"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."
Try again, 2 people directly refuted this. Neither were named Shindler or Schiavo, and both were ignored/downplayed by the court.
Not at the time. If we object to Michael's sudden recollections, what possible rational basis can we have for accepting theirs years later? None at all, and I don't do double standards, sorry.