A Pennsylvania appeals court ruled against the parents of a severely retarded man who sought to take him off a ventilator after he developed complications from choking on a hairpin.
The state Superior Court said a guardian needs to prove that death is in the legally incompetent person's best interests before the guardian can decline life-preserving medical treatment.
Judge Cheryl Lynn Allen: "In the context of this case, where an incompetent person suffers a medical condition, and recovery appears imminent and the pain is minimal, the ethical integrity of the medical community certainly mandates treatment and the state's interest in preserving life is considerable."
Full Article and Source:
Court: Man rightly kept alive after accident
The state Superior Court said a guardian needs to prove that death is in the legally incompetent person's best interests before the guardian can decline life-preserving medical treatment.
Judge Cheryl Lynn Allen: "In the context of this case, where an incompetent person suffers a medical condition, and recovery appears imminent and the pain is minimal, the ethical integrity of the medical community certainly mandates treatment and the state's interest in preserving life is considerable."
Full Article and Source:
Court: Man rightly kept alive after accident
3 comments:
Yea, a victory for the RIGHT TO LIVE over death!
Shocking that the parents wanted to cut the ventilator.
Absolutely shocking!
How could death ever "be in the legally incompetent person's best interest?"
And who is arrogant enough to think that he/she has the right to determine that decision?
Post a Comment