1 minute read

In the Matter of Quinlan

Significance



This case prompted the adoption of "brain death" as the legal definition of death in some states and the adoption of laws recognizing "living wills" and the "right to die" in other states, as well as the formation of "bioethics" committees in many hospitals. In 1985, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that all life-sustaining medical treatment, including artificial feeding, could be withheld from incompetent, terminally ill patients, provided such action was shown to be consistent with the afflicted person's past wishes.



On 15 April 1975, 21-year-old Karen Ann Quinlan passed out and lapsed into a coma after sustaining bruises which were never satisfactorily explained and ingesting tranquilizers "in the therapeutic range" and alcohol. Unable to breathe on her own, she was placed on a respirator.

By the following autumn, Quinlan's family and doctors had given up hope of recovery. Her parents, Julia and Joseph Quinlan, were devout Roman Catholics. The Quinlans consulted their parish priest, Father Thomas Trapasso, and were told that they could, in good conscience, request that Karen be removed from the respirator. The request was made, but Karen's primary physician, Dr. Robert Morse, refused to end the artificial support. In the absence of any other means with which to execute what he believed to be his daughter's wishes, Joseph Quinlan went to court.

By the time of the trial, 20 October 1975, Daniel R. Coburn, an attorney, had become the court-appointed guardian for Karen Quinlan. Morris County Prosecutor Donald G. Collester, Jr., and state Attorney General William F. Hyland joined the case, in an attempt to uphold New Jersey's homicide statutes. During pretrial interviews, Attorney General Hyland described the case as a challenge to New Jersey's long-standing definition of death as the "cessation of vital signs'' and one which could result in a new definition based on "cerebral" or "brain death."

However, one week before the trial it was disclosed that Karen Quinlan did not have a "flat" electroencephalograph--a medical test which would have been evidence of a complete absence of brain-wave activity. She also was capable of breathing on her own for short, irregular periods, and had occasionally shown muscle activity which some doctors had described as voluntary. It immediately became clear that the trial would not center on New Jersey's definition of death; rather it would address the more complicated question of whether Karen Quinlan had a "right to die."

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1973 to 1980In the Matter of Quinlan - Significance, Accepted Standards Vs. Right To Die, Decision Is Appealed, Do States That Allow Assisted Suicide Find An Increase In Intentional Suicide Rates?