Maryland
How Cruzan v. Missouri Dept. of Health applies in Maryland: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Constitutional Law.
Maryland law recognizes the principles established in Cruzan, particularly regarding the right to refuse medical treatment and the role of clear and convincing evidence for surrogate decision-making. Maryland courts emphasize the need for advance directives to clarify the intentions of patients in similar circumstances.
In Maryland, individuals have the constitutional right to refuse medical treatment, supported by laws requiring clear and convincing evidence to ascertain a patient's wishes when they are unable to communicate.
The court reaffirmed the right of individuals to refuse life-sustaining treatment under state law.
Established the need for advance directives in medical decision-making, consistent with Cruzan principles.
Emphasized the necessity of evidence of a patient's prior wishes when determining the withdrawal of medical treatment.
Maryland's approach aligns with the federal standard set by Cruzan, where both emphasize the importance of a patient's autonomy and the necessity of clear evidence reflecting patient intent. However, Maryland further augments this requirement with statutory regimes governing living wills and advance directives.
Understanding the implications of Cruzan in the context of Maryland's statutory framework and case law is crucial for the Maryland bar exam, particularly concerning patient rights and medical decision-making.