Florida State Statutes Title XLIV 765.305
765.305 Procedure in absence of a living will.--
(1) In the absence of a living will, the decision to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging procedures from a patient may be made by a health care surrogate designated by the patient pursuant to part II unless the designation limits the surrogate's authority to consent to the withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging procedures.
(2) Before exercising the incompetent patient's right to forego treatment, the surrogate must be satisfied that:
(a) The patient does not have a reasonable medical probability of recovering capacity so that the right could be exercised by the patient.
(b) The patient has an end-stage condition, the patient is in a persistent vegetative state, or the patient's physical condition is terminal.
For those who may want to read what the law says for themselves, here is a real link!
Chapter 765, Florida Statutes 2004 <-- Link
All of the language in the cited clause is ...
765.305 Procedure in absence of a living will.--(1) In the absence of a living will, the decision to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging procedures from a patient may be made by a health care surrogate designated by the patient pursuant to part II unless the designation limits the surrogate's authority to consent to the withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging procedures.
(2) Before exercising the incompetent patient's right to forego treatment, the surrogate must be satisfied that:
(a) The patient does not have a reasonable medical probability of recovering capacity so that the right could be exercised by the patient.
(b) The patient has an end-stage condition, the patient is in a persistent vegetative state, or the patient's physical condition is terminal.
I don't see where the spouse is mentioned in there though. The patient designates. Note too, food and water are in fact legally defined as life-prolonging procedures.
Well, hei-di-ho, this being the state of the law, I am amazed that Michael even bothered going to court. If the spouse has the legal right to order the doctor to stop feeding, then why didn't he simply do that?
Here is the part that hamstrings the surrogate, whoever it is, to follow the PATIENT's wishes ...
765.205 Responsibility of the surrogate.--(1) The surrogate, in accordance with the principal's instructions, unless such authority has been expressly limited by the principal, shall:
(a) Have authority to act for the principal and to make all health care decisions for the principal during the principal's incapacity.
(b) Consult expeditiously with appropriate health care providers to provide informed consent, and make only health care decisions for the principal which he or she believes the principal would have made under the circumstances if the principal were capable of making such decisions. If there is no indication of what the principal would have chosen, the surrogate may consider the patient's best interest in deciding that proposed treatments are to be withheld or that treatments currently in effect are to be withdrawn.
Still no sighting of the term "spouse" or "next of kin."
Ahhh, I think I found what you meant to cite.
PART IVABSENCE OF ADVANCE DIRECTIVE
765.401 The proxy.
765.404 Persistent vegetative state.
765.401 The proxy.--
(1) If an incapacitated or developmentally disabled patient has not executed an advance directive, or designated a surrogate to execute an advance directive, or the designated or alternate surrogate is no longer available to make health care decisions, health care decisions may be made for the patient by any of the following individuals, in the following order of priority, if no individual in a prior class is reasonably available, willing, or competent to act:
(a) The judicially appointed guardian of the patient or the guardian advocate of the person having a developmental disability as defined in s. 393.063, who has been authorized to consent to medical treatment, if such guardian has previously been appointed; however, this paragraph shall not be construed to require such appointment before a treatment decision can be made under this subsection;
(b) The patient's spouse;
(c) An adult child of the patient, or if the patient has more than one adult child, a majority of the adult children who are reasonably available for consultation;
(d) A parent of the patient;
(e) The adult sibling of the patient or, if the patient has more than one sibling, a majority of the adult siblings who are reasonably available for consultation;
(f) An adult relative of the patient who has exhibited special care and concern for the patient and who has maintained regular contact with the patient and who is familiar with the patient's activities, health, and religious or moral beliefs; or
(g) A close friend of the patient. (h) A clinical social worker licensed pursuant to chapter 491 ...
(2) Any health care decision made under this part must be based on the proxy's informed consent and on the decision the proxy reasonably believes the patient would have made under the circumstances. If there is no indication of what the patient would have chosen, the proxy may consider the patient's best interest in deciding that proposed treatments are to be withheld or that treatments currently in effect are to be withdrawn.
(3) Before exercising the incapacitated patient's rights to select or decline health care, the proxy must comply with the provisions of ss. 765.205 and 765.305, except that a proxy's decision to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging procedures must be supported by clear and convincing evidence that the decision would have been the one the patient would have chosen had the patient been competent or, if there is no indication of what the patient would have chosen, that the decision is in the patient's best interest.
Geee. That sure looks like PATIENT's wishes to me.