|
This website was
conceived and designed to serve as a comprehensive source of information
about the landmark California case of Conservatorship of Wendland.
The website was founded during the pendency of the case.
Robert Wendland
died on July 17, 2001, but the Supreme Court proceeded to rule, given
that the case raised, in the Court's words, "important issues about
the fundamental rights of incompetent conservatees to privacy and life,
and the corresponding limitations on conservators’ power to withhold
life-sustaining treatment."
Interpreting
California law in light of the relevant provisions of the California
Constitution, the Supreme Court ruled that "a conservator may not
withhold artificial nutrition and hydration from such a person absent
clear and convincing evidence the conservator’s decision is in
accordance with either the conservatee’s own wishes or best interest."
Read the decision.
Reactions to
the decision:
|
Rose
Wendland:
"I
hope that nothing ever happens to any of the justices’ families
because you know that old saying.
‘What goes around comes around.’”

"Those justices truly do not get it."

"They
needed to go see Robert."
Note:
The Decision reveals that the justices watched 6
videotapes of Robert's therapy sessions.
|
Florence Wendland:
"Robert's not here, but if he
were, he'd be as pleased as we are."

"I knew all along that
the ruling would be in Robert's favor."

"The door is always
open." Commenting
on whether or not her fractured family can
ever heal in the aftermath of this momentous battle.
|
|
Katie Wendland:
(Robert's daughter)
“To
even ask questions about his ability to think or make decisions is
ridiculous and I don’t think the justices understood that.”
|
Debra Hofer:
(Robert's sister)
"Because of this ruling, Robert
did not die in vain."
|
|
Lawrence J.
Nelson:
(Rose's attorney)
"It's the end of the
line for this battle."
Commenting on whether or not an appeal to the
U.S. Supreme Court on
Rose's behalf is being contemplated.
"Your wishes, your values, the things you cared most about in life, maybe once those are lost, maybe life has no value. I think this opinion shows a profound disrespect for that."
Emphasis added.
James
Braden
(Attorney appointed by the
court to represent Robert) "What
do I really think? I think that we lost this case today."May
30, 2001 ~~ immediately following oral argument before the Supreme Court
"I think it's fortuitous that he's passed on."
"What they are
concluding is that it's [the court's] job to err on the side of keeping a
guy alive. They are just legislating."
|
Janie
Hickok Siess:
(Florence's attorney)
"The Third District
Court of Appeal began its February 2000 decision with "[t]his is
the hardest case." This wasn't a hard case at all. To
me, this case always presented an issue easily resolved. What Rose
Wendland contemplated -- the removal of Robert's feeding tube -- was
barbaric and horrific. So I have never been able to understand
people who characterized the decision the jurists were called upon to
make as "agonizing" or "difficult." The
correct answer was, to me, always clear, unequivocal, and not
even worthy of debate. The
decision rendered by the Supreme Court is indeed Robert's legacy --- and it is a legacy of life.
That's truly something to be thankful for and proud of."
Read
Siess' entire statement
Dana
Cody (Executive
Director, Life Legal Defense Foundation) "We
were elated by the decision because it will save the lives of many
similarly situated individuals."
|
Even though the case is
now concluded, this website will remain as an archive of information about
the six-year battle which culminated in the Supreme Court's decision in
favor of life.
Contact the site owners
Some
graphics courtesy of
|
|
CONTENTS:
Media coverage of the Ca. Supreme Court decision
Robert's memorial service
The Legal Arguments
Trial Court
Appellate Court
Supreme Court
Comments
From the Wendland children
From the medical experts
From the disability community
What actually happens to a patient whose feeding tube is removed?
Wendland in the Media:
2001 2000
(the appellate decision) 1999 1998 1997 (trial court ruling:
"Wendland to
live")
Links to other sites:
Life Legal Defense Foundation
Not Dead Yet
International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force
Compassionate Healthcare Network
The Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation
Read about the courageous fight waged by Terri's parents to save her life 
|