(LifeSiteNews) — It is a truly horrifying video. For 18 minutes, Cathy Naranjo explains in a now-deleted Facebook livestream that her family has decided to remove their adult daughter Margo Naranjo from the “life support” she has needed since suffering a severe brain injury after a car accident in 2020. Margo is sitting next to her mother, opening and closing her eyes, moving her mouth. Cathy stated that she was “super nervous,” and then began to discuss the funeral and “celebration of life” as Margo shifted.

Cathy explained that before the accident, the family had been sitting around the table joking about how if something ever happened to them, they would want someone “who would pull the plug,” and claimed that Margo had said at that point that she wouldn’t want to be “kept alive by machines.” Cathy also claimed that Margo, at age 24, “was very clear about it” and would want to die rather than “not have quality of life,” although she “unfortunately” didn’t “write anything down.” Cathy continued: “I feel 100% sure that she knew what she was saying.” 

But as LSN reported, what Cathy means by removing the machines in this instance is removing Margo’s artificially administered nutrition and hydration. “In the state of Texas, that is considered a form of life support,” Cathy said. “It is ethical and legal to remove it in situations like this”—here she gestured at her daughter. “She’s under the care of amazing hospice doctors.” Naranjo insisted that Margo would not be starving to death, but that this was simply about following her wishes. 

Let’s be clear here: Margo Naranjo is not dying. A feeding tube is not “extraordinary care.” Cathy Naranjo herself noted that it would take “three to five days” for her daughter to die after removal of “nutrition and particularly hydration.” I will always recall Bobby Schindler, the brother of Terri Schiavo, describing to me what his sister looked like just before she died in the same circumstances—skeletal, horrifying. When you remove nutrition and hydration—food and water—someone starves to death. Or dies of thirst.  

Naranjo noted that a funeral has been organized for August 2 at St. Ann Catholic Church in Coppell, Texas, followed by a “Celebration of Life” party. (It is as yet unknown  if St. Ann’s staff knew that Margo’s death was planned—Ed.) 

RELATED:  URGENT: Pray for young Texas woman with brain injury having her nutrition and hydration withdrawn

Naranjo went to great lengths to insist that all of this was “peaceful,” and that Margo wanted to go to heaven:“If you believe in heaven, why wouldn’t you want to be there? So that’s where we’re going to let her go. She’s going to go to heaven, and everybody has been so supportive,” she said. She also claimed that people who are dying frequently refuse food and fall “into a deep sleep,” again not mentioning that Margo is not naturally dying—she will die as a result of being denied nutrition and hydration. Naranjo ended with a prayer, and her husband Mike joined her and thanked her for “walking people through and explaining” what was happening. 

It is important to address Naranjo’s claims. Dr. John Keown is one of the world’s top experts on euthanasia and assisted suicide, and he became the first holder of a lectureship in the law and ethics of medicine at Cambridge. He has published on the subject widely, most notably in his acclaimed book Euthanasia, Ethics, and Public Policy: An Argument Against Legalisation, published by Cambridge University Press. His work has been cited by the US Supreme Court, the Law Lords, House of Commons, House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics, and the Australian Senate. 

Keown is clear that withdrawing tube feeding can rightly be considered “medical murder by omission.” In a 2000 paper and another in 2009, he referred to this process as “passive euthanasia.”  

Keown has addressed this scenario extensively. In a 1998 article in The Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy titled “The Legal Revolution: From “Sanctity of Life” to “Quality of Life” and “Autonomy,” he carefully examines each position on the withdrawal of food and water, and concludes: 

In the medical context, there are no exceptions to sanctity’s moral prohibition of intentional killing: the doctor who intentionally shortens the life of a patient, whether a terminally ill adult or a child with Down’s syndrome, breaches the principle. It matters not, moreover, whether the shortening is brought about by an act or an omission. Intentionally shortening a patient’s life by withholding treatment, food, water, or warmth, is no less wrong than injecting a lethal poison. Nor does a good motive, such as the alleviation of the patient’s-or the relatives’-suffering, redeem a bad intent. In short, any conduct that is intended to shorten a patient’s life, whether as an end or as a means to an end, and whatever the further motive, breaches the principle. 

Keown adds, later in the paper: 

The criminal law is likewise not concerned only with punishing active killing. Although there is, generally, no liability for an omission to preserve life, it is well-established that it is murder to omit to discharge a duty to preserve life if the omission is with intent to kill or cause serious harm. Examples would be a parent’s omission to feed a child…or a doctor’s failure to feed a patient, with like intent. 

Thankfully, Margo is still receiving food and water. On July 21, her father Mike posted an update to Facebook, noting that the family was “deeply touched” by “the hundreds of posts, phone calls, emails, and texts supporting us” and noting that “We are not going to let a select few intimidate us into silence,” although he didn’t explain precisely what he meant by that. He then wrote:  

Here is the latest with Margo Naranjo. There is so much to share however, I do need to be careful with the details here. On Friday afternoon, we were issued a restrain[ing] order against suspending hydration and nutrition. So, Margo is currently on her regular feeding schedule. Our guardianship has been temporarily suspended as well. The temporary guardian has been great to work with. Hopefully one day I can share more details. 

Bobby Schindler told LifeSiteNews today that he feels for Margo’s mom and dad, but they have a duty to preserve their daughter’s life:

My heart goes out to the parents of Margo Naranjo, as my family knows the profound effect that these types of injuries can have on loved ones. However, we must remember that we have the moral obligation to do all we can to preserve life and protect those with disabilities, recognizing that a person with a brain injury is a human being with inherent dignity and a right to life-affirming care. This young girl needs only food, water, and her family’s love to survive. At the very least, this should be provided to her. Please pray for Ms. Naranjo and that her parents have a change of heart.

This situation is developing, and we will report more as details come in.