Recent Changes

The case also helped to generate support for the Congressional passage of the Patient Self-Determination Act.It was effective November 1991, when hospitals and nursing homes that receive Medicaid or Medicare funds must give patients written information about advance directives, explaining what right-to-die options are available under their state law. Most states now have laws providing a way for people to make known, in advance, their wishes about medical treatment (Lewin 1).
Other cases that referenced the Cruzan case were Gonzales v Oregon and Washington v. Glucksberg. These cases were also concerned with the right to die policies. (Linder 1)
Reviewed by Mr. Midora

"Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health." Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health. Conlaw, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Lewin, Tamar. "Nancy Cruzan Dies, Outlived by a Debate Over the Right to Die." New York Times 27 Dec. 1990: n. pag. Print.
Linder, Doug. "The Right to Die." Exploring Constitutional Conflicts. N.p., 1995. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.

This court case brought a lot of attention to other facets of the refusal of healthcare. Policies about the medical assisted suicide have been debated in relation to this case. Not many people were healthy that the state gained such power from this ruling to interfere in what many believe to be a family's personal decision. Many aren't comfortable with having to gain state permission to let go of a loved one who can't give the word for themselves.
The meaning and completion of her life should be controlled by persons who have her best interests at heart -- not by a state legislature concerned only with the "preservation of human life." (Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health)
about medical treatment. (treatment (Lewin 1).
Other cases that referenced the Cruzan case were Gonzales v Oregon and Washington v. Glucksberg. These cases were also concerned with the right to die policies. (Linder 1)

ItemID=WE52&iPin=ESC0136&SingleRecord=True (accessed October 17, 2013).
"Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health." Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health. Conlaw, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Lewin, Tamar. "Nancy Cruzan Dies, Outlived by a Debate Over the Right to Die." New York Times 27 Dec. 1990: n. pag. Print.

This court case brought a lot of attention to other facets of the refusal of healthcare. Policies about the medical assisted suicide have been debated in relation to this case. Not many people were healthy that the state gained such power from this ruling to interfere in what many believe to be a family's personal decision. Many aren't comfortable with having to gain state permission to let go of a loved one who can't give the word for themselves.
human life." (Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health)
The case also helped to generate support for the Congressional passage of the Patient Self-Determination Act.It was effective November 1991, when hospitals and nursing homes that receive Medicaid or Medicare funds must give patients written information about advance directives, explaining what right-to-die options are available under their state law. Most states now have laws providing a way for people to make known, in advance, their wishes about medical treatment. (
Impact (How does this ruling affect American life today?)

Purdy, Elizabeth. "right to die." In Schultz, David. Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2005. (Updated 2006.) American History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?
ItemID=WE52&iPin=ESC0136&SingleRecord=True (accessed October 17, 2013).
"Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health." Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health. Conlaw, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.

Aftermath (What otherThis court cases citedcase brought a lot of attention to other facets of the refusal of healthcare. Policies about the medical assisted suicide have been debated in relation to this case. Not many people were healthy that the state gained such power from this case?) ruling to interfere in what many believe to be a family's personal decision. Many aren't comfortable with having to gain state permission to let go of a loved one who can't give the word for themselves.
The meaning and completion of her life should be controlled by persons who have her best interests at heart -- not by a state legislature concerned only with the "preservation of human life." (
Impact (How does this ruling affect American life today?)

This case went to the Supreme Court because of the accident of Nancy Cruzan, who received serious brain damage form a car crash and wound up in a vegetative state. Her family wanted to take her off life support, claiming that they had had a conversation with Nancy before where she said she wouldn't want to exist in that way. But the state said that their evidence for their decision wasn't enough to warrant pulling the plug. Nancy's parents then took it up with the courts. (Commentary on 1990)
The courts ruled that a competent person may make the decision for an incompetent person. They said that this competent person needs to provide the court with evidence that the patient wishes to die. If there is not enough evidence, the states were free to choose to allow either the continuation or termination of life support. (Purdy 1)
Reviewed by Mr. Midora

Russell, Rose. "End-of-life Planning Helps Patient, Family." OH Blade 4 Mar. 2012: n. pag. Print.
"Commentary on 1990." The Constitution and Supreme Court. Woodbridge, CT: Primary Source Media, 1999. American Journey. U.S. History In Context. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.
Purdy, Elizabeth. "right to die." In Schultz, David. Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2005. (Updated 2006.) American History Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?
ItemID=WE52&iPin=ESC0136&SingleRecord=True (accessed October 17, 2013).

This case was about whether or not people in a comatose state have the right to live or die. There was the question of how much evidence needs to be obtained to pull the plug on someone. The family who wanted the plug pulled needed to have proof that patient did no want to live in a vegetative state. People were arguing about whether or not the state had a right to interfere with what many thought was a family's personal choice. The state argued that someone should represent the rights of the patient. (Russel 1).
This case went to the Supreme Court because of the accident of Nancy Cruzan, who received serious brain damage form a car crash and wound up in a vegetative state. Her family wanted to take her off life support, claiming that they had had a conversation with Nancy before where she said she wouldn't want to exist in that way. But the state said that their evidence for their decision wasn't enough to warrant pulling the plug. Nancy's parents then took it up with the courts. (Commentary on 1990)
What wasThe courts ruled that a competent person may make the Ruling anddecision for an incompetent person. They said that this competent person needs to provide the reactioncourt with evidence that the patient wishes to it?die. If there is not enough evidence, the states were free to choose to allow either the continuation or termination of life support. (Purdy 1)