About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

12 Issues L. & Med. 267 (1996-1997)
In re Martin

handle is hein.journals/ilmed12 and id is 289 raw text is: In re Martin HELD: A surrogate decisionmaker for a conscious patient who is not terminally ill or in a persistent vegetative state may be authorized to withhold life-sustaining medical treatment only if it is established by clear and convincing evidence that the person, while competent, previously expressed a desire to refuse life-sustaining medical treatment under the same or highly similar circumstances. In 1987 Michael Martin was involved in an automobile accident in which he sustained serious injuries that left him unable to walk or talk, and rendered him dependent on a colostomy for defecation and a gastrostomy for nutrition. In re Martin, 538 N.W.2d 399, 402 (Mich. 1995) (quoting In re Martin, 504 N.W.2d 917, 920 (Mich. App. 1993)). After the accident, Mrs. Martin, his appointed legal guardian and conservator, placed Mr. Martin in various nursing homes. In 1992, while he was being treated in a hospital for an obstructed bowel, Mrs. Martin contacted the hospital's bioethics committee to determine whether Mr. Martin's life-sustaining medical treatment should be removed. A few days later, the committee issued its report, finding that removal of his medical treatment was medically and ethically appropriate, but that the hospital would not proceed until court authorization was obtained. Id. at 402 (quoting 504 N.W.2d at 920). Mrs. Martin then filed a petition in probate court, requesting that she be given authorization to withhold Mr. Martin's life- sustaining medical treatment. At the evidentiary hearing, the trial court heard conflicting testimony concerning Mr. Martin's wishes to withhold life-sustaining medical treatment. Mrs. Martin testified that her husband would not want to live in a condition in which he was completely dependent on others or machines. She came to this conclusion based mainly on the conversations she had had with her husband after watching movies involving severely incapacitated persons. Two coworkers, however, testified that, although Mr. Martin had made similar statements to them, his present condition was not the type to which he had referred. Medical experts also offered conflicting testimony as to the level of Mr. Martin's physical, sensory, emotional, and cognitive functioning. Id. (quoting 504 N.W.2d at 920). One doctor found that Mr. Martin was content with his current circumstances and wanted to live, while another doctor found it impossible to test his responses. The doctors

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most