*Pennsylvania Court: Guardians Can't Pull the Plug on Mentally Disabled
People*

*by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 30, 2010*

**
*

Harrisburg, PA (LifeNews.com) -- In a ruling involving a mentally disabled
man whose legal guardians sought the power to end his medical care, the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court has determined that state law requires
life-preserving treatment for people who are not near death and have not
refused treatment.

The Alliance Defense Fund and allied pro-life attorneys filed a
friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of 53-year-old David Hockenberry, who
has had acute mental disabilities since birth, arguing that his legal
guardians should not be allowed to deny him life-preserving treatment while
he is not terminal or unconscious.

Hockenberry’s guardians unsuccessfully attempted to deny him temporary
life-preserving medical treatment for pneumonia.

“Having a disability shouldn't be a death sentence when treatable medical
complications arise,” said Independence Law Center Chief Counsel Randall L.
Wenger, one of the allied attorneys.

"The court made the right decision to protect Mr. Hockenberry’s right to
live. He is not dying or unconscious, and his life isn't worthless just
because he has a disability that may lead others to view his life as less
worthy to live," he added.

“A person’s value isn't based on his or her physical or mental abilities,”
said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “No one should be allowed to decide that
a person’s life is not worth saving just because he or she has a disability
or medical condition.”

In December 2007, Hockenberry developed aspiration pneumonia. Hockenberry’s
guardians--appointed as his legal guardians in 2002 by a trial court--tried
to decline his required ventilator treatment to assist his breathing, but
the hospital proceeded despite their objection. After three weeks on the
mechanical ventilator, he recovered from pneumonia and no longer required
the treatment.

Hockenberry’s guardians filed a petition with a trial court in January 2008
that would allow them to end his care if a similar situation were to arise
in the future. The Department of Public Welfare objected, stating that
Hockenberry was neither terminally ill nor permanently unconscious and never
appointed a third party with the power to refuse healthcare necessary to the
preservation of his life.

Hockenberry’s guardians filed a series of appeals until their case reached
the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.

In March, ADF and allied attorneys argued in a friend-of-the-court brief
that people should not be considered better off dead just because of a
disability. The high court concurred that the Health Care Agents and
Representatives Act requires life-preserving care for such persons.

“We hold that where, as here, life-preserving treatment is at issue for an
incompetent person who is not suffering from an end-stage condition or
permanent unconsciousness, and that person has no health care agent, the Act
mandates that the care must be provided,” the opinion states. “The
enactment...regulates the situation in which the incompetent person suffers
from a life-threatening but treatable condition, obviously reflecting the
Legislature’s assertion of a policy position of greater state involvement to
preserve life in such circumstances.”

http://lifenews.com/state5395.html
*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Mental Health Advocacy (News 'N Views) India" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/MhaNewsViewsIndia?hl=en
-------------
Affiliated Groups :  MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCACY INDIA
[email protected]
Discussions on mental health law / policy / plan monitoring / human rights etc 
[email protected]
India-specific news and views related to mental health
[email protected]
Information and support to carers of people with mental health issues
[email protected]
Mutual support and sharing of experiential knowledge, skills and social 
learning amongst peers

Reply via email to