Wrongful Withdrawal of LSMT Does Not Break Chain of Causation

Blogging about the Jada Ruiz Jones case reminded me of another recent decision in a similar case: the Wisconsin criminal case of Michael Below.  The infamous (and poorly-reasoned) Montalvo decision in Wisconsin makes it permissible to withdraw life support from a child only where the child is in a persistent vegetative state.  Only under such circumstances can parents or providers rebut the presumption that continued life is in the best interests of the patient. 





Michael Below beat a small child into a catastrophic but non-vegetative state.  Life support was withdrawn.  The child abuse defendant argued that withdrawing life support inconsistent with the narrow confines of Montalvo was wrongful.  Therefore, he argued, that broke the chain of causation causing the child's death.  He argued that his conviction must be reversed because the jury should have been, but was not, so instructed. 

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed Below’s conviction.  It avoided analysis of the wrongfulness of withdrawing inconsistent with Montalvo because it held that the chain of causation would not have been broken even if it were wrongful.