I’m kinda at the end of my rope reading angry or disappointed e-mails from people who say they don’t know the details of this case, but then who go on to say NR is wrong, or that our coverage is too much. Obviously, I expect and welcome disagreement, but we’ve now published a series of articles–both of the more polemical and well-researched variety–not just in the last few days, but over the course of a few years now. We’ve published primary documents that raise all sorts of questions. A lot of her details are out there—and even a cursory reading makes clear there are questions in this case—over whether she has been fairly represented in court, over whether she has gotten the best care. But still the question people seem to fall back most on in deciding Schiavo should be “allowed to die” is “I wouldn’t want to be on all sorts of machines.” I understand the instinct. But, I’d argue, this woman deserves a focus on her specifics. She’s needs feeding. She’s not on all sorts of extraordinary machines. And there’s a case out there that she has not had a decent shot at rehab, and the people who gave her life want to get it to her.

I remain with the president, if there are questions, we should be erring on the side of life. This should be the presumptive course of action on the hospital level, shouldn’t it? And, yes, I am heartsick it is not.

Anyway, I would read Robby George if you’re looking for something to read. He says it all better than I do. And it’s a Q&A, so easy to go through–unlike, say, a court brief.