At the T. S. foundation site (linked above) they itemize the "evidence". Is it evidence? I don't know but the parents feel it is compelling that she reacts to them.

This BBC report seems well balanced.

Doctors chosen by the two sides to give medical opinions disagree on whether there is any hope of recovery for Mrs Schiavo, though a court-appointed physician agreed with Mr Schiavo's experts that there was none.

The Schindlers accuse Michael Schiavo of making up his wife's wishes and say he has denied her rehabilitation treatment they believe could have helped her to learn how to eat again and so live without the feeding tube.

The Medical Ethics expert agrees that it is a very difficult decision and not a slam dunk as some seem to think. The question is rightfully what she would have wanted and the husband's testimony is hearsay.

As a husband, I can understand the long term stress and the need to move on. As a parent, I can understand the need to hang on and the hope that they have.

If the husband is right she is dead for all practical purposes and is not suffering so ending her life would only serve some abstract reasoning that it serves her human dignity.

IMO the husband should be released from all responsibility and the parents should assume all future financial burden for her care and "rehabilitation".

If the trust fund is exhausted and the parents want to trust the Doctors that say she has a chance, they will bear the burden. A few months of having it their way might change their minds.