Public Health Trust of Dade County v. Wons case brief
summary
541 So.2d 96 (1989)
CASE FACTS
The district court certified a question as to whether respondent mother, as a competent adult, had a lawful right to refuse a blood transfusion without which she would have likely died.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The certified question was answered in the affirmative, and the district court decision was approved, because the state's interest in maintaining a home with two parents for respondent's minor children did not override respondent's constitutional rights of privacy and religion.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
541 So.2d 96 (1989)
CASE SYNOPSIS
A question was certified
by the District Court of Appeal, Third District, Dade County
(Florida), as to whether respondent mother, as a competent adult, had
a lawful right to refuse a blood transfusion without which she would
have likely died. The district court had answered in the affirmative,
denying petitioner health trust's request to force respondent to
undergo a blood transfusion.CASE FACTS
The district court certified a question as to whether respondent mother, as a competent adult, had a lawful right to refuse a blood transfusion without which she would have likely died.
DISCUSSION
- The district court answered in the affirmative, denying petitioner health trust's request to force respondent to undergo a blood transfusion.
- The court held there were four established criteria wherein the right to refuse medical treatment may have been overridden by a compelling state interest: preservation of life, protection of innocent third parties, prevention of suicide, and maintenance of the ethical integrity of the medical profession.
- The court held the state's interest in maintaining a home with two parents for respondent's minor children did not override respondent's constitutional rights of privacy and religion.
- Accordingly, the district court decision was approved.
CONCLUSION
The certified question was answered in the affirmative, and the district court decision was approved, because the state's interest in maintaining a home with two parents for respondent's minor children did not override respondent's constitutional rights of privacy and religion.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
No comments:
Post a Comment