits from numerous doctors, friends, family, etc. that might prove the opposite.
This case has been entirely about assumptions being made by people in power...so to sit back in a conversation about a case that was STEEPED in assumptions and say that you won't discuss it because "assumptions are dangerous," is laughable.