Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California Law Provides for Killing of Non-Terminally Ill (Terri Schindler)
California Law ^

Posted on 03/30/2005 9:30:39 AM PST by TheDon

CALIFORNIA CODES
PROBATE CODE
SECTION 3200-3212

3200. As used in this part:

(a) "Health care" means any care, treatment, service, or procedure to maintain, diagnose, or otherwise affect a patient's physical or mental condition.

(b) "Health care decision" means a decision regarding the patient' s health care, including the following:

(1) Selection and discharge of health care providers and institutions.

(2) Approval or disapproval of diagnostic tests, surgical procedures, programs of medication.

(3) Directions to provide, withhold, or withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration and all other forms of health care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

(c) "Health care institution" means an institution, facility, or agency licensed, certified, or otherwise authorized or permitted by law to provide health care in the ordinary course of business.

(d) "Patient" means an adult who does not have a conservator of the person and for whom a health care decision needs to be made.

3201. (a) A petition may be filed to determine that a patient has the capacity to make a health care decision concerning an existing or continuing condition.

(b) A petition may be filed to determine that a patient lacks the capacity to make a health care decision concerning specified treatment for an existing or continuing condition, and further for an order authorizing a designated person to make a health care decision on behalf of the patient.

(c) One proceeding may be brought under this part under both subdivisions (a) and (b).

3202. The petition may be filed in the superior court of any of the following counties:

(a) The county in which the patient resides.

(b) The county in which the patient is temporarily living.

(c) Such other county as may be in the best interests of the patient.

3203. A petition may be filed by any of the following:

(a) The patient.

(b) The patient's spouse.

(c) A relative or friend of the patient, or other interested person, including the patient's agent under a power of attorney for health care.

(d) The patient's physician.

(e) A person acting on behalf of the health care institution in which the patient is located if the patient is in a health care institution.

(f) The public guardian or other county officer designated by the board of supervisors of the county in which the patient is located or resides or is temporarily living.

3204. The petition shall state, or set forth by a medical declaration attached to the petition, all of the following known to the petitioner at the time the petition is filed:

(a) The condition of the patient's health that requires treatment.

(b) The recommended health care that is considered to be medically appropriate.

(c) The threat to the patient's condition if authorization for the recommended health care is delayed or denied by the court.

(d) The predictable or probable outcome of the recommended health care.

(e) The medically available alternatives, if any, to the recommended health care.

(f) The efforts made to obtain consent from the patient.

(g) If the petition is filed by a person on behalf of a health care institution, the name of the person to be designated to give consent to the recommended health care on behalf of the patient.

(h) The deficit or deficits in the patient's mental functions listed in subdivision (a) of Section 811 that are impaired, and an identification of a link between the deficit or deficits and the patient's inability to respond knowingly and intelligently to queries about the recommended health care or inability to participate in a decision about the recommended health care by means of a rational thought process.

(i) The names and addresses, so far as they are known to the petitioner, of the persons specified in subdivision (b) of Section 1821.

3205. Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall determine the name of the attorney the patient has retained to represent the patient in the proceeding under this part or the name of the attorney the patient plans to retain for that purpose. If the patient has not retained an attorney and does not plan to retain one, the court shall appoint the public defender or private counsel under Section 1471 to consult with and represent the patient at the hearing on the petition and, if such appointment is made, Section 1472 applies.

3206. (a) Not less than 15 days before the hearing, notice of the time and place of the hearing and a copy of the petition shall be personally served on the patient, the patient's attorney, and the agent under the patient's power of attorney for health care, if any.

(b) Not less than 15 days before the hearing, notice of the time and place of the hearing and a copy of the petition shall be mailed to the following persons:

(1) The patient's spouse, if any, at the address stated in the petition.

(2) The patient's relatives named in the petition at their addresses stated in the petition.

(c) For good cause, the court may shorten or waive notice of the hearing as provided by this section. In determining the period of notice to be required, the court shall take into account both of the following:

(1) The existing medical facts and circumstances set forth in the petition or in a medical declaration attached to the petition or in a medical declaration presented to the court.

(2) The desirability, where the condition of the patient permits, of giving adequate notice to all interested persons.

3207. Notwithstanding Section 3206, the matter presented by the petition may be submitted for the determination of the court upon proper and sufficient medical declarations if the attorney for the petitioner and the attorney for the patient so stipulate and further stipulate that there remains no issue of fact to be determined.

3208. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), the court may make an order authorizing the recommended health care for the patient and designating a person to give consent to the recommended health care on behalf of the patient if the court determines from the evidence all of the following:

(1) The existing or continuing condition of the patient's health requires the recommended health care.

(2) If untreated, there is a probability that the condition will become life-endangering or result in a serious threat to the physical or mental health of the patient.

(3) The patient is unable to consent to the recommended health care.

(b) In determining whether the patient's mental functioning is so severely impaired that the patient lacks the capacity to make any health care decision, the court may take into consideration the frequency, severity, and duration of periods of impairment.

(c) The court may make an order authorizing withholding or withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration and all other forms of health care and designating a person to give or withhold consent to the recommended health care on behalf of the patient if the court determines from the evidence all of the following:

(1) The recommended health care is in accordance with the patient' s best interest, taking into consideration the patient's personal values to the extent known to the petitioner.

(2) The patient is unable to consent to the recommended health care.

3208.5. In a proceeding under this part:

(a) Where the patient has the capacity to consent to the recommended health care, the court shall so find in its order.

(b) Where the court has determined that the patient has the capacity to consent to the recommended health care, the court shall, if requested, determine whether the patient has accepted or refused the recommended health care, and whether the patient's consent to the recommended health care is an informed consent.

(c) Where the court finds that the patient has the capacity to consent to the recommended health care, but that the patient refuses consent, the court shall not make an order authorizing the recommended health care or designating a person to give consent to the recommended health care. If an order has been made authorizing the recommended health care and designating a person to give consent to the recommended health care, the order shall be revoked if the court determines that the patient has recovered the capacity to consent to the recommended health care. Until revoked or modified, the order is effective authorization for the recommended health care.

3209. The court in which the petition is filed has continuing jurisdiction to revoke or modify an order made under this part upon a petition filed, noticed, and heard in the same manner as an original petition filed under this part.

3210. (a) This part is supplemental and alternative to other procedures or methods for obtaining consent to health care or making health care decisions, and is permissive and cumulative for the relief to which it applies.

(b) Nothing in this part limits the providing of health care in an emergency case in which the health care is required because (1) the health care is required for the alleviation of severe pain or (2) the patient has a medical condition that, if not immediately diagnosed and treated, will lead to serious disability or death.

(c) Nothing in this part supersedes the right that any person may have under existing law to make health care decisions on behalf of a patient, or affects the decisionmaking process of a health care institution.

3211. (a) No person may be placed in a mental health treatment facility under the provisions of this part.

(b) No experimental drug as defined in Section 111515 of the Health and Safety Code may be prescribed for or administered to any person under this part.

(c) No convulsive treatment as defined in Section 5325 of the Welfare and Institutions Code may be performed on any person under this part.

(d) No person may be sterilized under this part.

(e) The provisions of this part are subject to a valid advance health care directive under the Health Care Decisions Law, Division 4.7 (commencing with Section 4600).

3212. Nothing in this part shall be construed to supersede or impair the right of any individual to choose treatment by spiritual means in lieu of medical treatment, nor shall any individual choosing treatment by spiritual means, in accordance with the tenets and practices of that individual's established religious tradition, be required to submit to medical testing of any kind pursuant to a determination of capacity.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: california; euthanasia; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
California allows for the starvation/dehydration death of the non-terminally ill, i.e. Terri could be killed in the same way here in California as in Florida.

Does your state allow this type of killing?

Do you think we should allow such killing?

1 posted on 03/30/2005 9:30:41 AM PST by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TheDon

Since the Karen Ann Quinlin (sp?) case of 10-15 years ago, some states began making laws regarding this issue. Many institutions were keeping patients alive by artificial means in order to receive the medicaid payments, nothing more. These laws have merit, the Shiavo case notwithstanding.


2 posted on 03/30/2005 9:41:29 AM PST by elbucko (A Rogue Feral Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

Do you suppose artificial nutrition and hydration means a feeding tube? Or does it include natural nutrition and hydration supplied by another person (such as spoon feeding or inserting water into the mouth)?


3 posted on 03/30/2005 9:45:22 AM PST by srweaver (Forget the Alamo...Remember Terri Schiavo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: srweaver

As the point of the law is to kill people who cannot feed themselves, I think it would include both.


4 posted on 03/30/2005 9:48:02 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: elbucko

I think the monetary issue is well understood, but I'm questioning the moral issue in these cases.


5 posted on 03/30/2005 9:48:46 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: elbucko

Karen was removed from the respiratory. Unexpectedly, she continued to live in a vegetative state for another ten years.


6 posted on 03/30/2005 9:52:13 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: srweaver

Greer's latest order to kill said that MS was to cause removal of nutrition and hydration - nothing about whether it's artificial or not. Nothing about removal of a feeding tube. I guess that was just in case Terri could actually swallow.

http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/greer_feb25_order_not_apply.html


7 posted on 03/30/2005 10:11:07 AM PST by ducdriver ("Impartiality is a pompous name for indifference, which is an elegant name for ignorance." GKC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
Do you think we should allow such killing?

I think that if we don't like it, we should petition the legislature, and stop pretending that Judge Greer invented the law.

8 posted on 03/30/2005 10:11:49 AM PST by SedVictaCatoni (<><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SedVictaCatoni

Your response is jumping the gun, as I'm asking should we allow it. In other words, should we change the law to disallow the killing of the non-terminally ill?


9 posted on 03/30/2005 10:31:49 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
Arizona does. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Mildred Rasmussen that "life support" can be withheld. It has yet to be tried in court but I know that it happens unofficially. My great aunt and my grandmother were both dehydrated to death in the 1980s (before I was aware of any of this crap).

Here's my question to the MS supporters:

For all the people who say, "Terri is/was a vegetable" and "Terri wouldn't have wanted to live this way."

Imagine Terri was your mother. Would you do to her what Michael Schiavo has done to Terri?

10 posted on 03/30/2005 10:36:41 AM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Click on my name to see what readers have said about my Christian novels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

This is the video that should be shown on the news everynight - it is even more powerful than the balloon video.

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/ccb/videos/Terri_Big_Eyes.rm

You need Real Player to watch this, available free on the internet.

This is not reflex action - she heard the doctor, she opened her eyes as wide as she could to impress him.

Even Fox news has ignored this clip.


11 posted on 03/30/2005 10:39:34 AM PST by grassboots.org (I'll Say It Again - The first freedom is life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion

While a teenager, I went with my mother to the home of a young boy who was probably in a PVS. He had been hit by a car while riding his bike. We were at his home to help his mother with his daily stretching exercises. She was absolutely dedicated to caring for her son. He never did recover and after several years he passed away.


12 posted on 03/30/2005 10:48:58 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: grassboots.org

So what is your take? Do you support the killing of the non-terminally ill? If Terri had left a written will stating that she wanted to be killed under the circumstances she is currently in, do you think she should be killed? I don't.


13 posted on 03/30/2005 10:51:21 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
As the point of the law is to kill people who cannot feed themselves, I think it would include both.

WOW.....do you know how many people they could kill with this law? DO many old people....and almost all the people who are mentally retarded. Who the hell passed this law? Is everybody insane?

14 posted on 03/30/2005 10:59:20 AM PST by zippee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

Absolutely not, I agree with you. I don't even support the killing of the terminally ill. We shouldn't starve people to death even if they request it. We may not be able to stop the conscience from killing themselves or force conscience people to take take certain life-saving treatment, but no one has the right to force the rest of us to help them die.


15 posted on 03/30/2005 11:26:53 AM PST by grassboots.org (I'll Say It Again - The first freedom is life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: zippee

This was the whole reason for this post, I don't think many people realize our legislatures' have already legalized euthanasia.


16 posted on 03/30/2005 11:28:01 AM PST by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

I never realized that a non-terminal person could be murdered (aka.. starved to death).....that is shocking.


17 posted on 03/30/2005 11:32:33 AM PST by zippee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion

Those people have: 1. Done just that
or
2. Are wanting to do that and may not
be honest enough to say so because when
it comes to it, THEY want to be thought
of as good and kind.

They are not sick. Those people are just plain evil.


18 posted on 03/30/2005 4:54:37 PM PST by freecopper01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: zippee
Is everybody insane?

From personal experience I'd say most are.
19 posted on 03/30/2005 7:46:13 PM PST by festus (The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

Someone told me that every state but Illinois now has this type of law. We have a lot of work to do.


20 posted on 03/31/2005 10:34:07 AM PST by djreece (May God grant us wisdom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson