A controversial Kansas state law that automatically overrides the medical wishes of pregnant individuals is now at the center of a legal battle. A lawsuit has been filed challenging a provision in Kansas’ Natural Death Act that strips away a pregnant person’s right to make advance medical decisions if they become incapacitated or face a terminal illness.
Three women, one of whom is currently pregnant, along with two doctors, are pursuing legal action with t heir goal to overturn the state’s “pregnancy exclusion” law. This clause renders advance healthcare directives for pregnant people invalid, regardless of the fetus’ viability or the mother’s health status.
The plaintiffs claim that this law is unconstitutional. They argue that it infringes personal autonomy, liberty, and the right to privacy. It also puts pregnant people in a legal disadvantage when compared to others.
Emma Vernon, who is currently expecting a child, is among the plaintiffs. She had created an advance health directive stating that she would only want life-sustaining care if her baby could be delivered full-term and in good health. Her directive is specific, prioritizing meaningful life for both herself and the unborn child.
However, under Kansas law, her directive is effectively nullified because of the pregnancy. This, the lawsuit says, denies her the same medical and legal respect granted to non-pregnant individuals who file similar directives.
Two doctors have joined the complaint, claiming that the law forces them to offer poor care to pregnant women. They argue that the current rule not only compromises patient rights, but also exposes doctors to legal and criminal liability for obeying patient directions.
According to them, the clause forces physicians into ethical quandaries and may expose them to professional sanctions just for following their patients’ desires.
Kansas is not alone, but it’s one of just nine U.S. states that completely nullify a pregnant patient’s advance directive, regardless of whether the fetus is viable. This was highlighted by Compassion & Choices, a national nonprofit advocating for end-of-life care rights.
The organization, alongside the legal advocacy group If/When/How: Lawyering for Reproductive Justice and the law firm Irigonegaray & Revenaugh, is representing the five plaintiffs in the case.
The issue of end-of-life rights has gained attention in recent months, particularly after reports from Georgia involving a brain-dead pregnant woman kept on life support due to the state’s abortion restrictions.
Also Read: Michigan couple wins $2M lottery prize on their anniversary
