Who has primary right to make these decisions, husband or parents (or children, if any)?
Does this change based on the notion that one or the other (in this case, the husband) might have other motivations?
Do the wishes of the person themselves hold absolute sway (if known), or can they be overruled?
How great of a recovery would constitute a “meaningful life”?
Personally, I would be uncomfortable letting any one person make unilateral decisions if other close relatives object, (assuming that those other relatives are equally involved - or willing to be - in the care of the patient). I understand that this is standard routine in organ transplant situations. And I would think possible monetary motivations should impact the ruling. I’m not sure I would grant absolute authority to the person’s own wishes, since their care requires an enormous amount of input from others and frequently from society as a whole. And I would think mental consciousness constitutes a recovery (an imperfect answer, I know).
Without a clear statement of intent from the woman herself, the situation does seem perplexing, though I would tend to side with the husband rather than the children.
AFAIK, once you are married, your spouse is your closest kin. This means that, in cases like this, the spouse should have the deciding vote, but other family members should have some amount of time to fight it, if they feel there are extenuating circumstances (like financial ones). That being said, hubby and I have discussed, at length, what we consider to be a life that is worth living, and what our wishes would be once those boundaries are passed, with no reasonable hope of returning. Make plans now, folks. No one knows what the future holds.