"... and who agitatedly told nursing home staff members that she had heard noises that made her uncomfortable. Ms. Schoneman testified that she was not certain the noises had been sexual."
Mr. Rayhons testified that he recalled brief instructions to limit “sexual activity” with his wife made during a conference at the nursing home on May 15. At the trial, Mr. Rayhons testified that he considered “sexual activity” to be intercourse.
Henry Rayhons is the 78-year-old man who was acquitted of sexually assaulting his wife — who had Alzheimer's disease but was always happy to see him and would initiate sexual play — "She would reach in my pants and fondle me sometimes.”
He told the prosecutor, “I always assumed that if somebody asks for something, they have the capacity” to consent.
The link goes to the NYT. One of the comments:
People should choose very carefully who they want as their health proxies or legal guardians. It seems that the husband in this case had very little control regarding his wife's care. It's disturbing to read that even the nursing home had more control and could mandate where the husband could take his wife outside of the nursing home.
The woman had chosen one of her daughters as her health proxy.
Posts
35 comments:
I'm a little unclear on the principle.
Perhaps what we have, here, is a corollary to the rule that advises us never to sleep with crazy.
Sounds like his stepdaughters have an issue with him, and
Mrs. Rayhons was taken to a hospital and examined for sexual assault.
That is really sad, and I have to think potentially upsetting for the poor woman, much more so than what seems to have been loving sexual contact between her and her husband.
That poor man.
Republican politician and democrat persecutor (I was attempting prosecutor but auto correct got it right), who even attempted to move trial to a location with a higher democrat population.
Longtime Republican politician, Democrat prosecutor. Republican forced to withdraw from the last election to defend himself from the charges.
Hmmm.
Is the Wisconsin disease spreading to neighboring states?
The underlying issue is not partisan. If someone is unable to consent, you do not have permission for sex. At least in societies where people are not chattel.
Some things and some people probably don't need to be prosecuted.
If I could not afford a nursing home with a private room for my invalid spouse, I would just shoot them right in the forehead. Bam!
With a .38, the bullet doesn't even come out the back of the head, and there is minimal blood. Death is instantaneous.
If I was on the jury, that case would have been lost in less than 10 seconds, and we would be at Popeye's eating chicken strips.
"The underlying issue is not partisan. If someone is unable to consent, you do not have permission for sex."
You sound like good candidate for the California legislature.
If someone has Alzheimers and indicates a desire for sex, or even cuddling and touching, you would ban this.
Nice to know.
What would happen if the two were single and lovers?
Do singles have any rights at all in Amerika?
If someone is unable to consent, you do not have permission for sex. At least in societies where people are not chattel.
This principle comes from where? How do you get it?
Consent laws are for underaged girls, the idea being that they're overmatched by a persuasive older male's blandishments.
Why does this matter? Because the older guy wants a one-night stand, and the young girl thinks she's getting a romance and a relationship. She's too young to figure out what happens long-term.
Hence the assumption that the young girl can't give consent.
The Alzheimer's patient though is working very short term. She wants sex now. She's married to the guy. She's not going to regret the decision later.
Consent applies only in the sense that she wants sex as opposed to not wanting it.
That's all the consent she needs.
The underlying issue is not partisan. If someone is unable to consent, you do not have permission for sex.
I understand that she have her daughter medical power of attorney, so the consent was technically there, however--
I wonder which, to a potentially frightened and confused elderly woman, would feel more like a nonconsensual, rapey experience: a rape kit in a hospital, or lovingly touching her husband.
The hospital exam part bothers me.
Often I'm off to work before my wife gets up and I give her a kiss while she is sleeping.
She never gave me consent, and she is unable to give consent (being unconscious) and prior consent (like staying with me for 24 years) doesn't count....
Is that rape?
Guess we're seeing another unintended consequence of well-meaning legislature.
Back before gay marriage was recognized here, a friend with Early Onset Alzheimers made damn sure that his partner had power of attorney and was recognized as his healthcare proxy. Both families were supportive, luckily, but lived far away. Made a difficult turn in life so much easier.
In a Perfect World, I guess we could just leave it to families to Do the Right Thing. Unfortunately, in the Real World, this isn't always the case. Hate how the daughters seem to be using their mother as a pawn against their stepfather.
The underlying issue is not partisan. If someone is unable to consent, you do not have permission for sex. At least in societies where people are not chattel.
There's no evidence that they had sex.
And nice to know that the handicapped, when they are lucid, are not able to do things because you think they are wrong.
Was Chisholm the prosecutor in this case too?
Michael K says :If someone has Alzheimers and indicates a desire for sex, or even cuddling and touching, you would ban this.
Try reading. Nothing about cuddling or touching. If an "indication of desire for sex" from an Alzheimers patient is all it takes to pass your consent test, you're a bad candidate for a nursing home job.
rhardin says: Consent laws are for underaged girls.
Some specific ones are based on age of consent. How about over-age girls who are passed-out drunk. Or drugged. Nothing for them if they have no memories and therefore don't regret the decision later?
monkeyboy asks : Is that rape? No.
"Try reading. Nothing about cuddling or touching."
I did and even read a bit between the lines. You sound like a Puritan who would ban any contact without stepwise consent. Hence my endorsement of you for the California legislature. Same instincts.
No, just against the presumption that consent to sex at one time is consent always. Like after dementia prevents rational choice. Like when a thin curtain is all that's between 80+ year old roommates.
Hence my non-endorsement for you in a nursing home. Same instincts.
You know, at the beginning of my mom's dementia she was certainly able to give consent. If my father or anyone else did something she didn't like, believe me, you heard about it immediately. She used to yell at pretty much anyone who annoyed her in the moment.
But by the end, her speech function was very poor, and she wasn't able to articulate her feelings because she was at that late stage of the disease. So if this woman was happy to see her husband and reached out for him, then leave the poor guy alone.
At my mom's dementia unit, there was one male patient there who was very "handsy" with many of the women patients. He'd reach out for whoever was sitting next to him during the group activities and start rubbing her leg and say things like "how do you like this baby". Some of them seemed to enjoy it but the staff usually re-directed him pretty quickly. My children found it all highly amusing.
And IHMMP, you are absolutely correct. Every time my Mom spent time in the emergency room or hospital (two broken hips, numerous other incidents) her decline seemed to accelerate. Being in a hospital setting was very disturbing for her and just having blood drawn or a catheter inserted was traumatic.
And while I have much respect for nurses, in my experience, some of them seem to have trouble understanding the limitations of dementia patients. I saw more than one get frustrated when my mom would not cooperate.
"The underlying issue is not partisan. If someone is unable to consent, you do not have permission for sex. At least in societies where people are not chattel."
Married adults are not allowed to engage in sexual relations unless they're certified by the state to meet certain criteria, and they're required to follow certain procedures the state has established. Or one or both of you go to jail.
Apparently in your society people are chattel, after all. The state's chattel.
This is something that should never have been in a courtroom.
And it wouldn't have been, had daughter-dearest not acted to get it there.
Dementia is a range of diseases, one of which is Alzheimer's. My mom died last week of a rarer form of dementia that left her unable to see, stand/walk, or swallow ... but completely mentally capable.
Only in the last days with morphine for pain did she confuse anyone and was unable to correct all te details my Dad got wrong in his stories.
Dementia is a range of disorders, treating them all as equivalent to the final stages of Alzheimer's is wrong headed and ignorant of the disease.
One test question asks if a retarded girl who is 18, comes up to you in the park and begins playing with your urinator:
a) Do you let her finish.
b) Do you stop her
The answer will depend on how retarded you think she really is. A little retarded, meh, a lot retarded, ack, or how about medium retarded. hmm.
Maybe any level of retarded is the legal definition, but then people like Bill Clinton splooshed a retarded Jewish girl, and he's still running around.
It's a conundrum...
jimbino said...
Do singles have any rights at all in Amerika?
Of course you do. You have the right to remain silent...
"Ignorance is Bliss said...
Of course you do. You have the right to remain silent..."
I think you mean: Shut up or else! No consulting even your lawyer.
But close enough, right?
"Like when a thin curtain is all that's between 80+ year old roommates.
Hence my non-endorsement for you in a nursing home. Same instincts."
These weren't "roommates" They were husband and wife. Would you recommend turning the care of all dementia patients to the state ? Exclude family ? The roommate doesn't remember exactly what happened. Since the wife was in a "memory unit," some people (not you of course) would be reluctant to use her (the roommate) as a witness in a criminal trial.
Prosecutorial discretion?
Lesson: Never talk to the police, never talk to an investigator, the State is not your friend, never assume a prosecutor will act in good faith or be reasonable. Thanks, law enforcement.
It is always a bit depressing to be reminded that the sex Puritans (and their hard little totalitarian psyches) are always with us (even at Althouse).
It is always a bit depressing to be reminded that the sex Puritans (and their hard little totalitarian psyches) are always with us (even at Althouse).
I thought this had all been sorted out in The Notebook.
Getting married in the first place is evidence of dementia, especially on the part of the man.
This case is one of a demented guy having sex with a demented gal.
As in the case of abortion, the threshold question is: who has the right to decide or judge?
And the answer is: NOT the State.
Some people just find the whole idea of seniors having sex as revolting. "My GAWD what are they thinking? It is just not DIGNIFIED!"
The need for touch and closeness from loved ones stays even into muddled old age. Why is it we all coo and awe to see how the ancient in nursing homes light up and respond with puppies and kittens, then recoil if a spouse cuddles and kisses?
This case should have never been brought to court. The persecutor should be whipped.
jimbino said...
What would happen if the two were single and lovers?
Do singles have any rights at all in Amerika?
******
If it had been two males in the situation you described- the prosecutor would charge anyone who complained about the sex with harassment.
Post a Comment