Honoring Old Love vs Medical Tyranny

[1PeaceMaker]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other...able-to-consent-to-sex/ar-AAawO2C?ocid=HPCDHP

Seems from this developing court case, in some states if you want to be able to continue possessing the right to have sex as an older person, you might have to get cooperation from the medical community. But...

What if you wrote a living will, that, in case of senility, you still consent to sex with your partner unless you orally withdraw that consent?

Yes should still mean yes even if you are old.

I think people should try to protect that right.

People should think it's wonderful that those two elderly love birds still have passion, and it's probably what keeps Donna alive in that cold place. What will happen now - now that her soul mate is taken from her? Why must he spend his last years on earth rotting behind bars for doing what he and his love have always done willingly and joyfully?

 

[Rusha]

From the article:

In late March of last year, Donna Lou Rayhons moved to a nursing home in Garner. The clashes over her care built until a meeting in May during which Henry Rayhons was informed of his wife's inability to consent. According to court documents, Henry Rayhons entered his wife's room about a week later, pulled the curtains around her bed and a roommate heard noises that suggested sexual activity. As Rayhons left, he dropped undergarments in a laundry basket.

lain:

There is no *honoring of old love* when one of the parties doesn't know what is going on around them.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

From the article:

In late March of last year, Donna Lou Rayhons moved to a nursing home in Garner. The clashes over her care built until a meeting in May during which Henry Rayhons was informed of his wife's inability to consent. According to court documents, Henry Rayhons entered his wife's room about a week later, pulled the curtains around her bed and a roommate heard noises that suggested sexual activity. As Rayhons left, he dropped undergarments in a laundry basket.

lain:

There is no *honoring of old love* when one of the parties doesn't know what is going on around them.

I believe you're right. This is more like rape.

 

[Rusha]

I believe you're right. This is more like rape.

:thumb: Exactly.

 

[Granite]

Yes, well, this is absolutely revolting.

 

[The Barbarian]

I suppose I'm going to have to leave some kind of written evidence that if I ever get to that state, I'd still be happy to have sex with my wife.

I wouldn't have done what this person did, though, unless my wife had made it clear earlier that is what she wanted. I think his wife's outlook prior to her losing the ability to consent would be most important.

If she gave prior consent, this would be no different than a spouse initiating affection while the other was still asleep, and waking them in that way.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

Mutual consent between two people is required each and every time a sexual act is performed. Otherwise, it is rape.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

From the article:

In late March of last year, Donna Lou Rayhons moved to a nursing home in Garner. The clashes over her care built until a meeting in May during which Henry Rayhons was informed of his wife's inability to consent. According to court documents, Henry Rayhons entered his wife's room about a week later, pulled the curtains around her bed and a roommate heard noises that suggested sexual activity. As Rayhons left, he dropped undergarments in a laundry basket.

Should I give you a hard time for all the expressive text manipulation, and imply it means what you previously indicated that it meant when I used it, that your point is weak? Or do you want to take that back?

Besides, what is your point? That because some guy in a nursing home paid by ageist, biased grown children who didn't like their stepdad disagreed with their love?

If the question was whether she invited him and had a was a happy participant this would be a shut case already. She obviously loved and knew him when they got together or they wouldn't have had to use a fallible medical opinion about her capacity to argue against her ability consent.

We are only discussing a consenting adult who wanted that person in her bed. She married him, too, as if we didn't have enough evidence with the way she treated him.

lain:

There is no *honoring of old love* when one of the parties doesn't know what is going on around them.

You don't know if she was lucid then. You'd have to prove she wasn't. And lucidity is not the only factor. You can approve of things during incapacitation that are quite invasive but which are for your good.

Them having passion obviously and provably is for her health and well being as much as surgery for a sleeping patient is.

If you argue if she was confused --- she wouldn't invite his attentions or resist his advances.

Example "Who are you? Don't touch me, you stranger!" vs "Come over here, you..." *smooch*

Seriously, if she didn't recognize that she wanted him, she would have been rejecting him, not smooching him! Her husband! LOL

 

[Granite]

PeaceMaker: You have got serious, serious issues.

 

[elohiym]

For those who want all the details before they cast judgement, this is a good article:

The state crime lab completed Donna Rayhons' rape test Nov. 20. It took six months to process because of a backlog at the lab. The exam showed no evidence of seminal fluid or DNA other than hers on swabs of her mouth and vagina. A stain in her underwear "indicated the presence of seminal fluid; however, no spermatozoa were microscopically identified," the two-page lab report said.

FACT: She didn't have sexual intercourse with her husband that night. Ergo, there was no rape!

His attorney, Joel Yunek of Mason City, said in a court filing that what Henry Rayhons told agent Reger is "vague" unless "snippets of the interview are selectively taken out of context." In a June 5 interview with a different state investigator, Schoneman revised her earlier words. She said she heard whispering, not sexual noises, although she worried for Donna Rayhons' safety.

FACT: The "witness" revised her statement. Therefore, the affidavit that led to the arrest contained false and misleading information.

NOTE: How her underwear "indicated the presence of seminal fluid" yet did not have evidence of sperm could be due to a "false positive" on the test the crime lab uses. One test labs use, and I think they used it here, is the p30 test. It tests for prostate specific antigen. That can be positive from female urine (also cancer and other things). For that reason, the p30 is considered to be a presumptive test.

To show Donna Rayhons lacked that capability, prosecutors may need something more than the BIMS memory tests referenced in court filings, said Wehry, the Vermont nursing home regulator. She said Donna Rayhons' doctors should have completed a broader assessment that gauged her ability to solve problems and make judgments, including judgments about sex.

"Does she recognize her husband?" Wehry said. "Does she recognize him as her beloved even if she doesn't know his name? Is she pleased to see him? Has she been interviewed with him present and asked whether she likes his company, whether she wants to have sex?"

It's possible that prosecutors possess a more comprehensive assessment. No such report has yet been produced as evidence, nor is there a record of one being shown to Henry Rayhons before the alleged assault, attorney Yunek said.

"This was not a rape," said Daniel Reingold, president and chief executive of the Hebrew Home at Riverdale, N.Y., a nursing home that has a policy of encouraging consensual sex among its residents, including those with dementia.

"It sounds like they had a really beautiful relationship," Reingold said after reviewing the case at the request of Bloomberg News. "And the law is depriving a couple of having a marital relationship. It is so big-brother-like, so intrusive, so second-guessing of what a person is experiencing in a dementia state."

 

[Granite]

A politician thinking he's above the law: Gee, who woulda thunk it?

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

There's another factor here not being discussed. As a woman ages, her body changes in significant ways. What was once pleasurable may no longer be if care is not taken by her significant other. That's an important distinction for me. If one person is enjoying the act, and the other person is in pain, how is that not rape? I would go on to say this goes for heterosexual and homosexual acts.

I thoroughly enjoy foreplay with my wife to such an extent that intercourse becomes secondary, or a climax to our mutual lovemaking. My wife's pleasure is my first priority and I give myself totally to it. With our mutual health problems, this is not near often enough. [If this is too graphic for the readers of TOL, I will delete this paragraph. Just PM me. I don't wish to offend anyone.]

 

[elohiym]

There is no *honoring of old love* when one of the parties doesn't know what is going on around them.

Sex and dementia.

 

[shagster01]

. . .to be able to continue possessing the right to have sex as an older person. . .

I'm putting my fingers in my ears and saying, "la la la," now.

 

[Granite]

They ruled her unable to give informed consent. Whatever happened to erring on the side of caution?:nono:

 

[elohiym]

A politician thinking he's above the law: Gee, who woulda thunk it?

Why don't you learn about sex and dementia before you open your mouth? I'm trying to save you some embarrassment.

 

[Granite]

Why don't you learn about sex and dementia before you open your mouth? I'm trying to save you some embarrassment.

And why don't you stop being such a pretentious waste of time?

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

I'm putting my fingers in my ears and saying, "la la la," now.

You still have eyes to read. If they offend thee pluck them out.

 

[shagster01]

Sex and dementia.

Form the article:

Depending on which parts of the person's brain have been damaged, and what medication they are taking, a person with dementia may (but may not) experience any of the following: •more interest in sex •less interest, or no interest, in sex

Wow, I wonder how much money they spent on that research to discover that a person may, or may not, want more more sex, less sex, or no sex.

I certainly couldn't have drawn that conclusion myself. . .

 

[1PeaceMaker]

I suppose I'm going to have to leave some kind of written evidence that if I ever get to that state, I'd still be happy to have sex with my wife.

I wouldn't have done what this person did, though, unless my wife had made it clear earlier that is what she wanted. I think his wife's outlook prior to her losing the ability to consent would be most important.

If she gave prior consent, this would be no different than a spouse initiating affection while the other was still asleep, and waking them in that way.

And don't forget, if you don't want the annual flu shot, you better put that in writing as well. I think it couldn't hurt. I'd rather die of the flu at that age than put up with their ridiculous, backwards and costly pain-giving aluminum injections every year.