Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from people with severe disabilities who request it: equal protection considerations.

TL;DRAbstract

In 1983, the Southern California affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued on behalf of Elizabeth Bouvia, a young woman with cerebral palsy. The ACLU sought a court order requiring a hospital to provide intravenous morphine to Ms. Bouvia while she starved herself to death.(1) The Bouvia case was the first highly publicized right-to-die court proceeding to involve a conscious individual with substantial but not terminal disabilities. Although Ms. Bouvia had experienced a series of personal setbacks including a miscarriage, spousal abandonment, loss of certain financial benefits, and loss of an opportunity to pursue a master's degree, these events were not addressed as factors precipitating a suicidal crisis subject to clinical intervention and treatment.(2) Her very public request for assistance to die was not interpreted as the proverbial cry for help. Instead, the court, the ACLU attorneys, psychiatric professionals, and the media assumed that Ms. Bouvia was rational

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper