Terri Schiavo had massive and irreversible brain damage
announced pathologists after autopsy.
"She would not have been able to form any cognitive thought," said Nelson, speaking with Pinellas County Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin at a news conference. "There was a massive loss of brain tissue."
The autopsy found no amount of therapy would have helped to regenerate Schiavo's brain, and determined she was blind, belying videotapes that appeared to show her eyes following objects. The videos were cited by her parents' supporters as proof she should be kept alive.
The experts apparently knew what they were talking about. The others didn't. Does this unambiguous information retroactively change your position for the Terri Schiavo case? If so, then, when cases occur under similar circumstances in the future, will you be more inclined to take the opposite position? In light of this autopsy, what is the federal/state role in second guessing a consensus of medical experts?
Note that I wrote "consensus
" to be a bit cheeky