Lane V. Candura Case Study

The right to refuse medical treatment has born ethical dilemmas between the constitutional right of privacy and preservation of life. The case of Grace R. Lane v. Rosaria Candura refers to a similar paradox between a daughter (Grace R. Lane) seeking for temporary guardian status over her mother (Rosaria Candura). As a guardian, she would obtain legal authority which enables her to consent on behalf her mother. Mrs.Candura has refused necessary treatment (amputation of a gangrene infected right leg) and has given a list of reasons underlying the refusal. Mrs.Candura has made it clear she does not consent to treatment, with all facts and following consequences considered. On the other hand, Mrs. Lane argues her mother's decision of refusing treatment was found upon irrationally. Mrs.Lane claims that Mrs.Candura was incompetent and should not be …show more content…
Candura, there were no conclusive evidence whether Mrs. Candura's lacks the requisite legal incompetence for her will to be suppressed by the state. However, the judge concluded that “her confused medical condition resulting from her underlying senility and depression warrants the exercise of the jurisdiction of this court” (Lane v. Candura , 376 N.E.2d 1232) through the appointment of a guardian. The appeal court transcribed the trial court's decision as enough evidence to support the legal incompetency claim, due to the absence of causal relation in irrationality and legal competency. Mrs. Candura's traits of lucidity and confusion, distorted conception of time, hostility and combative response to questioning does not translate as evidence of legal incompetency. Moreover, her exhibition of acuity and awareness regarding questions concerning the proposed operation and understanding of the risk of negative repercussions from refusing the treatment shows Mrs. Candura's testimony is a choice made with full consideration of the consequences (Lane v. Candura , 376 N.E.2d