Court Opinion

ID: 9631105
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 10:29:28.303031+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:07:48.953472
License: Public Domain

*831Mowbray, J.,
concurring in part:
I concur in the result of the majority opinion only.
The bottom line is whether the district judge in the court below ruled correctly in permitting Kenneth to leave his life-sustaining ventilator, knowing that his death would most probably follow and, secondly, permitting the administration of medication to Kenneth to ease Kenneth’s expected demise. The district judge did rule correctly on both issues, and therefore the judgment below should be affirmed.
The majority opinion goes on to establish a procedure for the disposition of these life termination cases. The majority places the ultimate and final life or death decision in a group of doctors characterized as “non-attending physicians.” This proposed procedure will have a far reaching effect.
While the members of the medical profession subscribed to and are governed by the Hippocratic oath, which is predicated on the preservation of life, the establishment by judicial fiat of a convenient cadre of colleagues who would be on tap as “non-attending physicians” to decree the death of a fellow citizen without relevant standards and safeguards concerns me.
I would leave the establishment of such a procedure to the people acting through the wisdom of their representatives in the legislature.