McFall v. Shimp Curran v. Bosze Jennifer Ganesh Law Values and Public Policy STS 2400 McFall v. Shimp Plaintiff- McFall needs a transplant Defendant- Shimp has high compatibility rating Shimp refuses to go through with procedure McFall files an injunction against Shimp Plaintiff’s Case Plaintiff’s Defense- King Edward I. St. Westminster 2, 13 Ed., I, c 24 This Court derives its power from this statute because this court is a successor of the English Courts of Chancery Defendant’s Case - Common law no legal compulsion to give aid or to take action to save another human being Judgment “For our law to compel the defendant to submit to an intrusion of his body would change every concept and principle upon which our society is founded. To do so would defeat the sanctity of the individual.....” Appeals Appealed and went to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court S.C. agreed with lower court’s decision This case set precedent for many other casesAngela Carder Story Curran v. Bosze Jean Pierre- 12 year old with rare form of leukemia 2 younger siblings that might be a match for a bone marrow transplant Mother of the twins refuse to grant permission for testing Plaintiff’s Defense Best Interest Standard- what is the best choice for the minors? Substituted Judgment- what would the children do if they were not minors? Defendant’s Defense Curran believes that the tests and actual donation may harm the twins both physically and emotionally Risks outweighs the benefits Judgment Petition denied No concrete evidence that the twins would want to go through with the bone marrow transplant Appeal Went to Illinois Supreme Court Decision of Circuit Court was upheld Questions? Comments? References http://imc.gsm.com/demos/dddemo/consult/statel aw/cases_il.htm http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/lawmcfall.htm l http://lawlibrary.ucdavis.edu/LAWLIB/June99/016 1.html http://www.lib.niu.edu/ipo/ii910326.html http://www.nocirc.org/articles/prescott3.html