My FRiend, please accept my condolences on your loss. Many on this board would rip the legal right for you to determine the proper and dignified course of your dearly departed and give it to a judge. And hand that decision to the parents who have zero legal standing.
But niceties like legal guardianship (or the law in general) mean nothing to many here. I support your difficult decision and wish you and your new wife all the best. I am 100% sure your departed wants you and yours to be happy. Your job (IMHO) is to be so and to raise happy and healthy children.
FWIIW: You should keep yourself and your children away from toxic people, no matter the relationship.
Guardianship law means a lot more to people here than it does to Judge Greer. Once Michael declared his intention to marry Jodi Centonze, that made quite apparent and undeniable a craven interest in Terri's death which would outweigh any claimed legitimate interest he might have therein. As such, he was no longer legally entitled to be Terri's guardian.
Terri's parents filed in September of 2002 to remove Michael as guardian. When scheduling the hearing after Terri's second scheduled execution attempt proved insufficient, Judge Greer granted a continuance. When that proved insufficient, Michael simply refused to show up at the hearing. Because Greer somehow failed to give Michael official written notice of the hearing (never mind that he clearly knew about it) he declined to hold Michael in contempt and instead rescheduled the hearing well into the future. When that proved insufficient, he granted another continuance. And when Michael again failed to show up, "Oops... no proper notice. Sorry about that."
It was illegal for Michael to continue to act as Terri's guardian after declaring his engagement to Ms. Centonze. People here were wanting Judge Greer to follow the law.
"But niceties like legal guardianship (or the law in general) mean nothing to many here."
Legal guardianship is not automatic and can be revoked if the guardian is unfit or found to have conflicting interests or not to have the person's best interests at heart. It happens in family courts every day. I'm not saying Schiavo was necessarily deserving of having his guardianship revoked, I'm only saying there are legal grounds for revoking it, and when someone's life is at stake it is certainly the proper role of the courts to hear arguments to that effect.