Skip to comments.Schiavo judge's other 'right-to-die' case
Posted on 04/07/2005 8:16:31 AM PDT by amdgmary
click here to read article
Ping. Judge Greer was involved in another case like Terri's in 2000.
This mutt needs to be called to account. My apologies to mutts everywhere.
Ping Clark, of Chinese descent, argued that four days of Chinese herbal medicine and acupuncture treatments had showed promise.
I wonder how many other cases like this the Judge has ruled over. It looks like he has a slant toward opting for death, as long as he isn't the one doing the dying.
This guy had a living will. Its nothing like the Schiavo case.
Clark relied heavily on the opinion of neurologists, some of whom claimed Clark's chances of recovery were no greater than one in a thousand.
"If you love somebody, one in 1,000 is a chance worth taking, argued Dennis Rogers, Ping Clark's attorney.
But it shows that even a Living Will can be subject to opinion. How can one cover all the possibilities for the actual meaning.
..."sharper than a serpent's tooth...."
Well, exactly where does it say - "Give me only one month for expectation of recovery"?
Well, typically the whole point of someone putting such a clause into a living will is exactly because they don't want to be forced to hang around for month after month in such a condition with no reasonable expectation of recovery.
I agree, it's not really much like Terri's case, save a family dispute and a feeding tube. There is something that bothers though, and that's the rush to take him off of it. Although, this guy was on a ventilator as well, and the article doesn't say when the life support was actually removed vs when he died - it only says it was a week after the ruling.
The wife only wanted 30 more days. I know why Greer would disregard that request, but I have a hard time understanding why her kids would fight her on that. I wouldn't want to be in that family at Thanksgiving dinner, that's for sure.
They wanted their inheritance and didn't want to wait 30 days for it.
Living wills should be more specific. That one was too vague.
Actually, by Florida law his living will governed the decisions, not his wife.
I know, the article certainly seems to suggest it.
It's just so hard to accept that there are people out there who would see the death of one parent and estrangement from the other as a good trade-off for financial gain.
Don't bother them with facts they have no bearing.
That wasn't in the article, was it? Guess they don't have to have Thanksgiving dinner with her then, but still.
His living will gave his guardian the responsibility to decide what was a "reasonable chance" of recovery- and to decide what extent of recovery he would want to continue to live. She claimed to have seen improvements from alternative medicine (as if ancient Chinese cures are inferior in some way to ours, which were still using leeches 100 years ago)...and she was only asking for THIRTY MORE DAYS before making her decision!
Judge Greer took all options and all decisions away from her at the request of his NONGUARDIANS who stood to benefit financially form his DEATH. Judge Greer could take decisions away from anyone by substituting his own opinion...as we have seen.
But now, please spare us the argument that Judge Greer was simply preserving Terri's legal guardian's standing and legal prerogatives to make decisions for her. Or that the courts "stay out" of family decisions when they trample on the spousal interpretation of the last wishes of the helplessly disabled..
Is that the part you disagree with?
If he was smart, his living will was filed with either the hospital or his primary care physician, and didn't give his guardian any discretion with regard to explicitly specified circumstances. Since he was a lawyer, that was more likely the case.
As for Terri, I didn't say anything about Terri. What I said was that this is nothing like the Schiavo case.
No. I posted it because it suggests the wife did not dispute the expectation of recovery, or rather the lack thereof.
So much for the "rule of law" mantra. There will be a new one along to replace it soon.
However, his wife believed there was still a reasonable expectation of recovery.
Ping Clark, of Chinese descent, argued that four days of Chinese herbal medicine and acupuncture treatments had showed promise. She asked only for 30 more days of ventilator support and treatments.
In this case the husband's holographic (written) declaration trumps the spouse's wishes. Greer's decision was the correct on based upon the evidence and Florida law.
There is little similarity in the cases.
Apparently this will require the services of an attorney to draft a living will that spells out precisely the conditions under which you would want specific modalities of treatment, therapy, life support, and nutrition delivered in the case of varying degrees of disability resulting from various natural and unnatural causes.
A lawyers dream. A patients nightmare.
(I'm not altogether unhappy that the unlucky fellow in the story was a lawyer.)
I can understand removal of a respirator, but not nutrition and hydration. Even if the someone wants to be killed under these circumstances, that doesn't mean we have to kill them. Euthanasia is evil.
The point that makes it comprable to the Shiavo case is guardianship.
I'm assuming the wife was guardian. The kids disagreed. Greer ruled for the non guardian which does, indeed, give the appearance that his decisions in these cases would be more toward "pulling the plug" than abiding by the guardian's wishes. Is he pre-disposed in these type cases?
765.205 Responsibility of the surrogate.--
(1) The surrogate, in accordance with the principal's instructions, unless such authority has been expressly limited by the principal, shall:
(a) Have authority to act for the principal and to make all health care decisions for the principal during the principal's incapacity.
(b) Consult expeditiously with appropriate health care providers to provide informed consent, and make only health care decisions for the principal which he or she believes the principal would have made under the circumstances if the principal were capable of making such decisions. If there is no indication of what the principal would have chosen, the surrogate may consider the patient's best interest in deciding that proposed treatments are to be withheld or that treatments currently in effect are to be withdrawn.
(c) Provide written consent using an appropriate form whenever consent is required, including a physician's order not to resuscitate.
(d) Be provided access to the appropriate medical records of the principal.
(e) Apply for public benefits, such as Medicare and Medicaid, for the principal and have access to information regarding the principal's income and assets and banking and financial records to the extent required to make application. A health care provider or facility may not, however, make such application a condition of continued care if the principal, if capable, would have refused to apply.
(2) The surrogate may authorize the release of information and medical records to appropriate persons to ensure the continuity of the principal's health care and may authorize the admission, discharge, or transfer of the principal to or from a health care facility or other facility or program licensed under chapter 400.
(3) If, after the appointment of a surrogate, a court appoints a guardian, the surrogate shall continue to make health care decisions for the principal, unless the court has modified or revoked the authority of the surrogate pursuant to s. 744.3115. The surrogate may be directed by the court to report the principal's health care status to the guardian.
The husband's holographic declaration gave her durable power of attorney for medical decisions. This statute gives her the power to speak for him.
The holographic is the "Principals" voice. Read the statute. The surrigate, as you consider the spouse, is limited by the wishes and directive of the principal.
Greer made the correct decision.
Since Terri's case came to light, all we've heard about is how this could have all been avoided by having a living will. However, if the living will is not specific as to times frames or many other circumstances, they could be fatal if that was not what the person in question really wanted.
This is why, IMHO, it is necessary to always err on the side of life when a written living will does not exist. If a person did not feel sure enough to sign one of these documents, then wouldn't it be reasonable that they doubted what they wanted for themselves?
Yup. In one case the guardian's rights supercede all no matter what. (FWIW FL law clearly says that that is not so.) In this case the clearly written power of attorney over medical decisions is brushed aside. In the first case numerous doctor's testimonies were judged inconsequential in this one they have been held as infallible.
***a good trade-off for financial gain***
i think this is the crux of all these disputes. If Daddy needs to be in the ICU for several weeks or months then the inheritance will be greatly reduced; why should we take the chance of loosing all that money?
I think someone should look into Greer's tax and bank records. It may be that some unexpected income was finding it's way into his hands.
I agree with you 100% on that one.
You make the error, not I. You need to apply the "reasonable man" standard. "One in a thousand" was found not to be reasonble.
Greer again ruled correctly.
765.102 Legislative findings and intent.--
3) The Legislature recognizes that for some the administration of life-prolonging medical procedures may result in only a precarious and burdensome existence. In order to ensure that the rights and intentions of a person may be respected even after he or she is no longer able to participate actively in decisions concerning himself or herself, and to encourage communication among such patient, his or her family, and his or her physician, the Legislature declares that the laws of this state recognize the right of a competent adult to make an advance directive instructing his or her physician to provide, withhold, or withdraw life-prolonging procedures, or to designate another to make the treatment decision for him or her in the event that such person should become incapacitated and unable to personally direct his or her medical care.
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.