There is no record of Terri's wishes. Period.
All we have is hearsay testimony--by Michael and his brother. I'll discount the brother, since he was not present when Terri made this alleged statement.
Let's assume that Michael is being absolutely truthful when he says that he remembers a conversation that took place 15 years ago where Terri said that she would not want to live "like that."
How do you ascertain what was actually said?
How can we know what she meant by "like that"?
How can we know that Michael remembers the conversation accurately?
Could the conversation have taken place, but it was not Terri who said it and Michael now thinks it was?
Could Michael have dreamed the conversation and now remembers it as real?
The human mind is very quirky when it comes to memory. That's a pretty insubstantial basis on which to determine whether a woman should be allowed to live or be killed. I'm of the very firm opinion that, unless there is objective and clear evidence otherwise--i.e., a written, notarized, witnessed, signed living will--we should default to life.
I am argueing the exact opposite side of this. I don't want the Fed.s to have the right to overrule family and be forced to keep someone alive for their own purposes, be they benign or not.
That leaves the door open to organ farms, forced blood banking and any other biologically and morally abhorant behavior the Feds deem is "in the best interest" of society.
Not that this congress would do it, but it's the precident being set and the law being subverted.