Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T12:59:22.950Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cruzan: Facing the Inevitable

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2021

James Bopp Jr.  and
Thomas J. Marzen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When the United States Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court that it was not in the best interests of Nancy Cruzan to die of dehydration and malnutrition by withholding from her food and fluids provided by tube the result was deplored by many legal and popular commentators.

The criticism suggested a wide range of values and reasoning that were reflected in the various briefs filed in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of reversing the Missouri court decision. The objections might be placed in three categories: the medical, the legal, and the ethical.

The medical rationale for reversal of the Missouri Supreme Court categorized provision of food and fluids by tube as a “medical treatment” and, hence, subject to practices that pertain to forgoing other, more obvious forms of medical treatment, such as use of respirators or chemotherapy.

Type
Article
Information
Law, Medicine and Healthcare , Volume 19 , Issue 1-2 , Spring Summer 1991 , pp. 37 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't. of Health, 110 S.Ct. 2841 (1990).Google Scholar
Cruzan v. Harmon, 760 S.W.2d 408 (Mo. en banc. 1988), aff'd, Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't of Health, 110 S.Ct. 2841 (1990).Google Scholar
See e.g., Brief of the American Medical Association as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners at 20–30, Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't. of Health, 110 S.Ct. 2841 (1990) (No. 88-1503).Google Scholar
Id. at 38–46.Google Scholar
Id. at 41.Google Scholar
Id. at 39–42.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Brief for Petitioners, Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't. of Health, 110 S.Ct. 2841 (1990) (No. 88-1503). [hereinafter Petitioner's Brief].Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S. Ct. at 2855–56.Google Scholar
Id. at 2855. See also Washington v. Harper, 110 S.Ct. 1028 (1990) (recognizing that prisoners possess “a significant liberty interest in avoiding the unwanted administration of antipsychotic drugs under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Id. at 1036).Google Scholar
Id. at 2851 n. 7.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852. See Annas, “Nancy Cruzan and the Right to Die,” 323 N. Eng. J. Med. 670, 670 (1990).Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See Editorial, “Doing Justice to Life,” New York Times, June 27, 1990, at A14, col. 1.Google Scholar
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967).Google Scholar
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923); Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925).Google Scholar
Bopp, & Coleson, , “Webster and the Future of Substantive Due Process,” 28 Duq. L. Rev. 271, 280 (1990).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2856.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id at 2851–52.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2854.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id. at 2853 n. 10.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
70 N.J. 10, 41, 355 A.2d 647, 664, cert. denied sub nom. Garger v. New Jersey, 429 U.S. 922 (1976).Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S. Ct. at 2856 n. 12.Google Scholar
Id. at 2870 (Brennan, J., dissenting).Google Scholar
U.S. Const. amend. XIV, 1.Google Scholar
The Declaration of Independence (U.S. 1776).Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2853.Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
Id. at 2854.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2889 (Stevens, J., dissenting).Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
Id. at 2854.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2855.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2855–56.Google Scholar
Id. at 2856.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2854.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id. at 2854.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2867 (Brennan, J., dissenting; joined by Marshall, J., and Blackmun, J.); Id. at 2890 (Stevens, J., dissenting).Google Scholar
Id. at 2857 (O’Connor, J., concurring).Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
Id. at 2855.Google Scholar
Id. at 2856 n. 12.Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
See Marzen, O’Dowd, Crone, & Balch, , “Suicide: A Constitutional Right?” 24 Duq. L. Rev. 1 (1985) [hereinafter Suicide].Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2859 (Scalia, J., concurring).Google Scholar
Id. at 2857 (O’Connor, J., concurring).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Quinlan, 70 N.J. at 40, 355 A.2d at 663.Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2847–50.Google Scholar
Quinlan, 70 N.J. at 38–42, 355 A.2d at 662–64.Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2851 n. 7.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Quinlan, 70 N.J. at 41–42, 355 A.2d at 664.Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2852.Google Scholar
Quinlan, 70 N.J. at 42, 355 A.2d at 664.Google Scholar
Id. at 51–52, 355 A.2d at 669–70.Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2855–56.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852–54.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id. at 2854.Google Scholar
Id. at 2852.Google Scholar
Id. at 2853.Google Scholar
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 290 (1972) (Brennan, J., concurring).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Mo. Ann. Stat. 459.010 (6) & -.015.3 (Vernon Supp. 1990).Google Scholar
See, e.g., id. 459.010 (3).Google Scholar
Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 63, 3080.3, 3080.4 (West Supp. 1989.Google Scholar
Act of Aug. 2, 1989, ch. 914, 16(1) 1989 Or. Laws 1752, 1756–1757.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.A. 5101–5117 (Supp. 1989).Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2852–55.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 748 (1969); Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67, 94 n. 31 (1971); Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 433 (1979); see also In re Westchester County Medical Center (O'Connor), 72 N.Y.2d 517, 532 n. 4, 534 N.Y.S.2d 886, 893 n.4, 531 N.E.2d 607, 614 n. 4 (1988); In re Peter, 108 N.J. 365, 378, 529 A.2d 419, 425 (1987); Leach v. Akron General Medical Center, 678 Ohio Misc. 1, 11, 426 N.E.2d 809, 815 (1980).Google Scholar
Cruzan v. Harmon, 760 S.W.2d at 417.Google Scholar
Id., citing Wanzer, Adelstein, Cranford, Federman, Hook, Moertel, Safar, Stone, Taussing, & Eys, Van, “The Physician's Responsibility Toward Hopelessly Ill Patients,” 310 New Eng. J. Med. 955, 957 (1984).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Ark. Stat. Ann. 20-17-214 (Supp. 1989); Uniform Rights of the Terminally Ill Act (approved at annual meeting of the National Conference on Uniform State Laws held August 2–9, 1985).Google Scholar
Cruzan v. Harmon, 760 S.W.2d at 426.Google Scholar
Cruzan, 110 S.Ct. at 2853–54, citing Schneiderman v. United States, 320 U.S. 118 (1943), Woodby v. INS, 385 U.S. 276 (1966), Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (1979), Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982).Google Scholar
See Petitioners Brief, supra note 7.Google Scholar
In re Cordes’ Estate, 116 S.W.2d 207, 209 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989); Snyder v. United States, 134 F. Supp. 319, 322 (W.D.N.C. 1955).Google Scholar
State ex rel. Standefer v. England, 328 S.W.2d 732, 738 (Mo. Ct. App. 1959); In re Hymes, 102 Misc. 2d 821, 823, 424 N.Y.2d 608, 610 (Sup. Ct. 1979); Mo. Ann. Stat 475.110, 475.120(2)(3) (Supp. 1989); see also 39 Am. Jur.2d Guardian and Ward 62 (1968 & Supp. 1989).Google Scholar
See generally Brakel, S. Parry, J. & Weiner, B., The Mentally Disabled and the Law 369 (3d ed. 1985) [hereinafter The Mentally Disabled and the Law].Google Scholar
City of Cleburne, Texas v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 432 (1985).Google Scholar
Cf. Booth v. Maryland, 482 U.S. 496 (1987).Google Scholar
Petitioners Brief, supra note 7, at 30–33.Google Scholar
See U.S. Supreme Court decisions cited supra note 98.Google Scholar
See Glendon, M.A., Abortion and Divorce in Western Law (1987).Google Scholar
See, e.g., In re Jobes, 108 N.J. 394, 428, 529 A.2d 434, 452 (1987); In re Hamlin, 102 Wash. 2d 810, 821–22, 689 P.2d 1372, 1379 (1984); In re Barber, 147 Cal. App. 3d 1006, 1008, 195 Cal. Rptr. 484, 488 (1983).Google Scholar
Cruzan v. Harmon, 760 S.W.2d at 424.Google Scholar
See Marzen, , “The ”Uniform Rights of the Terminally Ill Act: A Critical Analysis,” 1 Issues in L. & Med. 441 (1986).Google Scholar
See supra note 100.Google Scholar
See Suicide, supra note 72, at 148–242 (Appendix: The Laws of the United States).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Cal. Civ, Code 2430 to 2444 (West Supp. 1990); Fla. Stat. Ann. 709.08 (West 1988 & West Supp. 1990); 111. Ann. Stat. ch. 110 1/2, paras. 804–1 to-12 (Smith-Hurd Supp. 1989); Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 58 1071 to 1077 (West Supp. 1990); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 14 3451 to 3467 (1989).Google Scholar
See Diamond, , “Decision-making Ability and Advance Directive Preferences In Nursing Home Patients and Proxies,” 29 Gerontologist 622 (1989); Zweibel, , “Treatment At the End of Life: A Comparison of Decisions By Older Patients And Their Physician-Selected Proxies,” 29 Gerontologist 615 (1989).Google Scholar
Supra note 101.Google Scholar
Act Concerning Living Wills, 1989 Me. Pub. L. ch. 830 (to be codified at Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 18A, 5–701 to-714 (1990)).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Ark. Stat. Ann. 20-17-201 – 218 (Supp. 1989).Google Scholar
See Weber, , “Substituted Judgment Doctrine: A Critical Analysis,” 1 Issues in L. & Med. 131 (1985).Google Scholar
See The Mentally Disabled and the Law, supra note 107, at 369.Google Scholar