Re: OT: Game, Set, Match--Legal murder by starvation
Really, it's just a whole mess of stupidity.
The law should generally seek to avoid situations where someone is forced into such an awful situation, and would therefore benefit greatly from someone else's death.
The court should be able to enforce a divorce between them, make her parents her legal guardians, and remove any right the husband has to the money.
Then he could go on with his life without being forced to be married to someone he obviously doesn't love anymore, and she doesn't have to die for him to do it.
And, of course, someone who actually cares for her can make decisions in her best interests, with her own money (and theirs when it runs out).
Unless all that happens first I think any argument over whether it is better to keep her alive or not is totally mired in counter-productiveness. In fact it's a useless argument unless she is being cared for by public money - her parents should be able to spend her (or their) private money to keep her alive if they wish to.
And her compensation money definatley shouldn't go to anyone who decides to kill her. That is just wrong.
I don't see why the legislature isn't doing something to make this happen, if the courts can't.
|