The law says there has to be "clear and convincing" evidence that this is what she wanted. Offhand comments allegedly made to Michael Schiavo, which were never brought up by him until after the malpractice suits were finished, and which nobody heard but him and his family, don't meet those standards. Besides, even the comments she supposedly made addressed being on a ventilator, not being deprived of food and water.
Let us review the unprecedented wording of Judge Greer's Feb. 25, 2005 court order:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that absent a stay from the appellate courts, the guardian, Michael Schiavo, shall cause the removal of nutrition and hydration, from the Ward, THERESA SCHIAVO, at 1:00 p.m. on Friday, March 18, 2005.
(Feb. 25, 2005 order to remove nutrition and hydration)
Unqualified nutrition and hydration definitely does not mean medical treatment. Nutrition and hydration must be "medicalized"—delivered to the patient via medical assistance— to legally qualify as medical treatment.
Therefore, since Judge Greer's Feb. 25th court order does not call for the removal of medical treatment or anything that qualifies as medical treatment, it does not legally apply to Terri and her court determined wishes for the removal of medical treatment! This gross "error" must be publicized immediately.
Clear and convincing is necessarily a somewhat subjective judgement, but I seem to recall that Schiavo and at least one of his relatives came forth to testify to her wishes, while the Schindlers were unable to find anyone to directly refute it. "I heard her say it" will beat "That doesn't sound like something she'd say" pretty much every time. I may be misremembering the record, though - I trust you'll correct me if so.