Lawsuit filed against Kansas law nullifying end-of-life choices for pregnant women
The plaintiffs — one of whom is currently pregnant — are challenging the constitutionality of a clause in the state's Natural Death Act that denies pregnant women the option to make advance directives to accept or refuse healthcare if they become incapacitated or terminally ill.
Patient plaintiffs Emma Vernon, Abigail Ottaway and Laura Stratton and physician plaintiffs Michele Bennett and Lynley Holman filed the lawsuit on Thursday. It argues that the clause violates the right to personal autonomy, privacy, equal treatment and freedom of speech by ignoring the end-of-life decisions of pregnant women.
Vernon, the pregnant plaintiff, wrote an advance healthcare directive stating that, if pregnant and diagnosed with a terminal condition, she would only like to receive life-sustaining treatment if "there is a reasonable medical certainty" that her child would reach full term and be born "with a meaningful prospect of sustained life and without significant conditions that would substantially impair its quality of life."
The lawsuit says her directive has not been "given the same deference the law affords to others who complete directives because of the Pregnancy Exclusion, and therefore she does not benefit from the same level of certainty that the directive otherwise provides."
All states have laws allowing people to write advance directives on the medical care they would like to receive if they become unable to make their own health decisions. Nine states have clauses to invalidate a pregnant woman's advance directive.
The physicians who joined the lawsuit said the law requires them to provide pregnant patients with a lower standard of care than other patients and opens them up to civil and criminal lawsuits as well as professional penalties.
The lawsuit says the doctors "are deeply committed to the foundational medical principle that patients have a fundamental right to determine what treatment they receive, and that providing treatment without a patient's informed consent violates both medical ethics and the law."
"Yet Kansas law compels them to disregard their patients' clearly expressed end-of-life decisions, forcing them to provide their pregnant patients with a lower standard of care than any of their other patients receive," it continues. "It demands this diminished care without offering any clarity on what end-of-life treatment they are required to provide—leaving them to guess at what the law expects while exposing them to civil, criminal, and professional consequences for getting it wrong."
The defendants in the lawsuit are Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, Kansas State Board of Healing Arts President Richard Bradbury and Douglas County District Attorney Dakota Loomis.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Former NFL player convicted in large-scale dogfighting operation in Oklahoma
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A former NFL player from Oklahoma has been convicted for his role in a large-scale dogfighting operation, federal prosecutors announced. Leshon Eugene Johnson, 54, of Broken Arrow was convicted of six felony counts of possessing dogs for use in an animal-fighting venture. He was acquitted of 17 other similar counts. He faces up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each count when he's formally sentenced at a later date. 'The FBI will not stand for those who perpetuate the despicable crime of dogfighting,' FBI Director Kash Patel said in a statement. 'Thanks to the hard work of our law enforcement partners, those who continue to engage in organized animal fighting and cruelty will face justice.' Prosecutors alleged that Johnson operated Mal Kant Kennels in Broken Arrow and Haskell, Oklahoma, and selectively bred pit bull-type dogs known as champions or grand champions because of winning dog fights. Earlier this year, the government seized 190 dogs from Johnson that have been in the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service. Johnson allegedly bred dogs that had won as many as five fights and then sold 'stud rights' and their offspring to other dogfighters, according to the Justice Department. The trafficking took place across the U.S. and helped to grow the dogfighting industry, while resulting in Johnson profiting financially, prosecutors alleged. Johnson's attorney, Billy Coyle, said his client was a dog breeder who was never accused of fighting dogs and noted that the jury acquitted Johnson on most of the counts against him. 'He was simply a breeder of the American pit bull terrier,' Coyle said. 'Obviously the jury found that some of his dogs bred were probably or were used in dog fighting, and those were difficult charges to fight.' Coyle said federal agents also used heavy-handed tactics, with more than 40 officers raiding his home late at night, pointing guns at Johnson and his wife and seizing his dogs and property. Johnson previously pleaded guilty to state animal fighting charges in 2004 in Oklahoma. He was given a five-year deferred sentence, according to court documents. Johnson was a running back who played for the Green Bay Packers, Arizona Cardinals and New York Giants from 1994-1999.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Raw milk sickens 21 people in Florida including 6 children
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Six children are among 21 people who have E. coli or campylobacter infections after consuming raw milk from a farm in Florida, public health officials said. Seven people have been hospitalized, and at least two of them are suffering severe complications, the Florida Department of Health said Monday. It did not specify if any of the six infected children under 10 are among those being treated in hospitals, nor how many people were infected by E. coli, campylobacter or both bacteria. 'Sanitation practices in this farm are of particular concern due to the number of cases,' reads the state advisory, which did not identify the farm linked to the cluster of infections in northeast and central Florida. Raw milk appears to be gaining in popularity, despite years of warnings about the health risks of drinking unpasteurized products. The Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say raw milk is one of the 'riskiest' foods people can consume. Raw milk is far more likely than pasteurized milk to cause illnesses and hospitalizations because of dangerous bacteria such as campylobacter, listeria, salmonella and E. coli, research shows. The infections can cause gastrointestinal illness, and in some cases may lead to serious complications, including a life-threatening form of kidney failure. Young children, the elderly, immunocompromised people and pregnant women are at greater risk of complications. 'We invented pasteurization for a reason,' said Keith Schneider, a food safety professor at the University of Florida. 'It's maddening that this is happening.' States have widely varying regulations regarding raw milk, with some allowing retail purchases in stores and others allowing sale only at farms. Some states allow 'cowshares,' in which customers buy milk produced by designated animals, and some allow consumption only by farm owners, employees or 'non-paying guests.' In Florida, the sale and distribution of raw milk for human consumption is illegal, but retailers get around the ban by labeling their products as for pet or animal food only. Schneider called it a 'wink, wink, nudge, nudge,' form of regulation. 'Everybody knows that they're selling it for human consumption,' Schneider said, adding that people getting sick — or even seriously ill — from drinking raw milk is 'not a question of if, but when.' ___ Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cops called as Denise Richards shows up at ex's home amid restraining order
The cops were called on Denise Richards Sunday when the reality star allegedly showed up at the home of her estranged husband, Aaron Phypers, despite a restraining order the reality star has taken out amid their divorce battle. A divorce lawyer for the 'Real Housewives of Beverly Hills' alum, 54, told TMZ that Richards only arrived at the Calabasas home Sunday 'after confirming that Mr. Phypers was not present,' and did so 'to retrieve her dogs after learning that Mr. Phypers had put down one of her other dogs without her knowledge or permission.' Phypers, who denies Richards' recent claims of longstanding physical abuse, told the outlet that everything the 'Wild Things' star claimed was 'absolutely false. 'Denise's actions are willfully intentional in the slander and destruction of what is left of a family,' continued the 52-year-old 'frequency medicine' practitioner. 'This is after Denise chose to carry on an adulterous affair — after being caught not once, not twice, but three times.' Photos published by the outlet show the OnlyFans star speaking to a trio of deputies outside the home, which is owned by Phypers, his parents and brother. One image shows Phypers speaking to one of the officers, while another shows him hugging his elderly mother. Phypers, who wed Richards in 2018, filed for divorce July 7, three days after he said they separated. Richards has claimed he 'would frequently violently choke' her and subject her to other forms of physical abuse, including leaving her with a black eye in 2022. She was granted a restraining order against Phypers, which lasts until their scheduled court appearance on Aug. 8, and orders him to stay 100 yards from Richards, her home, car and place of business. Richards last week accused Phypers of disseminating her texts and illegally leaking her nude photos. 'Mr. Phypers has continued to harass Ms. Richards since being served with the Temporary Restraining Order by, among other things, disseminating private information from Ms. Richards' cell phone and laptop, which he stole,' her lawyer alleged in a statement to multiple outlets in late July. 'These actions continue to disturb Ms. Richards' peace. … Ms. Richards will not be responding to Mr. Phypers' false allegations in a public forum and will be addressing Mr. Phypers' abuse in Court.'
