Her husband gained that authority through hearsay evidence, admitted seven years after her accident.
If her wish was to not be kept alive, why did he argue to the court that he needed money to rehabilitate her? Why only after her received the money and hooked up with a famous right-to-die lawyer did he suddenly remeber this all-important wish?
I understand you're comfortable with putting this woman to death based on this re-married man's word... but I can't begin to imagine why.
He gained that authority by marrying her. That he subsequently committed adultery is not relevant as a legal matter to his legal authority to make medical decisions when she is incapacitated. I don't have to agree with his decision to accept that he had that right.
You'are not only disingenuous, you're dishonest. I never said nor implied that I was "comfortable with putting this woman to death," but if it makes you feel better to falsely accuse other people, have at it. It only demonstrates how pathetic you are.
Why do accuse mountaineer of "putting this woman to death"?