So, who do you think should have ultimate and eternal power over her? You certainly seem to think SOMEONE shoud.
The only person who should have power over her is Terri herself. The issue is what to do in the absence of clear indication of her wishes. Her parents, and her Catholic faith suggests she wants to live - only her husband, whose credibility is dubious, suggests she wants to die. In the face of such a dispute, and given that she is not on life support - she is being fed, not made to breathe - the bias should be for life. If the bias is for death - the risk is run of killing someone in the absence of their desire to die, and second, more "inconvenient" relatives will die based on hearsay and the bias established toward it.
Regards, Ivan
I think a husband who has moved on should not be allowed to be guardian for time eternal. That's ridiculous. I would then say it falls on adult children first and parents second. Regardless, I do not think a guardian should be allowed to make any decision they want to without regard to what is decent and humane. They should not be allowed to starve the person to death.