Why judge Greer would take Schiavo's obviously fabricated story, plus that of Schiavo's brother and sister-in-law, as 'clear and convincing evidence' is beyond me.
There needs to be some sort of clarification in the laws as to what constitutes "clear and compelling evidence". In the hands of a reasonable judiciary, allowing judges to make such judgement calls would be a good thing. But in the hands of judges like Juge Greer...
Even if I had a magic crystal ball and knew with certainty that Michael's testimony about Terri's statements was accurate, I still would not regard such testimony as "clear and compelling" evidence that Terri wanted to be fatally dehydrated. For someone to say they "don't want to live like X" does not mean that, if they find themselves like 'X', that they would want to stop living altogether. It may also mean that they would want to do everything possible to live differently.