Now, I Have Some Questions

From West Palm Beach Florida:

Family's Fight Over Feeding Tube Reminiscent Of Schiavo Case
Husband, Mom At Odds Over Tube

A Florida woman put on a
feeding tube after she had a stroke is at the center of a court case similar to
the dispute over whether Terri Schiavo should be kept alive.

Karen
Weber's husband wants to have her feeding tube removed and have her transferred
to a hospital ward, where she would likely die. He claims that his 57-year-old
wife is in a vegetative state, but Weber's family is fighting to keep her alive,
arguing she's alert and responsive...

...A judge in Weber's case has
issued an injunction prohibiting the feeding tube's removal while a committee
determines the woman's competency. She does not have a living will and can not
talk.
Her husband, Raymond Weber, said he doesn't want this to become a
media event, but her mother, Martha Tatro, said she refuses to let her daughter
die.

Read complete story here.

Now, I have some questions. For one, is this woman alert and responsive or not? If so then she is not in a so-called 'vegetative state'. I understand that due to privacy laws, Mrs. Weber's doctors may not explain her condition to the media. But either she is or she isn't.

(I use the word 'so-called' because the terminology of vegetative state is ridiculous and undignified. An individual in such a state is not a plant in the corner being kept watered occasionally. He or she is someone who has lost cognitive neurological function and awareness of the environment but retains noncognitive function and a preserved sleep-wake cycle. In other words, he or she is still a person, one with profound cognitive disabilities.)

Second question, since there many cases of misdiagnosis of and treatment for this state, such as the sleeping pill Zolpidem which can temporarily revive people in a so-called permanent vegetative state, or one similar, to the point where they can have conversations, have these treatments been attempted?

Thirdly, why is removing her feeding tube even an option. Mrs. Weber is alive, with brain function and breathing on her own. A feeding tube has technically legally been deemed life support lately, but unlike removing a breathing tube of someone with absolutely no brain activity who will instantly die when that breathing tube is removed because he or she is already dead, pulling out the feeding tube of Mrs. Weber is not 'letting her die'. It is refusing to feed a woman who needs help eating; it is willful neglect. It is death by neglect. It is murder.

Lastly, what difference does it make whether she is in a 'vegetative state' or not? What if Mrs. Weber never regains awareness of her surroundings or even of her very existence? What if she remains totally and completely dependent on others the rest of her life for every aspect of her life?

I wonder if a life like hers is testimony that a person's worth to us and to God is not at all dependent on abilities, but on simply the fact that she is a fellow human being. Now is our chance to show we believe that idea when we tell our children, "God loves you for who you are, not for what you can do" by protesting this woman's murder, caring for those most in need of caring around us, and caring for their families.

Some say that it would be undignified to 'allow' Mrs. Weber to remain alive in such an event. However, is it not more undignified to refer to her as a vegetable, rescind her status of personhood, and starve her to death?