In re Guardianship of Tschumy (Summary)

CONSENT

In re Guardianship of Tschumy, No. A12-2179 (Minn. Sept. 17, 2014)

fulltextThe Supreme Court of Minnesota affirmed the court of appeals’ ruling that a court ordered guardian may consent to the removal of a ward’s life support system when all interested parties agree that removal is in the ward’s best interest. The district court appointed a guardian to an incapacitated patient pursuant to a state statute. This appointment included “the power to give any necessary consent to enable the ward to receive necessary medical…care.” Subsequently, the patient suffered an “anoxic brain injury” in which the prognosis was “dire.” The patient’s treatment team was in unanimous agreement that he suffered irreversible brain damage and would not survive. The court appointed guardian petitioned the court to authorize the removal of life support to the patient. The district court held that the medical power granted to a guardian does not grant the guardian the unrestricted authority to direct the removal of life support. The guardian appealed, and the court of appeals stated that absent a limitation in the guardianship order, the medical consent power granted under the statute includes the power to authorize the removal of life support without further authorization from the court.

The Supreme Court of Minnesota affirmed the court of appeals holding. The Supreme Court explained that the guardian had the consent to authorize life-sustaining treatment, thus a reasonable interpretation of “consent” would include the authority to withdraw life-sustaining treatment. Moreover, absent any express language in the guardianship order, the guardian had the authority to remove the life-sustaining treatment without court approval when all interested parties agree that the removal is in the ward’s best interest. This is consistent with prior court decisions authorizing family members of incapacitated patients to make similar decisions.