Michigan Lawsuit Challenges Restrictions on End-of-Life Decisions for Pregnant Women
A new lawsuit filed in Michigan argues that the state’s current law regarding advance directives infringes upon the reproductive freedoms recently enshrined in the state constitution. The suit centers on a decades-old statute that prevents a pregnant person’s designated healthcare advocate from withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, even if it would result in the patient’s death.
Plaintiffs in the case, including several michigan physicians, contend the law creates a unique adn discriminatory barrier for pregnant women, denying them the same end-of-life autonomy afforded to other adults in the state. The law effectively overrides a patient’s wishes, possibly forcing continued life support against their expressed desires.
“It takes away an vital right from women of reproductive age that other adults with capacity in the state of Michigan have,” explained Kayte Spector-Bagdady, a health law professor at the University of Michigan Medical School.
The lawsuit builds upon a accomplished challenge earlier this year where Michigan’s reproductive freedom amendment was used to overturn existing abortion restrictions, including a mandatory 24-hour waiting period.
Michigan lawmakers are already considering amending the advance directive law. The state Senate passed a bill in April that would allow patient advocates to make decisions regarding life support for pregnant individuals. The Republican-controlled House is currently reviewing the legislation. Washington state recently passed a similar bill removing a pregnancy exclusion from its advance directive law.
While instances requiring such difficult decisions are rare, and many women of childbearing age may not even be aware of the restrictions or have a formal advance directive in place - a 2019 study found most states with these limitations do not clearly disclose them – several high-profile cases have brought the issue to light.
The case of Marlise Muñoz in Texas, who was kept on life support despite being brain-dead and against her stated wishes due to a similar law, garnered national attention over a decade ago. Her husband ultimately had to sue to have life support removed following a judge’s order after two months.More recently, the case of Adriana Smith in Georgia, where her family faced similar challenges in determining her end-of-life care while she was pregnant, further spurred discussion within the medical community.
Dr. Koskenoja, one of the plaintiffs and a physician who treats pregnant women facing life-threatening conditions, stated that Smith’s case prompted her to create her own advance directive in September, specifically addressing her wishes should she become pregnant – recognizing, however, that such instructions are currently not legally binding in Michigan. she emphasized the feeling of losing control over one’s own healthcare decisions under the current law, stating, “that is all taken out of your hands.”
Buck