{"id":329825,"date":"2025-04-20T11:31:14","date_gmt":"2025-04-20T16:31:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=329825"},"modified":"2025-04-17T15:36:51","modified_gmt":"2025-04-17T20:36:51","slug":"simons-law-resuscitates-parental-rights-medically-vulnerable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/simons-law-resuscitates-parental-rights-medically-vulnerable\/","title":{"rendered":"Simon’s Law resuscitates parental rights for medically vulnerable children"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this guest post are solely those of the guest author.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Hospitals across our nation are permeated with a Nazi-style eugenics approach to medical care, which increasingly discriminates against differently-abled children by blatantly disregarding parental rights to make informed decisions concerning the administration of life-sustaining care. While both passive and active euthanasia were once unheard of, it is now perfectly legal in most states for a doctor to unilaterally decide that a parent’s precious child is not worthy of life, instructing medical staff to withhold resuscitative measures by placing a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order in a minor child\u2019s medical chart \u2014\u00a0with no effort to obtain parents’ explicit informed consent.<\/span><\/p>\n

In a society that idolizes “<\/span>choice”<\/span>\u2014<\/span><\/i> from \u201cyour way right away\u201d fast food to a culture of so-called \u201creproductive freedom\u201d \u2014 one would assume that a decision to choose life<\/em> with full interventions would be readily accepted and honored. <\/span>However, going against \u201cexpert\u201d medical recommendations by <\/span>choosing <\/span><\/i>life-sustaining care for children <\/span>believed <\/span><\/i>to be cognitively impaired (due to their <\/span>apparent or anticipated <\/span>inability to communicate sufficiently) requires parents’ constant vigilance, education, and advocacy.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

This is because doctors are acting within the authority of their facility\u2019s <\/span>futility policy<\/b> to forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitative (CPR) measures \u2014 and even delay, withhold, or deny the administration of life-sustaining nutrition, hydration, and oxygen to children who are deemed “incompatible with life” by supposed \u201cevidence-based scientific consensus.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

No matter when or why life-sustaining care is necessitated, every parent<\/em> should be outraged to know that a complete stranger could be making critical life or death medical decisions for their cherished children behind their backs. These are difficult and complex decisions with grave ramifications resting squarely on the shoulders of parents. Thus, parents’ right to decide what is best for their beloved child’s medical care should be held in the highest regard.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Medically Murdered<\/b><\/p>\n

Simon Crosier<\/span> was born in Missouri in 2010 with repairable congenital anomalies. Once a diagnosis of intellectual disability was added, it was noticeably accompanied by a significant reduction in the quality of medical care administered.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

Less than three months later, Simon experienced cardiopulmonary arrest and his parents pleaded with NICU staff to intervene.\u00a0 Yet, to the Crosiers\u2019 shock and dismay, neither Simon\u2019s blaring monitor alarms nor his panicking parents compelled any medical personnel to spring into action or initiate a<\/span> \u201ccode blue\u201d<\/span> resuscitation.<\/span><\/p>\n

It wasn\u2019t until one of Simon\u2019s nurses remorsefully confessed that medical staff had been prohibited<\/em> from yielding to the Crosiers\u2019 frantic pleas for resuscitation, that Simon’s parents investigated further. The nurse insisted that they closely examine Simon\u2019s medical records \u2014 which revealed a doctor-instituted<\/em> DNR. They also discovered that the evident reduction in medical care quality callously included systematic starvation<\/em> and the administration of contraindicated medication with the intention<\/em> of suppressing Simon\u2019s respiratory drive.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

But the most shocking revelation of all was that <\/span>the Crosiers’ experience<\/span> was <\/span>not<\/strong> an isolated incident<\/a>!<\/span><\/p>\n

A Providential Encounter<\/b><\/p>\n

Three weeks after Simon\u2019s death, his mother, Sheryl Crosier, began pouring her heart and grief into writing, “<\/span>I Am Not a Syndrome–My Name is Simon<\/span><\/a>.” The publication of this book led to media interviews and speaking engagements \u2014 one of which resulted in a providential encounter with Bill Kidd, who was later elected to Missouri\u2019s House of Representatives and drafted the very first version of Simon\u2019s Law. <\/span><\/p>\n

Rep. Kidd introduced Simon’s Law on the fifth anniversary of the exact day and time<\/em> that Simon passed from this life.<\/span><\/p>\n

The primary objective of Simon\u2019s Law is to restore healthcare equity and parental rights in decisions relating to life-sustaining care <\/span>(based on the presumption that the continuation of life is<\/em> in the minor\u2019s best interest)<\/span>,<\/span><\/i> by stopping<\/strong> doctors from instituting DNRs without the <\/span>(uncoerced)<\/span> written informed consent of parents.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

Scott & Sheryl Crosier, with sponsor Kansas Rep. Bill Rhiley (center), at NACL<\/p><\/div>\n

This includes a requirement to aid in the smooth and speedy access of alternative opinions and to cooperatively facilitate a seamless life-sustaining transfer to a different facility. Furthermore, transparency is required on any existing policies involving resuscitation or life-sustaining measures.<\/span><\/p>\n

Simon\u2019s Law Enacted<\/b><\/p>\n

While the journey of legislation does not always run smoothly, progress is being made<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n