Today’s edition of the Wall Street Journal has a very good article on the Betancourt v. Trinitas case in New Jersey.  (All of the previous posts on the case can be found by accessing this link)

Suzanne Sataline provides the best summary of the issues in the case – as argued by stakeholders on both sides.  Here is a brief summary of what happened to Ruben Betancourt from Sataline’s article “Court Weighs Death Decision“:

Trinitas Regional Medical Center in Elizabeth argues that Mr. Betancourt was in a persistent vegetative state and that giving further care was unwarranted and unethical, prolonging a painful death. The hospital is appealing a lower-court judgment from 2009 that ordered Trinitas to provide life-saving treatment to the patient.

Mr. Betancourt died in May 2009, a year before the appellate judges heard arguments. While his care decisions may now be academic, legal observers say they expect the court to rule in the closely watched case because New Jersey courts have not shied from such debates, which have become more common across the country.

Not Dead Yet, along with other disability rights groups, filed an amicus brief in the case. NDY is referenced in the article, along with other significant players on both sides:

Several organizations have weighed in on the fight. The New Jersey Hospital Association and the Medical Society of New Jersey argued that families have no constitutional right to demand end-of-life care and that hospitals have a duty to conserve their limited resources for all patients.

Not Dead Yet, a disability-rights organization based in Rochester, N.Y., backs the family, saying it fears that a decision in favor of Trinitas could mean that a hospital would have the power to overrule a patient’s directive. Thaddeus Pope, a professor at Widener University School of Law in Wilmington, Del., filed a brief in support of the family, saying that the hospitals are seeking too much ultimate authority.

This is probably the most even-handed media treatment of the case that has appeared in print.  I’m told that Ms. Sataline spent a significant amount of time making sure she had a complete understanding of the facts of the case.

More later on this case – either on developments or on other commentary about it.  –Stephen Drake