In terms of a direct statement prohibiting sexual relations, you are correct. However, when the person having the relations is the husband AND the guardian, there IS a direct conflict of interest which IS grounds for termination of the guardianship (744.474 (11) to be exact).
Think about it ... is MS's allegance to the ward or his new honey? Now add the fact that MS has a child with his new honey? A blind man could see the conflict.
There are several other reasons in 744.474 as to why the guardianship should be terminated. See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1006219/posts?page=891#891
I am SO glad that there is another attempt to remove MS as guardian and that Judge Greer will at least consider the evidence this time. I think the fact that there was much discussion over the conflicts of interest when the legislature was considering "Terri's Law" got Greer's attention.
Funny you should mention this, since Greer is legally blind. Let's hope he really can see the conflict when this is argued in the courtroom.