I can imagine the horror show it must be for that girl's family to have their hands tied while someone else withholds food and water from their daughter until she dies. Given a chance, maybe they can teach her to feed herself, and if they can't, eventually, they will come to know that too, and then they can decide that they should let her go.

If her family wants to keep her alive, who is it harming? If they want to try to help her recover, couldn't there potentially be some useful knowledge gained in the experience that may save future brain-damaged people? There are folks in science who are working on ways to re-grow damaged brain tissue, and it has been found that while adult humans don't normally re-grow brain tissue, some other mature animals do, and there is also stem cell research that may be useful in replacing the lost brain cells, as well, so something to improve her situation could possibly be done.

While I disagree with enabling the Governer to override the judges, I think the judges or the laws misfired in agreeing to kill her when her family still wanted a chance to save her.

As for the money, the medical expenses for her must be enormous. I doubt anyone will gain financially from her, if she is kept alive, and since she was the victim of the malpractice, it seems only fair that the settlement money be used to help her.

Thanks, Crash, for speaking up on this issue--how we treat our helpless says a lot about our morality as individuals and as a society.