Sex with comatose wife
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
It sounds like she exhibited willingness, something a comotose person cannot do. It sounds like she would have done the things an interested in sex person would.
That is a whole nother sex act.
I mean think about how irritating it is if your sex partner does not move or falls asleep. But this guy wants to have sex with his wife. Something is wrong with him. And she is not aroused. So he is having sex with an unaruosed person.
If he wants to wake her up he can relate to her in a way that fits her state, which is not aroused.
He can talk to her, carress her arms. Kiss her cheeks.
Next we'll have people reviving people who have nearly drowned by having sex with them.
"Oh, I knew she liked sex and it was the most likely way to get her soul back in her body, officer."
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
did she shows signs of arousal?
I am not saying the guy is a rapist - though he might be - but it's a bad idea and it should be prevented.
actually SA how do you know she didnt exibit arousal?
your making an assumption there, arosal is only partly to do with the brain and very little to do with the concious brain at all. you can quite easerly stimulate someone who is asleep if your willing to try.
oh and just for your infomation a coma just means that they score under 8 on the GCS and nothing more, at 8 you still have some funtioning. its not till you hit GCS 3 that there is no brain activity at all
your making an assumption there, arosal is only partly to do with the brain and very little to do with the concious brain at all. you can quite easerly stimulate someone who is asleep if your willing to try.
oh and just for your infomation a coma just means that they score under 8 on the GCS and nothing more, at 8 you still have some funtioning. its not till you hit GCS 3 that there is no brain activity at all
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
If she showed signs of arousal that would improve his case. But even rape victims can show signs of arousal. I am not really speaking about AFTER he starts doing things. When I mention arousal I really mean as signs of consent prior to the act. If I see my wife lying down I do not assume that the next thing she wants to do or is willing to do is have sex with me - well, sometimes I do, but I listen to her when she sets me straight.
So here is this woman lying there in a not looking for sex state. It is the presumption that it is OK to move her toward sex, even if she, after some stimulation showed some sexual arousal, that bothers me.
Women who are raped can show signs of arousal and this can add to their guilt and shame AS IF this means they somehow were willing.
ok i missunderstood what you were talking about, please go back to my previous post on enduring power of guardianship.
in this document not everything is written down but there is a guiding principle from the parliment contained in the document and that is that the person who holds power of guardianship use there knowlage of the person to decide what THEY would wish in a situation. This is quite different from the medical agent under the concent to medical treatment act which requires a person to act to in there best interests.
the difference works like this:
you have 2 pts in EXACTLY the same condition:
one has filled out medical power of attorney and the other enduring power of guardianship, nither have writen guidelines but left full decision making up to there agents.
these pts were on there way back from being converted to JW but they wernt carrying a no blood products card and as i said they hadnt updated either of there forms to reflect this.
the person with medical power of attorney MUST authorise a blood transfusion if it is in the pts best interests of regaining atonomy
the person with enduring guardianship MUST NOT authorise a blood transfusion because they know that would go against what the pt would want
now her sister holds guardianship and there are only 2 ways in australia for that to be granted, either by a enduring power of guardianship form or by a hearing at the guardianship board.
im going to go out on a limb and say the former because unless there was a reason not to the courts would have granted it to the husband first as next of kin
there for the sister is the ONLY person who can decide wether in that situation the pt would or would not have wished her husband to have congical rights over her unconcious body and NO ONE ELSE, including the courts.
the only time the courts could even take the case is if there is STRONG evidence that the guardian was working against what the pt would wish in that cirumstance and i belive this needs to be physical evidence (like the guardianship form, a diary, letters ect)
there for im quite willing to take the sisters word that this is what she would want at face value
in this document not everything is written down but there is a guiding principle from the parliment contained in the document and that is that the person who holds power of guardianship use there knowlage of the person to decide what THEY would wish in a situation. This is quite different from the medical agent under the concent to medical treatment act which requires a person to act to in there best interests.
the difference works like this:
you have 2 pts in EXACTLY the same condition:
one has filled out medical power of attorney and the other enduring power of guardianship, nither have writen guidelines but left full decision making up to there agents.
these pts were on there way back from being converted to JW but they wernt carrying a no blood products card and as i said they hadnt updated either of there forms to reflect this.
the person with medical power of attorney MUST authorise a blood transfusion if it is in the pts best interests of regaining atonomy
the person with enduring guardianship MUST NOT authorise a blood transfusion because they know that would go against what the pt would want
now her sister holds guardianship and there are only 2 ways in australia for that to be granted, either by a enduring power of guardianship form or by a hearing at the guardianship board.
im going to go out on a limb and say the former because unless there was a reason not to the courts would have granted it to the husband first as next of kin
there for the sister is the ONLY person who can decide wether in that situation the pt would or would not have wished her husband to have congical rights over her unconcious body and NO ONE ELSE, including the courts.
the only time the courts could even take the case is if there is STRONG evidence that the guardian was working against what the pt would wish in that cirumstance and i belive this needs to be physical evidence (like the guardianship form, a diary, letters ect)
there for im quite willing to take the sisters word that this is what she would want at face value
I agree. She should have objected to the police cameras...
The police should have notified the legal guardian, and as long as she was OK with it, there was no law broken...
I agree with the judge's decission. The guy could have waken up her, we never know what kind of stimulus helps.
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
I'm not.
It's not consensual sex. To me it is a crime.
No one can give consent to the crime, or to what, at the very least, may be a crime. I understand that legally the sister may be entitled to make such judgements. I just think it's immoral.
If they had been into S&M - a legal activity, could he slap his wife around? Tie her up and and spit on her?
What if the sister said she likes being dunked under the water?
You get my drift.
I have no problem with such things where consent can be gotten. But things that are a crime without consent should not be under someone's power of guardianship.
I also think the sister is making quite a presumptive leap by assuming she knows her sister would want to have sex - at what for her are random times - while comatose. Do you know anyone you think you could make that call on?
I remember a MD in South Africa gave a woman in a coma sleeping medicine and she woke up for a little while. Interesting really. It obviously we stimulating areas of the brain related to sleep and somehow she came out of her coma but then as the medicine wore off she slide back in. So every day she is given some medicine and has about 1.5 hours of dream like awake state where she comes to and ~1 hour of almost normal consciousness and then she slides back into the coma....
so, you never really know.
your missing my point, with only one exception (that is relating to suicide) a guardian has unlimited power of consent, (which is why when i fill mine out im CHOSING to limit it to medical for the moment) its the most powerful form which can be filled out and is almost impossable to challange, without a challange to the guardian herself there is no crime because there is consent.
for instance there was a thread a while ago about a man with alzimers who was having sex and his son stopped his father seeing the women. now if this man had given his son enduring power of guardianship and it had become activated because the father is legally incapacitated then that is VERY legal unless there was evidence showing that the son was acting against what his fathers stated wishes were.
my mother didnt have quite this much power and her decisions COULD be challanged in the guardianship board because she was granted power of guardianship by the board rather than by the person she had power over
so YES in the situations you described the sister could give conscent because she has as much power as the person she is guardian over.
this power goes WAY above next of kin, parental rights ect, you have APSOLUTE power to make the ANY decision on medical care and lifestyle that the pt could make limited only by 3 things:
1) you cant assist them or alow them to commit suicide
2) you MUST act in the way stated on the form (ie if they say they dont wish blood or they dont want to see person a you cant over rule this unless they still have enough funtioning to show a legitimate amount of consent themselves)
3) you MUST act in what you know the pts would if they were making the decision, which means you MUST know the pt very well.
the rest of the limits have to do with who you can actually apoint as a guardian and how they can be apointed (ie they must not be someone being paid, they must not be someone who is providing proffessional medical care, they must be over 18, they must agree to be your guardian, you must be over 18 ect)
for instance there was a thread a while ago about a man with alzimers who was having sex and his son stopped his father seeing the women. now if this man had given his son enduring power of guardianship and it had become activated because the father is legally incapacitated then that is VERY legal unless there was evidence showing that the son was acting against what his fathers stated wishes were.
my mother didnt have quite this much power and her decisions COULD be challanged in the guardianship board because she was granted power of guardianship by the board rather than by the person she had power over
so YES in the situations you described the sister could give conscent because she has as much power as the person she is guardian over.
this power goes WAY above next of kin, parental rights ect, you have APSOLUTE power to make the ANY decision on medical care and lifestyle that the pt could make limited only by 3 things:
1) you cant assist them or alow them to commit suicide
2) you MUST act in the way stated on the form (ie if they say they dont wish blood or they dont want to see person a you cant over rule this unless they still have enough funtioning to show a legitimate amount of consent themselves)
3) you MUST act in what you know the pts would if they were making the decision, which means you MUST know the pt very well.
the rest of the limits have to do with who you can actually apoint as a guardian and how they can be apointed (ie they must not be someone being paid, they must not be someone who is providing proffessional medical care, they must be over 18, they must agree to be your guardian, you must be over 18 ect)
Legal or not, there's no way anyone could watch this and think it was ok. Imagine him pulling out his false teeth, licking and slobbering on his hand, grinning fiendishly as he rubs it on his liver spotted cock and then grunting and murmuring as he clumsily mounts his wife's lifeless body and befouls it, while farting.
Then cut to her still motionless face as a solitary tear rolls down her cheek.
What a creep.
And the sister saying "he's just expressing his love for her and trying anything he can to wake her up" or whatever is kidding herself. He's just a slovenly sleaze, I bet they didn't even used to have sex before the coma.
Then cut to her still motionless face as a solitary tear rolls down her cheek.
What a creep.
And the sister saying "he's just expressing his love for her and trying anything he can to wake her up" or whatever is kidding herself. He's just a slovenly sleaze, I bet they didn't even used to have sex before the coma.
Asguard:
Makes me wonder.
Guardianship, isn't that like what you have over your children? So if a parent would give someone permission to have sex with their children, they couldn't be charged with rape (of course other charges would be possible)?, since the parent basically has the right to make decisions for their children (because they have guardianship)?
Makes me wonder.
Guardianship, isn't that like what you have over your children? So if a parent would give someone permission to have sex with their children, they couldn't be charged with rape (of course other charges would be possible)?, since the parent basically has the right to make decisions for their children (because they have guardianship)?
NO, guardianship in this sence is WAY more powerful than what a parent has over there children.
parental "rights" are limited. for instance a parent cant have there child sterilised without the concent of the guardianship board. they cant have a girl cirumsised ect
enduring power of guardianship is an unlimited power of autonomy which can only be granted by the person it relates to before they become incapacitated and acts as if they speak with YOUR voice
parental "rights" are limited. for instance a parent cant have there child sterilised without the concent of the guardianship board. they cant have a girl cirumsised ect
enduring power of guardianship is an unlimited power of autonomy which can only be granted by the person it relates to before they become incapacitated and acts as if they speak with YOUR voice
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
I assume that this was directed at me and not the post above. I understand that it might be legal, I am saying I think it immoral. In fact there are protections in some countries' laws against a person themselves giving consent to certain things - certain contracts, for example, cannot be made even if the person is willing to put up with the consequences. I think rape is a moral crime, even if the state does not recognize it as rape or potential rape in this instance. I don't think someone can know what someone else would want to have happen in a coma on this level. Unless you had that precise discussion. And even then....
Not really a parallel. I also think this was likely to have been immoral, but there is a significant different in the kind of control being exerted. Teh father is being prevented from engaging in something he wants to. A woman is potentially being subjected to something she does not want.
Which would be immoral.
How can someone else decide these things?
Well if the woman dies a moral case could be made that for all we know she did not want to continue being subjected to sex at his whim and her body's will to live withered.
I don't know any woman who I know would want to have the person they love and or live with have sex with them while in a coma. I know a lot of women very well. I am quite sure most would not like the idea. How can anyone express this with confidence?
'Oh, I know she'd want sex at for her random moments with her husband.'
Talk about faith in one's own intuitive abilities.
As a judge in a case like this I would grill the shit out of the sister. How does she know this? Has she discussed this issue with the husband? Who initiated those conversations? By what decision making process did she arrive at the notion that this is what her sister would have wanted? Does she know anyone else who would want this? What was unique abuot her sister that makes her so sure this is what she would want?
Bells
Staff member
Dear God!
Hell just froze over.
I actually agree with Lou on something.:bawl:
I agree, I don't know how anyone could think this was somehow 'ok' or acceptable. What kind of sick bastard rapes his wife or anyone while she's in a coma?
And no Asguard. I doubt any court would accept a document where you state your spouse could have sex with you while you are in a coma and unable to consent to it at the time of the act.