The Karen Anne Quinlan case had been vociferously debated all summer. On April 15, the 21-year-old woman had taken a combination of tranquilizers and alcohol that had left her comatose, with severe brain damage. Her parents, after consulting with their parish priest, had asked the doctor to turn off the respirator; he refused; the parents sued; the judge had just ruled in favor of the doctor. (The following spring the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed that decision. The respirator was turned off; Miss Quinlan lived for another nine years, never regaining consciousness.) Mr. Porzio had defended Miss Quinlan's doctor; Dr. Heifetz had testified for the petitioners. A profound discussion of this agonizing issue, starting off with an earlier case involving a court-ordered blood transfusion for a young Jehovah's Witness. Dr. Heifetz: "The court had a right to say, 'Well, there's an element of doubt in this case. Would she waver? We think maybe she would.' ... What the court did was order the blood, which was correct, but instead of using that as their argument-which would therefore put it into the basis of the right of self-determination-they said there is no constitutional right to die. This is as inane as saying there's no constitutional right to eat apple pie."