In Re: Elsie M. Bender

J-S46032-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
IN RE: ELSIE M. BENDER : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
Petition for the Appointment of a :
Guardian of the Person and Estate :
Of Elsie M. Bender, an Alleged :
Incapacitated Person :
:
: No. 304 MDA 2014
Appeal from the entered on Order of February 8, 2014,
in the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County
-517
BEFORE: SHOGAN, LAZARUS and MUSMANNO, JJ:
MEMORANDUM BY MUSMANNO, J.: FILED AUGUST 20, 2014
adjudicating her an incapacitated person, and confirming the appointment of
guardian for the person and estate of Bender. We affirm.
he relevant history
underlying the instant appeal, which we incorporate herein by reference.
-5.
On appeal, Bender presents the following claims for our review:
xpressed
by a mentally competent adult to either refuse, forgo or ignore a
medical treatment regimen, even if that refusal or forbearance
may lead to her further injury or death?
Brief of Appellant at 2.
J-S46032-14
incapacitated person. Id. at 7-8. Bender asserts that this case is about
competent adult, whether to assume the risk of personally managing her
disease, or whether the court has the power to take away that right and
Id. at 8. Bender argues that, contrary to the
Id. (emphasis omitted).
Citing In Re: Estate of Border, 68 A.3d 946 (Pa. Super. 2013), Bender
claims that a competent adult has the absolute right to refuse treatment.
Brief of Appellant at 9.
administration of insulin, but being forced to administer insulin under the
direction and control of others. Id. at 10. She objects to nurses having
control over decisions regarding the amount and timing of her insulin
injections. Id. at 10-11. Bender states that she has no dependents, and
her right to self-determination is not outweighed by the interest of the state
in preserving her life. Id. at 14. Finally, Bender advises that she has no
intention of committing suicide. Id. at 15.
A person is presumed to be mentally competent; incapacity must be
proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re Hyman, 811 A.2d 605, 608
competency case is based on an abuse of discretion standard, recognizing,
-2-
J-S46032-14
of course, that the trial court had the opportunity to observe all of the
witnesses, including, as here, the allegedly incapacitated Id.
finding of mental incompetency is not to be sustained simply if there is any
evidence of such incompetency[,] but only where the evidence is
Id. Once
an individual has been found incapacitated and in need of guardianship
to serve, granting limited or plenary powers consistent with the
incapacitated Estate of Haertsch, 649 A.2d 719, 720 (Pa.
Super. 1994).
adjudication, which is supported in
4/21/14, at 3-
multiple hospitalizations resulting from her diabetes, her diagnosis of non-
specific dementia affecting short-
a
Bender is not refusing treatment. See id. at 3-
findings are supported in the record, and its legal conclusions are sound.
Accordingly, we affirm on the ba
regard to the claim raised by Bender.
Order affirmed.
Lazarus, J., concurs in the result.
-3-
J-S46032-14
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 8/20/2014
-4-
Circulated 07/25/2014 02:48 PM
Circulated 07/25/2014 02:48 PM
Circulated 07/25/2014 02:48 PM
Circulated 07/25/2014 02:48 PM
Circulated 07/25/2014 02:48 PM