Disabled Gal Can't Decide Life Or Death

[epower]

This is disgraceful. nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/disabled_gal_cant_decide_life_or_death_regionalnews_dareh_gregorian.htm September 22, 2006 – In a case of “Whose life is it anyway?” a state appeals court ruled yesterday that a mentally handicapped woman has no say over whether she should be kept alive on life support. In the unanimous decision, a five-judge panel ruled that the 26-year-old - who says she wants to be kept on life support in the event she’s felled by illness or an accident - isn’t competent to make that decision. Instead, her mother, who is her legal guardian, gets to make the call - and she doesn’t want her daughter on life support. A lawyer for the woman, identified only as Chantel R., did not return a call for comment. The decision says the woman has an IQ of 52, about the mental capacity of a 7-year-old, “but otherwise does not suffer from any particular illness.”

 

[WanderAimlessly]

How long will it be before the judicial activists judges give legal guardians the right to terminate no matter what the reason.

PF

 

[BioCatholic]

How long will it be before the judicial activists judges give legal guardians the right to terminate no matter what the reason.

PF

Judicial Activists? You are kidding, right? These judges are strictly applying already existing laws. Don’t you want “Strict Constructionist” judges?

Didn’t the pro-life community absolutely hail the passage of the interstate parental notification act, whereby a minor’s parents must be notified of an abortion because THEY are the guardians of the minor. Wasn’t the whole point of that bill aimed at giving control to legal guardians?

So what is the difference here?

What you are saying is that a person incompetent to make decisions for themselves, should be allowed to go ahead and make medical decisions, correct?

Then why don’t we strike the interstate parental notification act, because if a dependent should be able to make decisions regarding life and death procedures, then a minor dependent should be able to make decisions concerning their body as well.

This is no different than if a 7 year old child is comatose and on life support after a car accident, and the parent decides to terminate such support. The Legislatures have granted the parents that right, and it extends to legal guardians of other persons under applicable Laws.

It is the Legislatures that have failed, and NOT the judges. There could easily be clauses in the statutes that give the ability for cases to be adjuticated in dependent adult cases. The judges here have no choice other than to apply existing laws. Welcome to Strict Constructionism. Isn’t it awesome?

Everyday, I thank God for an independant Judiciary, especially at the Federal level where judges can stricly apply Laws, no matter how much special interest groups scream and cry. .

 

[thechrismyster]

This is no different…blah blah blah…how much special interest groups scream and cry. .

in the end of this. someone will be dead. and that life will be taken by someone other than God. therein lies the problem.
all life is precious and worthy of saving and defending, from conception to natural death.
we’re a pretty monstrous bunch, us Catholic pro-life people, arent we?

that mentally ill woman isn’t a child. if we judge adults by their IQ, most of the world would be incompetant.

 

[colinrideout]

Ok, this 26 yr-old woman, she had previously expresssed that in the event of an accident or such that left her disabled, she wanted to be kept on life-support?
If so, who’s right is it to deny that to her? to tell her that her own wishes are now to be ignored because of her current situation.

 

[RWMorris]

… if we judge adults by their IQ, most of the world would be incompetant.

While I agree with your premise, you are incorrect concerning IQ. The average adult has an IQ of 100, the statistical mid-point. We may be getting smarter or dumber, but the average IQ will always remain 100.