Estate of Dorone, In re
| Decision Date | 02 December 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 117,117 |
| Citation | 517 Pa. 3,534 A.2d 452 |
| Parties | In re ESTATE OF Darrell DORONE. Appeal of William DORON and Carol Doron, Parents and Natural Guardians of Darrell Dorone, a/k/a Darrell Doron. E.D. Appeal 1986. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Arthur K. Hoffman, Philadelphia, for Amicus--Hosp. Assoc. of Pa.
Before NIX, C.J., and LARSEN, FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT, HUTCHINSON, ZAPPALA and PAPADAKOS, JJ.
This case comes before us on appeal from a Superior Court affirmation of two orders of the Orphans' Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County, 502 A.2d 1271. Those orders appointed a temporary guardian of an unconscious patient for the purpose of consenting to the administration of blood transfusions. The issue before us is whether during the hearings for the appointment of a temporary guardian the hearing judge abused his discretion in failing to receive testimony from the patient's parents, fiancee, or his presiding minister, regarding the patient's religious beliefs.
In responding to this issue we must bear in mind the procedural context which generated it. What we are reviewing is the appropriateness of an order appointing a temporary guardian. The appointment of such a guardian is specifically authorized by statute, the relevant section of which provides as follows.
Notwithstanding the provision of section 5511 of this code (relating to petition and hearing), the court, upon petition and a hearing at which good cause is shown, may appoint a temporary guardian or guardians of the person or estate of a person alleged to be incompetent, when it appears that a failure to make such appointment will result in irreparable harm to the person or estate of the alleged incompetent. The provisions of section 5511 of this code shall be applicable to such proceedings, except that only such notice of the petition and hearing shall be required as shall appear to the court to be feasible in the circumstances, and need not be given at such times or to such persons as would be required by the provisions of section 5511 of this code in a proceeding for the appointment of a guardian. A temporary guardian so appointed for the person or estate of an alleged incompetent shall only have and be subject to such powers, duties and liabilities and serve for such time as the court shall direct in its decree.
20 Pa.C.S. § 5513. 1 A petition for the appointment of a guardian may be made by "any person interested in the alleged incompetent's welfare." 20 Pa.C.S § 5511(a). 2 As is evident from section 5513 the requirements for a hearing for the appointment of a temporary guardian are limited:
only such notice of the petition and hearing shall be required as shall appear to the court to be feasible in the circumstances, and need not be given at such times or to such persons as would be required by the provisions of section 5511 of their code in a proceeding for the appointment of a guardian. 3
20 Pa.C.S. § 5513 (emphasis added).
Regarding the criterion to be utilized in choosing a temporary guardian, the presiding judge must be convinced that the person chosen will be "interested in the alleged incompetent's welfare," 20 Pa.C.S. § 5511(a), and will act in the best interest of the incompetent. In re Voshake's Guardianship, 125 Pa.Super. 98, 189 A. 753 (1937). The ultimate selection of a guardian lies within the sound discretion of the hearing judge, and an appellate court will not reverse that decision except upon an abuse of that discretion. Heidtman Estate, 452 Pa. 441, 306 A.2d 878 (1973); Coulter Estate, 406 Pa. 402, 178 A.2d 742 (1962); Voshake's Guardianship, supra.
With these rules in mind we now turn to an examination of the facts of this case. The patient, Darrell Dorone, a twenty-two (22) 4 year old Jehovah's Witness, was seriously injured in an automobile accident in Warren County, New Jersey, on July 31, 1984. He was unconscious when he was taken to a nearby hospital. There his spleen was removed. 5
On August 1, 1984, he was transferred by helicopter to the Lehigh Valley Hospital Center (L.V.H.C.). His personal effects were left behind. On arrival he was diagnosed as suffering from acute subdural hematoma with brain contusion. His treating physician was of the opinion that without an immediate cranial operation Darrell's death was imminent. The hospital authorities sought and were given consent to the operation by William and Carol Doron, Darrell's parents. However, the parents withheld consent to blood transfusions. They based their refusal on religious beliefs.
With respondent on the table awaiting the surgical procedure, his treating physician and the hospital administration petitioned the Orphans' Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County for authority to administer blood during the operation, if in the opinion of the surgeon it were to become medically necessary to do so. A hearing was convened and conducted by telephone during which the court received the testimony of the surgeon and the hospital administrator. The appellants did not testify, but their refusal to consent to the administration of blood was presented to the court in the testimony of the surgeon. The court found that the patient would die without the operation; and that even with the operation, in case of complications he would die without a transfusion in any event. The court appointed the hospital administrator as temporary guardian to consent if necessary. The operation proceeded. When during that procedure Mr. Dorone's condition began to deteriorate, blood was given with the guardian's consent.
Two days later, Mr. Dorone was diagnosed as suffering from a blood clot. In the opinion of the surgeon the immediate removal of the clot was necessary. Again permission to operate was sought and granted by Darrell's parents. Again they withheld consent to the administration of blood. The hospital petitioned the court for an emergency hearing, which was conducted by telephone because of the circumstances. During the hearing the surgeon testified that Darrell's condition was critical. It was his opinion that surgical removal of the clot was an immediate necessity, and that delay would cause additional damage to healthy brain tissue because of the swelling and other effects of the clot. His request to administer blood was based on the following factors: the loss of blood generally incident to any surgical procedure; removal of a blood clot makes the patient peculiarly susceptible to hemmorage and without blood replacement,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chalkey v. Roush
...to file exceptions will be excused"), citing In re Estate of Dorone, 349 Pa.Super. 59, 502 A.2d 1271, 1274 (1985),affirmed,517 Pa. 3, 534 A.2d 452 (1987). Based on our review of the cases we have already discussed, we therefore conclude that dismissal would be improper.6 As a result, we mus......
-
Fiori, In re
...permitted to refuse medical treatment, even at the risk of death. Conroy, 98 N.J. at 350, 486 A.2d at 1223, 1225. Cf. In re Estate of Dorone, 517 Pa. 3, 534 A.2d 452 (1987) (blood transfusion given to patient in emergency life-threatening situation despite his previous declaration of religi......
-
In re AC
...Conroy, supra, 98 N.J. at 343-45, 486 A.2d at 1229-1230; In re Dorone, 349 Pa.Super. 59, 68, 502 A.2d 1271, 1278 (1985), aff'd, 517 Pa. 3, 534 A.2d 452 (1987); see also 1982 PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION REPORT, supra, at 179. The court should also consider previous decisions of the patient concer......
-
In re Duran
...in In Re Estate of Dorone, 349 Pa.Super. 59, 502 A.2d 1271 (1985), appeal granted, 511 Pa. 609, 515 A.2d 893 (1986), affirmed, 517 Pa. 3, 534 A.2d 452 (1987), this Court There is a large class of other Jehovah's Witnesses, and it is reasonably likely that at least some of these will be invo......
-
Religious Healing in the Courts: the Liberties and Liabilities of Patients, Parents, and Healers
...adult patient despite parent's religious objections), overruled by In re Conroy, 486 A.2d 1209 (N.J. 1985); In re Estate of Dorone, 534 A.2d 452 (Pa. 1987) (ordering blood transfusion for unconscious patient despite parent's objection on grounds that patient was a Jehovah's 122. In In re Ge......
-
In re Estate of Darrell Dorone.
...consent to such a procedure. When the superior court affirmed the orders, the patient's parents appealed. In re Estate of Darrell Dorone, 534 A.2d 452 (Pa. The issue of cardinal importance before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was whether the hearing judge abused his discretion during the h......
-
Werth v. Taylor.
...necessary to avert death. The appellate court cited as support a decision by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in In re Estate of Dorone, 517 Pa. 3, 534 A.2d 452 (1987). That decision directed physicians to perform against the parents' wishes a blood transfusion for a twenty-two year old Je......