I dunno. Brian Herbert (In my opinion) was able to quite easily turn Dune from an amazing series into one tainted by a slew of novels that were.... Not exactly exceptional, and he even had one of my favorite authors helping him. Christopher Tolkien seems to have fared better, but I wouldn't say the two exactly cancel each other out.
I've seen a lot of harm done to good stories where someone else has had to finish writing them.
I think that that the author should either leave their work to another author that they know, so that they have some idea of the quality that would be produced. Or even leaving someone they trust in charge of the decision making process once they're gone, such as Jordan did. I guess I'm making a bit of an assumption in believing that EUOL will write the final WOT book well, but based on everything else he's done, I expect it will likely be better than Jordan could have done himself.
While I'm hesitant to try and give rights to dead people who in all likelihood could care less what happens to their work, now that they're enjoying themselves in heaven (Or being worm food, depending on your belief system), but it also seems to me to be a matter of respect. If the original creator wants his work to die with him, than I think it's only right that his children respect his wishes.
More specific to the article on Slate, the question does become a bit tougher when you're dealing with literary genius. As one of the great writers, isn't it to the benefit of literature lovers everywhere that it be released? Does that desire outweigh a dying man's wishes that he passed on to his son?
Largely, I would say that we should respect the wishes of the dead, but that they should try to find some way for their work to be completed before it reaches that point. But there are some situations, such as with Laura, that I can't say I really have an answer that I can stand by.
