Living wills no longer valid if you're in hospice

Forums: Aging And Elder Care
Email this Topic • Print this Page

A woman in Georgia is being starved to death DESPITE the fact that she had a living will specifying that food and water should not be with-held. If you think a Living Will ensures your wishes will be followed, think again.

Link 1

Link 2

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,596 • Replies: 13

No top replies

This is absolutely disgusting...I was reading halfway to the article and I was already thinking about what I would say to that woman if she were in front of me.

When she said..."grandma has ... *diseases* and who would want to live like that" I just thought to myself - she would - if you were willing to take care of her.

My grandma has typical old people diseases and has to take numerous pills per day - but I would take care of her till her dying days, I would never leave her to die. Why do I get the sneaking suspicion this grandaughter (if she is worthy of being called this) - is SHE who wants the elderly woman to die, not the grandma herself?

Your post sounded pretty angry - and I don't blame you at all. So much for a living will and by the looks of it - the court may not be much of a help either.

0 Replies

If a Will is written, than it's okay for the Offical's to grant those wishes.

"Any Government, especially Judges, should take their big, ugly noses out of our personal buisness, period!" If there's no written Will, than let the family have a Showdown or fight it out. Though Laser Tag or a Paintball game would be less violent.

0 Replies

No comparisons to the Schiavo case. This woman has her facilities and a living will.

Also, congress and Bush are not doing any late night legislation and sticking their noses in. Maybe these a**holes are capable of learning.

This womans grandaughter is a real scumbag.

0 Replies

blueveinedthrobber wrote:

No comparisons to the Schiavo case. This woman has her facilities and a living will.

Also, congress and Bush are not doing any late night legislation and sticking their noses in. Maybe these a**holes are capable of learning.

This womans grandaughter is a real scumbag.

I assume she could beat you up.

0 Replies

ConstitutionalGirl wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
No comparisons to the Schiavo case. This woman has her facilities and a living will.

Also, congress and Bush are not doing any late night legislation and sticking their noses in. Maybe these a**holes are capable of learning.

This womans grandaughter is a real scumbag.

I assume she could beat you up.

I don't understand your point.

0 Replies

I can understand the anger many of you have expressed over the legislature and judciary poking their noses into private affairs - after all: if its a written will with certain express wishes - leave it alone right? But from the cases I have read, I understand the high court of australia has some of the following views, so that the will will not be followed to the letter:

- possibility of invalid/legally non binding will (they seem to take the formalities here very seriously so that if the legal formalties [eg - signing, witnesses] are not followed to the letter of the law, the will is usually invalid or unenforceable.

- doing equity: where the courts think that the will is going to leave one certain party in an unjust position (especially if its a direct family member) they are willing to change it for their advantage (there was a 2002 case where this happened) however, the High court does take into account surrounding circumstnaces of what happened when the deceased was alive

I myself hate the idea of a third indpenedent party changing my own personal decisions - but looking at the approaches of the High court in australia, I have to admit that sometimes, exceptions must be made.

What's it like in the USA?

0 Replies

A Living Will is designed to speak for you when you are unable to speak. That document bears the words and wishes of the person who can no longer express those wishes. It should be upheld, regardless of the family's thoughts or wishes.

The law should be that when you sign a Living Will, you and everyone else around you understand that once it is in effect, if you should become unable to express your wishes, it cannot be changed or altered by anyone.

Period.

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

A Living Will is designed to speak for you when you are unable to speak.

I know and I agree completely. Believe me, I can completely see the reasoning (common sense reasoning) behind this belief - if a will was subject to every single tom dick and joe's interpretation - lets not have a will or any other similar legal document, lets just give my property and my body to the public and they can decide to do whatever they want. But in today's complex society - *sigh* - everyone has to have a bit of everything and there has to be measures to deal with that as well. Confused

0 Replies

There were a few cases in Australia in equity - where the wills of deceased (usually men) stated they wished to leave everything they had to their (female) servants - such that the immediate relatives received nothing. There is the possibility in such cases that the will may have been a result of undue influence or unconsionable conduct. In such cases, I believe that the courts do have a right to look at the surrounding circumstances - was the deceased of sound mind when this will was written? If not - then they will do all possible to do equity. I think that is completely justified, despite the judicial intervention.

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

A Living Will is designed to speak for you when you are unable to speak. That document bears the words and wishes of the person who can no longer express those wishes. It should be upheld, regardless of the family's thoughts or wishes.

The law should be that when you sign a Living Will, you and everyone else around you understand that once it is in effect, if you should become unable to express your wishes, it cannot be changed or altered by anyone.

Period.

That's the way it should be!

0 Replies

That's the way it is, actually but with exceptions in Australia according to the HCA - you have to admit they are perfectly valid exceptions.

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

The law should be that when you sign a Living Will, you and everyone else around you understand that once it is in effect, if you should become unable to express your wishes, it cannot be changed or altered by anyone.

Living wills aren't usually that specific. The idea is to give people an idea of your wishes.

If you wrote out your living will saying that all artifical life support should be removed if you were on it for 90 days but the doctors all agreed that at the 110 day point you had a 100% chance of recovery with no ill after-effects would you still want them to pull the plug on the 89th day just because that was what is written on a piece of paper???

I'd agree that people should follow the general intent of the living will but the document isn't that comprehensive that it can cover every single possibility and that has to be allowed for in the system as well.

0 Replies

fishin' wrote:

I'd agree that people should follow the general intent of the living will but the document isn't that comprehensive that it can cover every single possibility and that has to be allowed for in the system as well.

absolutely - follow the general intent, allow the system and also - look for unfair and inequity (where relevant, I am not saying the deceased's proeprty should be given to the family next door because they can't afford the rent!!) :wink:

0 Replies

Living wills no longer valid if you're in hospice

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know