Conflicts may arise when state interests in preserving life and preventing abuse conflict with personal liberty and bodily autonomy. Courts generally resolve these by upholding the state’s evidentiary requirements safeguarding against involuntary euthanasia, while recognizing documented patient autonomy.
For example: A court upholds a state law requiring written evidence of a patient’s end-of-life wishes before terminating treatment, even if family members claim to verbally know those wishes.