Herein lies the danger of the 'living will'. If the patient is communicating the desire to live, by whatever method that might be, the ideal would be to allow that wish to stand, until it may be revoked by a different communication.
If a person has a living will, they are just as good as dead (IMHO), because there can be any number of legally argued reasons to suggest that the patient is no longer of sound mind.
It is my opinion that when push came to shove, Mr. Chambers no longer desired to be on the other side of the ground. He found that life was indeed a gift, even if it was one that was not his earlier ideal. One day each of us must come to terms with our own imperfections in life, and choose whether we view that life as one worth living.
I think his children attempted to discern from their father what he wanted, and would honor that wish either way. That they all sided against their mother on this shows me that his current wishes were not what Mrs. Chambers had in mind.
People who think that living wills are a panacea just don't get it. They can be used against you, too. This case just illustrates that sad and terrible reality.
"He found that life was indeed a gift,
even if it was one that was not his earlier ideal."
bump