Virginia Trask originally agreed to a DNR order on her brain-damaged daughter, Aleah Peaslee. But after the baby improved somewhat, Trask changed her mind. But, by then, Trask was no longer in charge of her daughter. State child welfare officials consented to the DNR order. Trask is now fighting to reverse that order. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court hears arguments on September 23 (In re A.P., Ken-14-192).
Trask argues that the court may allow the Department of Health & Human Services to authorize a DNR order only if the parent's parental rights have been terminated. The Department argues that it has the authority to consent to a "do-not-resuscitate" order for any child in its custody, if it is in the child's best interest to do so.
In short, a core question at issue is whether temporary substitute decision makers have the right to consent to a DNR order for a child. Generally, the answer is "no." These decision makers cannot consent to stopping life-sustaining treatment until parental rights are permanently terminated.
- D.K. v. Commonwealth, 221 S.W.3d 382, 384 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).
- In re Matthew W., 903 A.2d 333, 335 (Me. 2006).
- In re Smith, 133 P.3d 924, 929‐30 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
- In re Stein, 821 N.E.2d 1008 (Ohio 2004).
- In re Tabatha R., 564 N.W.2d 598, 605 (Neb. 1997).
Most recently, attorneys for the mother of Issac Lopez tried to argue that withdrawing physiological support without consent violated parental rights. That argument failed, because Issac was already dead and his death terminated parental rights. But since Aleah is still alive, the argument should be successful.
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét