This woman was cheating on her husband and having a heated argument with him about her infidelity when she opened the door of the moving vehicle they were in and distracted him, causing the crash that injured him.
Yet the law's default position says she had the right to make his medical decisions for him.
Then there is another question of conflict of interest: how does someone who stands to gain insurance and survivor benefits from someone's death get to choose whether they live or die?
My medical directive requires any life-ending decision to be made in consultation with a Roman Catholic moral theologian who is a member of Opus Dei.
My wife and I agree that these decisions should be made by someone who is knowledgeable, has emotional distance and stands to gain or lose nothing from my demise.
Thank you. I didn’t know the circumstances. Yes, you are entirely correct, then. She should not be the sole voice in this decision because there is clearly a conflict of interest. You and your wife have come to a wise decision about these things. Thank you for clarifying the details for me.
This sounds much too much like the Terri Shiavo case to me, at least about how the spouse had or may have had a hand in the circumstances surrounding the patient’s condition and the conflict of interest regarding the insurance payout.