Also make you wonder, if the parents have no ulterior motives, why won't they respect the husband's wishes? Regardless of how you feel about the Terri Schaivo case, it is his wife and Michael has the final say. Otherwise, do you believe parents have a stronger legal voice that a spouse?
You raise an interesting point? I am not sure how I feel about that question. Actually, right now I am thinking an equal say between spouse and parent might be at the most fair. It's hard to imagine that once my children are married that I am no longer considered 'family' and no longer will have any standing on the care of my child, in the eyes of some courts anyway. I would consider myself at least equal to the spouse in wanting only the best for my child. Especially if the spouse has moved on with his/her life and had a couple kids by a new partner. Spouse trumping parents without question is not something I am totally comfortable with in life and death matters.
< Also make you wonder, if the parents have no ulterior motives, why won't they respect the husband's wishes? Regardless of how you feel about the Terri Schaivo case, it is his wife and Michael has the final say. Otherwise, do you believe parents have a stronger legal voice that a spouse? >
I think what the parents are doing is out of love for their daughter AND suspicions of the son-in-law's motive. Under different circumstances, I would whole-heartedly agree with you and the law. However, there are too many questions here to just go ahead with anything the husband says. There are reasons to be suspicious.
I say err on the side of life. That's not to say surrender to the feelings of the parents. It's saying choose life, at least til it's all exposed and sorted out...not with info from 7 years ago, but anew. Let's go with what we have now.
All these court decisions are based on old info. The courts have refused to look at anything new. I see nothing wrong with questioning the court at this point. Something smells very bad.
Neither a parent nor a husband has a right to be a guardian or a legal voice. You wouldn't know it from the discussion in the media, but the only person in this entire scenario who has "rights" is Terri.
Parents, spouse, relatives, etc. are granted authority by the state to act in Terri's best interests. The law does provide a presumption (subject to rebuttal) that a spouse is the person the ward would want to serve and be granted that authority.
HE IS AN ADULTERER, THEREFORE HE HAS NO RIGHTS AS A "HUSBAND". I don't see how you people can support Michael Schiavo's 'rights' to make decisions over Terri when he clearly has broken marriage vows and has a FIANCE and TWO CHILDREN!! That is a valid 'marriage' for him to be allowed all these rights over her mother, father and siblings?? Law needs to be changed.