CRUZAN V.MISSOURI DEPT OF HEALTH

Overview

- The first "right to die" case ever heard by the Court

- Argued on December 6, 1989

-Decided on June 25, 1990.

-The court finding it acceptable to require "clear and convincing evidence" of a patient's wishes regarding withdrawal of life support.

-Creation of advanced health care directives.

Background

- January 11, 1983 : Nancy Cruzan lost control of her vehicle and was thrown head first into a ditch filled with water.

- Paramedics resuscitate her and placed artificially in coma

- Diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state.

- Tube placed in her throat to feed her.

- Cruzan's parents asked her doctors to

remove her feeding tube in 1988. The hospital refused to do it without a court order, it would be like killing her.

Background

- ​​The Cruzans sought and obtained a court order to removed the feeding tube.

-The Missouri Supreme Court ruled that no one can deny treatment to another person, absent an adequate living will or clear and convincing, inherently reliable evidence, absent here."

-The Cruzans appealed, and in 1989 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

Issues

- Right to require "clear and convincing evidence" in order for the Cruzan family to remove their daughter from life support

- Supreme Court was looking at whether Missouri violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by refusing to remove Nancy's feeding tube.

- Fourteenth Amendment : "we the states shall not deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.

Aftermath

- Jasper County Judge Charles Teel decided that the Cruzans had satisfied the burden of proof “clear and convincing”.

- September 1990 : The state of Missouri withdrew from the case

- 14 December 1990 : the feeding tube was removed

- 26 Decembre 1990 : Nancy died

- 17 Auguste 1996 : Nancy's father committed suicide.

- the Cruzan case also helped increase support for the federal law on patient self-determination. This legislation requires hospitals and nursing homes receiving federal funding to provide patients with information on advance directives and to explain the right-to-die options available under their state’s laws.

Décision

Decision

The Court upheld the Missouri Supreme Court's decision in favour of the State of Missouri that it was acceptable to require "clear and convincing evidence" of a specific individual patient's desire to withdraw life support.

The scope

This case ;

- Established that the right to die was not a constitutionally guaranteed right.

- Established that in the absence of a will and convincing evidence of what the incapable person would have wanted, the interests of the state in preserving life outweigh the rights of the individual. to refuse treatment. It left it up to states to determine their own right-to-die standards, rather than creating a uniform national standard