I'm only recently heard about this case in the last few days.
While I believe both in a person's own right to "die" (end artificial life support), and right to kill themself, it appears that Terri can't make that decision. Since she left no known written directive, the decision ought to go to the parents.
I'm not even sure they should be able to decide because Terri 'isn't dying'. It's reasonable to assume that her wish would be to exhaust her resources in order to keep herself alive with the possibility of coming out of a coma. This assumes a self-centered individual. On the other hand, she might see more benefit to her offspring if she were to die and give them her resources, instead of gambling on her own life.
I need to mull it over more.
Michael has done a pretty good job exhausting Terri's resources for her, buying things for himself and his mistress, and expending substantial sums of legal fees to have Terri killed - with the very money earmarked for her rehabilitation!
Visit www.terrisfight.org for a brief rundown of the facts. This is not just an ideological tug-o-war but a fight to save an innocent, healthy albeit disabled person from a horrific death by starvation. The business about Terri being vegatative is pure bunk: she responds to doctors, laughs, shows emotion, follows a balloon with her eyes. There is enormous potential for this very special woman given the proper care.
Many believe Michael's strident efforts to end her life and then cremate her body as quickly as possible belie something more sinister that would turn up in an examination or autopsy. Police reports from Terri's original collapse (linked earlier in this thread by another poster) seem to corroborate this.