Bartling

Bartling v. Superior Court

Bad Law
163 Cal. App. 3d 186·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 2892·209 Cal. Rptr. 220
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 27, 1984B007907California4,405 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

In this case we are called upon to decide whether a competent adult patient, with serious illnesses which are probably incurable but have not been diagnosed as terminal, has the right, over the objection of his physicians and the hospital, to have life-support equipment disconnected despite the fact that withdrawal of such devices will surely hasten his death.

Petitioners are William Bartling and his wife, Ruth Bartling. Real parties in interest are the Glendale Adventist Medical Center (Glendale Adventist) and Mr. Bartling’s treating physicians.

The ruling challenged in this petition is the denial of petitioners’ request for an injunction ordering real parties to disconnect Mr. Bartling’s ventilator (commonly called a “respirator”), a machine which sustains the patient’s breathing. Although petitioners filed an appeal from the superior court’s order, they also filed the within petition, claiming that the situation was too urgent to await the appeal. Petitioners were unfortunately correct, for Mr. Bartling passed away the afternoon before the hearing on this petition.

Both sides in this case have urged us to address the merits of the petition and formulate guidelines…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.