Texas Futility Law Is Less Fair than Capital Punishment

Last month, Fort Worth Star Telegram editorial writer Cynthia M. Allen compared the cases of Tinslee Lewis and Rodney Reed. 

Lewis is the subject of a medical futility conflict at Cook Children's Hospital. Clinicians want to withdraw her life-sustaining treatment they judge non-beneficial. Her mother objects. Reed is a convicted murderer scheduled for execution. He objects, claiming he is innocent.

In both cases a clinician plans to hasten the death of an individual over their objections or over the objections of their authorized decision maker. But notice key differences in the process used to reach the decision in each case.

In Reed's case, the decision was reached only after (a) exhaustive hearings, (b) before neutral and independent tribunals, (c) conducted in a transparent manner, (d) applying articulated standards. 

In contrast, the decision to withdraw Lewis' life support had none of this. The hospital convened a committee comprised of its own personnel who reached a decision in private using unknown principles. 

Since both cases involve the involuntary taking of life, similar process, oversight, and fairness is warranted.