I think what your comment brings to this discussion is that it doesn't lend itself to facile answers and certainly not to simple ones. That's why I believe so strongly in private decision-making, not state-imnposed decision-making. I agree with your point about activist judges.
I remember how quickly my wife went downhill and shudder to think of having had to initiate some legal proceeding and persuade some liberal judge (armed with a 'maintain physical life at all costs' statute) in order to stop chemotherapy and let my dear wife die.
I think a lot of people here distrust the husband (perhaps justifiably so) and were upset that Judge Greer didn't displace him. But to now get the Congress to enact some slapdash law to try to overrule Judge Greer is crazy. Imagine literally having to make a 'federal case' out of every decision which could affect live or death.
This is insanity. As your post so movingly proves, this is not about one woman, but about the proper legal procedure which could and would affect hundreds of thousands of people.
My wife and I talked about incapacitation many, many times. Although seldom in the presence of others. We did both write 'durable powers of attorney' but even there the general statements are intended to guide the decision-maker, not generate more litigation.
The husband in Terry's case may be a bad apple, I don't know. I do know that the parents had their (many) day(s) in court and did not persuade Judge Greer that the husband met the criteria for removal under Florida law. I have no reason to believe that Judge Greer did not try to make the best decision he could. Moreover, I have no reason to believe that either lawyer pulled any punches. I suspect that they each put up every bit of evidence they thought would help their case.
So, my view is that the principle of private decision-making of these sensitive decisions is crucial and that any rule which involved the state in every such decision would be disasterous. Thus, I conclude that efforts to change the law by involving the state in every such decision would be a terrible, terrible thing.
I would let Terry go home now.
This is the point that has been made over and over in this forum: she won't "go home" unless she is killed- starved. I would "go home" under those circumstances, too. The difference between Terri and your wife is that Terri is not dying. Sadly, your wife was. You made sure she was as comfortable as was humanly possible as she died. Terri is not dying. She will not die soon unless she is killed. The state of Florida is proposing to initiate a process that will end her life intentionally. This is not an "unplug the machine" choice.