I don't judge him for wanting to go on with his life. It was a tragic situation. I can't blame a man of his age for wanting to rebuild his life. What bothers me, and others, is that after he "moved on," he continued to claim the privileges of being Terri's husband. The fact that he had moved on to a new life, and that the pursuit of that life was impeded by Terri's continued existence, made him unsuitable as a guardian for Terri. He had a conflict of interest that should have precluded him from making those decisions. It is unreasonable on the one hand to say he had the right to move on, find a new wife (in all but name), and have children with her, yet at the same time to say as Terri's husband, he was entitled to make all decisions. The concept of one spouse deciding for another is based on the notion that your spouse has your best interests at heart and is, in fact, acting as your spouse. The problem here is Michael Schiavo wanted to have it both ways. It was not right for him to simultaneously act as a husband to another woman and to claim the right to act as Terri's husband. If he needed to move on (which is understandable, at least) he needed to really move on... not just move on in the ways he chose.
Bingo. If you ever run for Judge, I'll vote for you.