Martin v. Martin

We granted leave in this case to consider whether life-sustaining treatment in the form of a gastrostomy tube that provides nutritive support should be removed from a conscious patient who is not terminally ill or in a persistent vegetative state, but who suffers from a mixture of cognitive function and communication impairments that make it impossible to evaluate, the extent of his cognitive deficits.1

The trial court determined that there was clear and convincing evidence that, before his injuries, Michael Martin "expressed [a medical] preference to decline life-sustaining medical treatment…