Parents battle over life of brain-damaged daughter
Lauren Richardson, 23, has been in a persistent vegetative state since taking an overdose of heroin in August 2006
In a case with parallels to the 2005 uproar over Terri Schiavo, a Newark father is fighting a court order that could allow the removal of a feeding tube and end the life of his brain-damaged daughter.
“She’s committed no crime and doesn’t deserve to have this death imposed on her,” said Randy Richardson, 52, on Wednesday.
According to court records, Lauren Marie Richardson, 23, is in a persistent vegetative state following a heroin overdose in August 2006. She was pregnant at the time and was kept alive at Christiana Hospital — with feeding tubes and a breathing machine — to allow her to give birth, which she successfully did in February 2007 to a healthy baby girl.
Late last week, a court awarded guardianship of Lauren Richardson to her mother, Edith Towers , who maintains her daughter did not wish to live this way and seeks to end artificial life support measures.
Randy Richardson has appealed a ruling by Delaware Court of Chancery Master Sam Glasscock III, putting any action on hold until the court’s chancellor or a vice chancellor reviews the ruling, a process that will take at least three months.
Once that ruling is made, one side or the other may be able to appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court.
While the case is similar to the one involving Schiavo, legal experts said that matter did not set any precedents Delaware has to follow.
“That was a case about Florida law,” said Drewry Fennell, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware.
In the Schiavo case, her husband, Michael Schiavo, waged a seven-year legal battle to end life support for her, stating that she did not want to live by artificial means. Schiavo’s parents opposed removing a feeding tube. A lower court and later the Florida Supreme Court sided with Michael Schiavo. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately declined to intervene and in March 2005, the tube was removed. Terri Schiavo, 41, died 13 days later.
Lauren Richardson, a Glasgow High School graduate, did not leave a “living will” stating her desires in such a situation, or use a mechanism in the Delaware law called an Advanced Health Care Directive, a simple form a person can fill out to make their end-of-life wishes clear.
Randy Richardson acknowledges that the daughter he knew before her brain injury is gone. But, he said, she is still alive and responds to him. He said she has made progress since her overdose — she no longer needs a ventilator to breathe — and given more time and therapy that can continue. “We just want to give her a chance,” he said, adding he is not talking about extreme measures.
He also said she should be kept alive for the sake of her 1-year-old daughter, and is concerned Towers, his ex-wife, has not allowed Lauren and her child to see each other.
On Wednesday, Richardson and the Delaware Pro-Life Coalition Inc. released a video of Lauren taken recently at The Arbors, a nursing home near New Castle , where she is receiving treatment. In the video, Lauren appears to respond and react to family members and a dog.
“There is no life support except … a feeding tube,” Richardson said, adding he has been told that with the proper therapy, his daughter could be taught to eat.
He said he would like to take her home and allow her to live out whatever is left of her life with dignity and not have it end in slow starvation with the removal of a feeding tube.
‘A very private situation’
Lauren’s mother declined comment through her attorney William A. Gonser Jr. beyond a brief statement on Wednesday: “This is a very painful, very sad and very private situation and both sides have suffered greatly.”
In court, Towers argued that her daughter told her and others, at the time the Schiavo case was in the news, that she would not want to live that way.
According to court records, Towers recalled her daughter saying, “Don’t ever leave me hooked up to life support. I would not want that. I think it is horrible. I think that I do not ever want to be kept on life support if the doctors say there’s no hope.”
Towers testified that she then promised her daughter she would not and made her do the same if she ever ended up in that situation.
An uncle also testified, according to the ruling, that in a separate conversation Lauren told him such an existence would be “gross” and she wouldn’t want to live like that with others caring for her.
Richardson, who divorced from Towers when their daughter was young, disputes the accounts, saying Lauren was living with him at the time and expressed no such wish.
The court ruling indicates Lauren moved around among relatives.
Richardson said his former wife never mentioned his daughter’s statements about life support and the Schiavo case before she filed for guardianship.
He also said his daughter made clear other end-of-life matters — like her wish to be an organ donor — but did not write a “living will” or state her opposition to life-support measures in her journals. Richardson also said his daughter had expressed anti-abortion sentiments, as in the case of her then-unborn daughter when she was encouraged to get an abortion.
Towers has temporary custody of Lauren’s child, but Richardson said a second guardianship case is pending on that issue.
A difficult decision
In his Jan. 24 decision, Glasscock wrote that he believes both parents were fit to be Lauren’s guardian and both love her and wish for what is best for her. However, he found that testimony presented by Lauren’s mother was “clear and convincing” about her wishes and the evidence “presented by Lauren’s father does not change this conclusion.”
As for Lauren herself, Glasscock wrote, “All the medical evidence supplied by the physicians — by the independent neurologist and by Lauren’s own doctors — is in agreement: Lauren is not in a coma but is in a persistent vegetative state. A large portion of her brain was destroyed by a lack of oxygen following a heroin overdose of August 2006. She is unable to communicate or experience consciousness. Her continued existence is dependent upon tube feeding and hydration. … No improvement in her condition can be expected.”
Richardson said he disagrees and, in addition to filing an appeal, reached out to several groups for assistance, including the Delaware Pro-Life Coalition, which organized a prayer vigil Wednesday outside The Arbors. About 25 people turned out, some carrying pictures of Lauren.
Richardson said the vigil was not protesting The Arbors, where he believes his daughter is being treated well.
Fennell, of the Delaware ACLU, said it is a sad situation for all involved but the system appears to be working the way it was intended.
Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania , agreed. Delaware is a state that does not require living wills or other written documents to allow for someone to be removed from life support, he said. It is among the states that allow verbal testimony from friends and family about what the patient would have wanted.
“There will be a scramble with each parent locking horns, trying to find friends and relatives who she said things to about this issue,” he said.
Caplan said the ruling giving guardianship to the mother makes it tougher for the father to make his case.
“The burden will be on the father to prove the mother is not emotionally or psychologically qualified to act in the best interest of the daughter, and reflect her true values,” he said.
Outside The Arbors on Wednesday, Richardson said he waited 17 months before saying anything publicly. “We didn’t want to do this. It is not in my nature to speak to newspeople. … But if I don’t, who will? I love my daughter.” http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080131/NEWS/801310382
Lauren Richardson. Lauren. Lauren Marie Richardson. Not just a name. Lauren. She is a person. A living and breathing person. She feels emotion. She loves her family. She knows she has a daughter. She also knows that she has not seen her. If you look at her, you have no doubt that she is there, she may not talk, but she is there. Two weeks ago, after a court battle in Delaware between Lauren’s mother, Edith Towers, and Lauren’s father, Randy Richardson, Master Chancery Glasscock III, decided Lauren’s mother Edith Towers should be guardian of Lauren. Edith Towers wants to remove Lauren’s feeding tube, her father does not.
For the record, I would like to state that I do not believe this to be a Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice issue. I do not believe it to be a Conservative vs. Liberal issue. I do not believe it to be a Christian vs. Non-Christian issue. I do not plan to write as if it is. I have noticed many people speaking poorly of the “pro-lifers” and vice versa. It seems that many people believe that just because people do not share the same beliefs, they cannot agree on any one thing. This is not the case. For the people that do not know Lauren or her friends and family, but have invested time in this issue, I send you many thanks. This is not an issue of just one family in just one state. It is something that everyone should know, and everyone should be outraged.
Obviously Lauren’s family is outraged. The American public should be as well. This seems to be a topic that makes so many people uncomfortable. It can be hard to deal with your own mortality. The verdict delieverd by Master Chancery Glasscock III was delievered due to testimony given by Lauren’s mother and Lauren’s uncle. They claim that Lauren stated that she would not want to live “like that,” and that living like that would be “gross.” These statements were allegedly made when the Terri Schiavo case was being televised.
If these statements were made, which this most certainly is in question, how many people have made statements like that? I know I have. But until this happened I never thought about what “like that” meant. Where is the line for you? When would it be okay for them to let you go and when would you want your family to decide that there is hope? Do you trust that your family would know the difference? Is there someone that you would trust to decide between the two? If you made the statement when you were on drugs do you want people to decide you should not live based on that? If you made it 5 years ago, before you were sober and before you had a child, would you want people to remove your feeding tube. When you said ‘like that,” did you mean on a bunch of machines? Were you aware that in some states having a feeding tube is considered life support? I personally did not. Maybe a lot of people do. Surely people with families that would need to be taken care of in the event of a tragic accident do, but people in their teens and twenties? Single people with no one to take care of when they are gone? Even people WITH families are possibly out of the loop. If a doctor said that there was a chance, a good chance, that you would be able to feed yourself again with therapy, would you want your feeding tube removed? If a judge did not let that doctor testify, would you be angry with a verdict that was going to allow someone to remove your feeding tube? What if a judge said before the hearing even started that he already had an opinion on the case? If you could swallow, but people would not be allowed to give you food or water after the tube is removed, how would you feel about that. It would be illegal for people to give you food or water even though you could swallow. People are born with disabilities that require feeding tubes or other people to feed them every single day… Should these people be starved? What makes it okay for a person born “like that,” to live, but not a person who becomes disabled later in life? Neither of them can speak for themselves. But someone can just claim that a person told them once during a commercial break “I would not want to live with artificial nutrition and hydration.” The possibilites are endless for what could possibly change your mind… Of course for some it is easier to think that the right thing is being done for Lauren, instead of facing the fact that our society is so uncomfortable with the disabled that they would just as soon have someone deprived of food or water then deal with it. Let’s try an experiment, go a few days without food and water and see how you feel. It took Terri Schiavo 13 days to die a slow and very painful death. 13 days. What does not make sense to me is that in the United States of America we cannot help a person with a terminal illness who is in a tremendous amount of pain kill themselves. A person who CAN speak for themselves. We cannot give them drugs that would make it pain free and fast. But we can remove a feeding tube from someone who cannot speak for themselves, and watch them die a horrific death.
Let’s talk about Terri Schiavo for a minute. I know this case, Lauren’s case, seems similar. In some ways it is. In a lot of ways it is not. Lauren has made more progress in 17 months then Terri did in 15 years. I am not saying that what happened to Terri Schiavo was in any way right, I am justing stating facts. And no one has said that Lauren would be a “miracle” and just one day be her old self again. No one has said that. However, not being her old self does not mean that the person she is and the person she will become with the right therapy is someone expendable.
I am also aware that a lot of people are not at all familiar with the information in regards to Lauren. And there is some information that cannot be talked about due to legal reasons. But these facts I can give you.
Lauren overdosed on heroin in August of 2006. She had been hiding from her mother that week because she was pregnant and her mother was trying to force her to have an abortion. That day she was packing and getting ready because the next day she moving in with her father and step-mother. She had asked them for help with the baby. When she was taken to the hospital she was having seizures and was in a coma. Her mother and father were informed and arrived to the hospital shortly thereafter. They were both informed that things did not look good, but there were a lot of tests that could not be performed because of the pregnancy. They were told that they could take her off the life support, but that they had to decide within the next few weeks because after that the fetus would be viable and the hospital would not legally be able to take her off until the baby was born. Once again they were told that things did not look good for Lauren. Both parents agreed, after multiple meetings with doctors, that they would keep her on life support. Not once was it ever mentioned that Lauren would not want to live this way. Not once.
After about two months Lauren slowly started to come out of her coma. Doctors still believed that things did not look good for her. Her father, step-mother, aunts, uncles, cousins, and her grandmother were with her constantly. She had her daughter in February of 2007. Her mother, due only to timing, got custody of Lauren’s daughter. The custody for her is currently in court, although many hearings have been postponed. Reasons: unknown. Once Lauren had her little girl, a little girl that she has never seen, Lauren’s mother came forth with information that Lauren had said she would never want to live “like that.” Lauren was moved to Arbors nursing home and the court battle started.
Her doctor said Lauren would never move her body, she does. He said she would never respond, she does. He said she would never breathe on her own, she does. He said she was essentially a “vegetable” and therefore could not feel any pain, but amazingly enough prescribed morphine for pain. She cringes and pulls away if someone does anything to make her feel discomfort. He also said she does not feel emotion (what with her brain not working and all) but she cries, especially when her family sings to her. She smiles if someone says something funny. If yous saw her, you would know how she feels about her daughter. I cannot say for sure whether or not he said that she would never be able to swallow. If he didn’t I am sure it is because he did not think that that would come up… But she can swallow.
Lauren’s G.A.L. is Jason C. Powell. He has done nothing to advocate for her life, only for her death. He has put a restraining order on Randy due to the video given to the media… Funny how the video contradicts so much of what her doctor testified to. No one is allowed to take pictures of her now. Obviously video is not allowed. The court has also decided that there had to be an approved list of people that could visit her. And of course they have to sign a statement saying that they will not do anything to invade Lauren’s privacy. Jason C. Powell wants people to believe that Lauren is so brain-damaged that her life is worth nothing, but he wants to make sure she has her privacy? These are people, the only people, advocating for her life. Amazing. Just a few days ago the court transcripts which were public record, were sealed quickly. If Master Chancery Glasscock III is so confident in his decision why does he want the records sealed? Is it because it is on record that he had an opinion on the case, before the hearing started? Or is it because it is on record that Master Chancery Glasscock III did not want this to be lengthy, so he cut down Randy’s witness list.
Why is it that Jason C. Powell, a person that once again is supposed to be looking out for Lauren, did not let the doctors who wanted to see Lauren because they thought she had improved and stated that she could continue to do so. Why did he not let them give her treatments that have been PROVEN to help people declared PVS? Including a girl who was in a coma for 6 years after a heroin overdose? Are these decisions you would want made when you could not speak for yourself???
I know this has been really long. If you read all of it I thank you. I encourage everyone to go to http://www.lifeforlauren.org This includes people who perhaps do not agree with the statements I am making. I would especially love for you to visit that website. There are stories there that prove that this is not a decision that should be made on hearsay alone. Stories that would blow your mind. Lauren is a human being, she is a person with thoughts and emotions and she is ALIVE. Why in the world does anyone think it is okay to take that away from her?