It is equally relevant.
Why did MS bring up her "wishes" many years *after* her collapse - and indeed, after malpractice suit? Why didn't he act on her "wishes" much earlier??
Anything you or I might say about his motives is sheer speculation. You think he had venal reasons for acting so. An alternative explanation is that it took him several years to become convinced that her state really was unrecoverable.
Now why, do you suppose, did it take 10 YEARS for the Schindlers to come out with the abuse allegations against MS?
"Anything you or I might say about his motives is sheer speculation."
Correct.
"You think he had venal reasons for acting so."
As you're always admonishing, don't ASS-U-ME here. I don't know anything about Michael for certain. I've said many times - esp. during the whole nitemare - that there is apparently no solid evidence he did anything bad (per se). He may have totally had her interests at heart.
I've always said the ultimate thing that makes me sick is the poor judgement by the judge on likewise FLIMSY evidence. That led to Terri's neglect and death.
"An alternative explanation is that it took him several years to become convinced that her state really was unrecoverable."
Yes, possible, but wouldn't that make him "terrible" according to the "rite-to-die" people to put her thru all that agony for years? Wasn't Terri in pretty bad shape from the get-go and showed little change?
The judge should've thought it queer that the man would apparently work hard on a woman who was apparently in a bad state for some years, then finally declare she wanted to die.
Maybe Michael is totally innocent, and LIKE the Schindlers, at 1st he didn't want to obey his wife and tried to get her better rather than let her wither away. Then maybe he just gave up, unlike the Schindlers, and decided he'd go along w/her wishes.
That all doesn't erase the fact that the evidence either way was flimsy, and supporting death on flimsy evidence seems very poor judgement and rule of law to me.