GUARDIANS - DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED PERSON - STERILIZATION OF WARD
In re Lora Faye Wirsing, Developmental Disabled Person ___Mich___(1998), #1044834, 2/3/98
Lora Faye Wirsing was adjudicated to be a developmentally disabled person due to mental retardation in 1981.  Her mother was appointed as her plenary guardian under the Mental Health Code.  In 1986, the guardian petitioned the probate court for authorization to consent to sterilization of the ward for birth control purposes.  The probate court granted such authorization after holding an extensive hearing.  In 1992, the Michigan Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Appeals, "to consider, without limitation, whether probate court judges possess the power to authorize a guardian to consent to the sterilization of a developmentally disabled citizen."  The Court of Appeals reversed the probate court concluding that the probate court did not have the jurisdiction or power to authorize the guardian of the ward to allow the ward's surgical sterilization.  The guardian appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court.

The Michigan Supreme Court stated that the issue they were asked to decide was whether a probate court has the statutory authority to permit the plenary guardian of a ward to consent to a tubal ligation of the ward for birth control purposes.  In reversing the Court of Appeals they concluded that the probate court does have such authority.  They found that the Court of Appeals majority had failed to distinguish between the unfortunate history of forced eugenic sterilization and the separate concept of voluntary sterilization.  The ward was unable to exercise an important right.  She was unable to choose for herself whether she wished to become pregnant.  To deprive her of the option of sterilization would make the choice for her, and make the same choice for each ward, regardless of the circumstances.  The legislature has instead provided a mechanism designed to encourage a guardian, upon concluding it is in the ward's interests to apply to the probate court for an order authorizing the consent for an extraordinary procedure such as sterilization.  The probate court shall then evaluate the case and, if it is persuaded and finds that the procedure is in the ward's best interest, order the authorization of consent.

In summary the Michigan Supreme Court held that the probate court has jurisdiction to hear an application by a guardian for authorization to consent to an extraordinary procedure under MCL 330.1629, MSA 14.800(629) including sterilization, and to order such authorization if it determines the procedure is in the ward's best interests.

Top of Page

Return to Probate Review Menu

Return to Calhoun County Courts Homepage

Last updated 2-12-98

Send your comments, questions and suggestions to Phil Harter at 161 E Michigan Avenue, Battle Creek, Michigan 49014 or e mail to pharter@calhouncountymi.gov