Michigan Lawsuit Challenges Restrictions on End-of-Life Decisions for Pregnant โWomen
A new lawsuit filed in Michigan argues that the state’s current โlawโ regarding advance directives infringes upon the reproductive freedoms recently enshrined in the state constitution. The suit centers โขonโค a decades-old statute โthat prevents a pregnant person’s designated healthcare advocate from withdrawingโข life-sustaining treatment, even if itโข would result in the patient’s death.
Plaintiffs in the โฃcase, including several michigan physicians, contend the law creates a โขunique adn discriminatory โขbarrier for pregnant women, denyingโฃ them the same end-of-life autonomy afforded to other adults in theโ state. โขTheโ law effectively overrides a patient’s wishes, possibly forcing continued life support against their expressed desires.
“It takes away โan โฃvital right from โฃwomen of reproductive age that otherโ adults with capacity in the state of Michigan have,” explained Kayte Spector-Bagdady, aโ health law professor at the University of Michigan Medical School.
Theโ lawsuit builds upon โa โaccomplished challenge earlier this year where Michigan’s reproductive โfreedom amendment was used to overturn existing abortionโ restrictions, including aโ mandatory 24-hour waiting period.
Michigan lawmakers โขare already considering amending the โขadvance directive law. The state Senateโ passedโ a bill in April that would allow patient advocates to โmake decisions regarding life support for pregnant individuals. The Republican-controlled House โขis currently reviewing the legislation. Washington state recently passed a similar bill โขremoving a pregnancy exclusion from its advance directive law.
While instances requiring such difficult decisions are rare, and many โฃwomen of childbearing age may not even be awareโค ofโข the restrictions or haveโ a formal advance directive in place โ- a 2019 study found most states โwith theseโฃ limitations do not โclearly โdisclose them – several high-profile cases have brought โคtheโค issue to light.
The case of Marlise Muรฑoz inโ Texas, who was kept on life support despite being brain-dead and against โher stated โwishes due to a similar law, garnered nationalโค attention over a decade ago. Her husband ultimately had to sue to have life โsupport removed following a judge’s order after two months.Moreโค recently, the โcase of Adriana Smith in Georgia, where her family faced similar challengesโ inโ 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 โwomen facing life-threatening conditions,โข stated that Smith’s case prompted her to create her own advance directive in โฃSeptember, specifically addressing her wishes should she become pregnant – recognizing, however, that such instructions โฃare currently not legally binding in Michigan. she emphasized the โขfeeling of losing control over one’s own healthcare decisions underโ the current law, stating, “that is all taken out ofโค your hands.”
