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

Skip to comments.

Group warns against living wills
World Net Daily ^ | April 1, 2005 | staff

Posted on 04/01/2005 7:50:14 PM PST by tessalu

Standard form 'assumes you want to be starved or dehydrated to death'

Amid the national crush to fill out living wills in the wake of the Terri Schiavo saga, a California pro-life group is warning citizens against signing that state's standard living will form, claiming it could result in a painful death by starvation and dehydration.

Campaign for Children and Families, a family-values nonprofit organization, is urging people to avoid using California's Advance Health Care Directive form because it makes no distinction between food and water versus heart-and-lung machinery and other artificial life-support systems. Californians who use the state's form with its standard check-off boxes may be denied nutrition and hydration, says the CCF, and could end up dying of thirst and hunger if they fall into a coma or become otherwise incapacitated.

The state's Advance Health Care Directive is found in the California Probate Code, Section 4701.

"California's living will law assumes you want to be starved or dehydrated to death," said CCF President Randy Thomasson. "This is frightening. Most people don't know that signing the standard advance directive form sentence you to a horrible death, by your own hand or someone else's." The California's standard form provides space for citizens to further specify their wishes, but without the extra input, the form defaults in the direction of equating nutrition and hydration with artificial life-support machinery.

The group is recommending, instead, that interested Californians use the pro-life "Will to Live" form.

In fact, the National Right to Life website provides a "Will to Live" form for every state plus Washington, D.C.

"If you sign the standard form, and then fall into a temporary coma, or become disabled in an accident, or incur brain damage that initially prevents you from talking or writing, you could literally be starved and dehydrated to death by your own signature or by the person you appoint as your health care agent," said Jan Carroll McCoy, former associate western director for the National Right to Life Committee.

The problem, say critics of California's standard "living will" form, is that by simply filling in the check-off boxes provided, the citizen gives total control over his care, including the decision to withhold and withdraw food and water, to his agent:

(1.2) AGENT'S AUTHORITY: My agent is authorized to make all health care decisions for me, including decisions to provide, withhold, or withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration and all other forms of health care to keep me alive, except as I state here. Ironically, CCF says both the check-off options of "Choice Not to Prolong Life" and "Choice to Prolong Life" are "misleading and deadly."

The choice against prolonging life artificially with machinery opens the door for death by dehydration and starvation, since California's law defines "health care" and "treatment" as including nutrition and hydration. But even checking the box to prolong life may be problematic, say critics, since that decision puts the signer within the changing limits of "generally accepted health standards," which could conceivably encompass the denial of food and water under certain circumstances.

(2.1) END-OF-LIFE DECISIONS: I direct that my health care providers and others involved in my care provide, withhold, or withdraw treatment in accordance with the choice I have marked below: ___ (a) Choice Not To Prolong Life

I do not want my life to be prolonged if (1) I have an incurable and irreversible condition that will result in my death within a relatively short time, (2) I become unconscious and, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, I will not regain consciousness, or (3) the likely risks and burdens of treatment would outweigh the expected benefits, OR

___ (b) Choice To Prolong Life

I want my life to be prolonged as long as possible within the limits of generally accepted health care standards.

"Given that you could be starved and dehydrated to death if you use the ill-defined standard living will, now is the time for responsible citizens to take advantage of the pro-life 'Will to Live,'" said Thomasson. "Unlike the inhumane advance directive form, having a 'Will to Live' guarantees that you will receive the food and water you need should you become incapacitated, while allowing you to make distinctions about what you might consider to be extraordinary care."

The "Will to Live" was developed by the National Right to Life Committee, and is based on the presumption that "food and water are not medical treatment, but basic necessities." It specifically directs health care providers to "provide with food and fluids orally, intravenously, by tube, or by other means to the full extent necessary to both preserve my life and to assure me the optimal health possible."

"Stop and think about it," concluded Thomasson. "Food and water is not 'artificial treatment.' Food and water is not a 'machine.' Food and water is basic care for babies and adults of all ages."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: livingwills
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 last
To: Salamander

LOL!

From one optimist to another...

I hope it's a hoax, too. ;o)


41 posted on 04/01/2005 10:36:11 PM PST by dixiechick2000 (President Bush is a mensch in cowboy boots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: dixiechick2000

Oh good.
I thought I was only one sitting around with my fingers crossed....;))


42 posted on 04/01/2005 11:03:20 PM PST by Salamander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: bvw

Whoa, try the decaf...

Would you prefer to live in intractable pain?

Would God want you to?


43 posted on 04/02/2005 1:55:59 AM PST by MindBender26 (Having my own CAR-15 meant never having to say I was sorry......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TontoKowalski
I always thought that the purpose of a Living Will was to make your wishes clear to your family, and thus relieve them of the burden of having to make, and live with, choices on your behalf. In other words, it is a kindness to the family of the person who is ill. It also defuses potential family squabbles about what Dad would have really wanted. I never considered a Living Will to be legally enforceable, only a method of instructing your LOVING family. I emphasize "loving" because, of course, if your family doesn't give two hoots about your wishes, then it doesn't matter anyway.

I think you have the right of it.

Moreover, there is no substitute for having a spouse who knows what you want and is willing to fight for it. Failing that, a child, then someone else down your line of blood relatives.

Until the Terri affair came up, my wife of 20 years and I saw exactly eye-to-eye on this subject-- we both belonged to the "try to save me if it looks like I could come back and enjoy life-- otherwise, let me go" school of thought.

Now, I haven't changed, but she wants to "live, regardless." And that is fine by me-- knowing this new information, I'm perfectly willing to fight like a tiger to keep her going.

44 posted on 04/02/2005 2:28:57 AM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tessalu

I agree, I was trying to think how to word my living will and the last thing you want to do is give some judge the ammo to take your life before your time might be up.


45 posted on 04/02/2005 2:50:28 AM PST by John Lenin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

As a lawyer, I hate to appear to be advertising for my profession, but here it goes. After Terri Schiavo's judicial murder, it's vital that just about all of us have a living will, or similar document, to keep the same thing from happening to ourselves. As noted in the article, a standard form document may enable one's care givers to starve and dehydrate one to death. Thus, it is highly advisable to have a living will, or equivalent document, and to sit down with a lawyer and CAREFULLY DISCUSS EVERY CLAUSE AND THE MEANING THEREOF, REVISING EACH TO DEAL WITH YOUR OWN SITUATION.


46 posted on 04/02/2005 6:49:27 AM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
I don't know if it requires a lawyer or not. It's not a terribly complex instrument. I'm a lawyer, also, and I think a good percentage of people are savvy enough to understand what the provisions mean without professional legal help.

However, it's an important enough document and decision that, if there's any uncertainty, obtaining legal advice would be money well spent.

47 posted on 04/02/2005 6:56:15 AM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 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