Why didn’t the court appoint a guardian other than Terri’s husband to speak for her?
The trial judge could have utilized a guardian ad litem as a neutral party to speak for Terri, but in the end the trial judge did not do so. The Second District affirmed this decision and explained its rationale in this way: Under these circumstances, the two parties, as adversaries, present their evidence to the trial court. The trial court determines whether the evidence is sufficient to allow it to make the decision for the ward to discontinue life support. In this context, the trial court essentially serves as the ward’s guardian. Although we do not rule out the occasional need for a guardian in this type of proceeding, a guardian ad litem would tend to duplicate the function of the judge, would add little of value to this process, and might cause the process to be influenced by hearsay or matters outside the record. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s discretionary decision in this case to proceed without a guardian ad litem. Why didn’t Terri’s parents get a chance to prove t
