Lawsuit filed against Kansas law nullifying end-of-life choices for pregnant women
Three women and two physicians are suing to block a Kansas law that invalidates a pregnant woman's advance medical directive about end-of-life treatment.
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.
Cdc Removes Covid Vaccine Recommendation For Healthy Children, Pregnant Mothers
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."
Read On The Fox News App
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, including Kansas, 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."
New Mom Furious At Husband For Choosing Friends And Barbecue Over Her And Their Newborn
"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.Original article source: Lawsuit filed against Kansas law nullifying end-of-life choices for pregnant women
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
8 minutes ago
- Associated Press
AP top stories June 3
The Associated Press is an independent global news organization dedicated to factual reporting. Founded in 1846, AP today remains the most trusted source of fast, accurate, unbiased news in all formats and the essential provider of the technology and services vital to the news business. More than half the world's population sees AP journalism every day.
Gizmodo
11 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Smoking Weed and Eating Edibles Share This Surprising Health Risk
A new study has found a startling link between chronic cannabis use and increased risk of cardiovascular disease—regardless of whether you smoke it or consume edibles. The finding challenges commonly held beliefs about the health impacts of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which many see as a relatively harmless drug—especially when ingested. The study, published Wednesday, May 28 in the journal JAMA Cardiology, found that THC smokers suffer from significantly worse artery function than non-users. They observed the same effect in edible consumers, though their arteries were not as severely affected. In either case, vascular function was reduced by roughly half compared to those who do not use cannabis, according to a statement from the University of California, San Francisco. 'Scientifically, this THC result is really interesting but boy does it screw up the public health messaging,'' co-author Matt Springer, a cardiovascular researcher at UCSF, reportedly said to lead author and UCSF physician-scientist Leila Mohammadi when he saw the data. These results add to a growing body of evidence that suggests long-term weed use can lead to cardiovascular damage and life-threatening events such as heart attacks and strokes, though experts still lack consensus on its precise impacts. A 2024 study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association found that people who consume cannabis daily had a 25% increased risk of heart attack and a 42% increased risk of stroke compared to non-users. For this new study, researchers investigated how cannabis impacts vascular function. To isolate the effects of chronic cannabis use, they recruited 55 otherwise healthy adults aged 18 to 50 who did not use any form of nicotine and were not frequently exposed to secondhand smoke. These participants were sorted into three groups: marijuana smokers, edible users, and non-users. Those in the two cannabis user groups reported taking the drug at least three times per week, either exclusively through smoking or edibles. To assess the participants' vascular function, the researchers measured dilation of the brachial artery—located in the upper arm—to determine whether it could properly expand in response to increased blood flow. To that end, they used an inflatable forearm cuff to briefly block blood flow to the artery, then used ultrasound to measure its diameter before and after inflating the cuff. Matt Springer, a cardiovascular researcher at UCSF whose lab led the study, told Live Science that his test offers a 'window into the future.' When blood vessels cannot fully dilate, he said, the risk of heart attack and other poor cardiovascular outcomes increases. Participants who did not consume cannabis showed an average vessel dilation—represented as the percent change from the baseline measurement of artery diameter—of 10.4%. This value was significantly reduced among weed smokers and edible users, who showed an average vessel dilation of 6.0% and 4.6%, respectively. For reference, average values for brachial artery dilation in healthy individuals typically range from 8.0% to 15%. In a previous study, Springer's lab found similarly reduced levels of vessel dilation among e-cigarette and cigarette smokers. To better understand how THC causes this change, the researchers ran lab tests to determine how endothelial cells—which form the linings of blood vessels and release nitric oxide to trigger dilation—responded to the participants' blood samples. These tests revealed that the blood of chronic cannabis smokers inhibited nitric oxide production in the cells, which may explain why these participants showed reduced vessel dilation. This effect was not observed in edible consumers, however, suggesting that ingestible THC may impact arterial function via an entirely separate mechanism. Figuring out what that mechanism may be will require further research. What's more, subsequent studies will need to reproduce these findings in a larger population to validate the results. Within the last several years, cannabis use among U.S. adults has reached new heights, according to the NIH's National Institute on Drug Abuse. As such, investigating the health effects of THC is more important than ever before—especially as mounting evidence challenges perceptions of weed as a harmless high.
The Verge
14 minutes ago
- The Verge
Peter Thiel's Jeffrey Epstein connections.
Isn't it funny how all these tech and science men have ties to Epstein? I wonder why! Anyway, Epstein invested with Thiel's Valar Ventures — and that investment hasn't previously been disclosed. Guess what that means? 'There's a good chance much of the windfall will not go to any of the roughly 200 victims whom the disgraced financier abused when they were teenagers or young women.'
