TOTALLY GEEKED!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Sex, Dementia and a Husband on Trial at Age 78


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Sex, Dementia and a Husband on Trial at Age 78
Permalink  
 


Sex, Dementia and a Husband on Trial at Age 78

 

 

Henry Rayhons at the grave of his wife, Donna Lou Rayhons, an Alzheimer’s patient who died last year. © Daniel Acker/Bloomberg, via Getty Images Henry Rayhons at the grave of his wife, Donna Lou Rayhons, an Alzheimer’s patient who died last year.

There is no question that Donna Lou Rayhons had severe Alzheimer’s.

In the days before being placed in a nursing home in Garner, Iowa, last year, Mrs. Rayhons, 78, could not recall her daughters’ names or how to eat a hamburger. One day, she tried to wash her hands in the toilet of a restaurant bathroom.

But another question has become the crux of an extraordinary criminal case unfolding this week in an Iowa courtroom: Was Mrs. Rayhons able to consent to sex with her husband?

Henry Rayhons, 78, has been charged with third-degree felony sexual abuse, accused of having sex with his wife in a nursing home on May 23, 2014, eight days after staff members there told him they believed she was mentally unable to agree to sex.

It is rare, possibly unprecedented, for such circumstances to prompt criminal charges. Mr. Rayhons, a nine-term Republican state legislator, decided not to seek another term after his arrest.

Mr. Rayhons is accused of sexually abusing his wife, shown in a photograph with him. © Daniel Acker/Bloomberg, via Getty Images Mr. Rayhons is accused of sexually abusing his wife, shown in a photograph with him.

There is no allegation that Mrs. Rayhons resisted or showed signs of abuse. And it is widely agreed that the Rayhonses had a loving, affectionate relationship, having married in 2007 after each had been widowed. They met while singing in a church choir.

The case pivots on longstanding medical and ethical concerns that will become only more pressing as the population ages and rates of dementia rise. How can anyone determine whether a person with dementia can say yes to sex? Who has the right to decide?

“It really is a huge issue, and somewhere down the line we’re going to have to confront it,” said Derek Beeston, a social work professor at Staffordshire University in England who has studied sex and dementia.

Mrs. Rayhons, who died in August, was placed in the Concord Care Center in March 2014, soon after one of her daughters, Linda Dunshee, was called to pick her up at the Iowa State Capitol, where Mr. Rayhons was working. Ms. Dunshee found her mother wearing lingerie and unzipped pants under her coat.

Details about the case come from interviews, court records and news media reports. At the care center, Mr. Rayhons, a corn and soybean farmer, visited his wife morning and evening, sometimes praying the rosary by her bed. But documents and interviews suggest he opposed some staff recommendations, including limiting outside trips, like attending a friend’s funeral at an unfamiliar church.

Michelle Dornbier, a social worker at the center, and Dr. John Boedeker, Mrs. Rayhons’s family doctor, testified on Friday about her scores on a test to assess memory and orientation. In May 2014, she scored zero, unable to recall the words “sock,” “bed” and “blue.”

But Ms. Dornbier acknowledged that Mrs. Rayhons “was always pleased to see Henry.” And Dr. Boedeker acknowledged that “intimacy is beneficial for dementia patients.”

Ms. Dornbier testified that the Concord Care Center allows consensual sex between residents. But she said that on May 15, 2014, family members including Mr. Rayhons were given a “care plan” establishing simple routines for Mrs. Rayhons, including limiting outings with Mr. Rayhons, mostly to church on Sunday.

Ms. Dornbier, prompted by what she called concerns from Mrs. Rayhons’s daughter Suzan Brunes, that Mr. Rayhons was engaging in inappropriate sexual contact, wrote at the bottom of the plan: “Given Donna’s cognitive state, do you feel she is able to give consent for any sexual activity?”

The center’s doctor, Dr. John Brady, wrote: “No.” Mr. Rayhons was told the recommendation against having sex and indicated it would not be a problem, according to Ms. Dunshee.

On May 23, Mrs. Rayhons was moved from a private room to a double. That evening, her roommate reported that Mr. Rayhons drew the curtain around his wife’s bed and that sexual noises were heard. Later a security camera recorded Mr. Rayhons dropping his wife’s underwear into a hallway laundry bag after leaving her room.

Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

In an interview with a state investigator, Mr. Rayhons said that his wife still enjoyed and occasionally asked for sex, but he did not remember having sex in the shared room that night. The investigator implied, apparently erroneously, to Mr. Rayhons that cameras had recorded sexual activity, which seemed to persuade him to acknowledge having had relations.

Mrs. Rayhons was moved to another facility run by the same company, which has a special dementia unit. Her daughter limited Mr. Rayhons’s visits. He was arrested soon after she died.

The case is being tried by the Iowa attorney general’s office because of Mr. Rayhons’s prominence in the county. The attorney general’s office, the Concord Care Home, Mrs. Rayhons’s daughters and their lawyer declined to comment while the case is pending.

Sex is one of the most ambiguous areas in the scientific understanding of Alzheimer’s. While there are established methods of measuring memory, reasoning and the ability to dress, bathe and balance checkbooks, no widely used method exists for assessing the ability to consent to intimate relations.

One obstacle: Dementia’s symptoms fluctuate. Patients may be relatively lucid in the morning and significantly impaired in the afternoon.

“What may be appropriate on one day may not be appropriate the next week, or at a different point that same day,” said Ann Christine Frankowski, associate director of the Center for Aging Studies at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.

Yet desire may survive long after names and faces are forgotten. Physical intimacy can benefit dementia patients, experts say, calming agitation, easing loneliness and possibly aiding physical health.

“Touch is one of the last pleasures we lose,” said Daniel Reingold, chief executive of the Hebrew Home at Riverdale, in the Bronx, which pioneered a “sexual rights policy” for residents in 1995. “So much of aging and so much of being in a long-term care facility is about loss, loss of independence, loss of friends, loss of ability to use your body. Why would we want to diminish that?”

Several experts described intimacy as an almost primal instinct, like eating. “Wanting to have sex is a bit like being hungry or being thirsty,” Dr. Beeston said.

Unless people are in a “vegetative” state, said Patricia M. Speck, a forensic nurse at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Nursing, “there’s a lot of things they might not be able to do like money and time and recognition of children, but they have the capacity for self-determination and intimate relationships.”

Gayle Doll, director of the Center on Aging at Kansas State University, said a person with dementia might not assent with words, but with body language or facial expression.

“In a nursing home, it doesn’t happen like ‘wham bam thank you ma’am,’ ” she said. “The staff, they know the cues, they know what’s happening in the person’s relationship.”

Dr. Doll trains facility workers in practices like knocking before entering residents’ rooms. One home even put mattresses on the floor to provide a safe place for residents who might otherwise fall out of bed.

Aging baby boomers “are going to want to have sex, and they don’t want to play bingo,” Dr. Frankowski said. Yet many nursing homes have no sexual intimacy policy.

“Most of them are embarrassed by sex,” Dr. Speck said. “Older persons are not considered to be sexual.”

An exception is the Hebrew Home, where staff members are asked to assess consent with nonverbal cues, to note a resident’s mood after sex, and to pose questions like: “Do you enjoy sexual contact?,” “Do you know what it means to have sex?,” and “What would you do if you wanted it to stop?”

“I’ve definitely had family members who have gotten very aggressive opposing our position in encouraging intimacy,” Mr. Reingold said. But staff members will tell family members, “Look, Dad is happy. Why would you want to deprive him of this?”

In other facilities, though, Dr. Frankowski said: “I find staff members saying ‘It’s wrong. Old people don’t do this, they had spouses in the past, they have family member that would be concerned.’ ”

“Sometimes they will say to the resident, ‘Do you really want your daughter to know about this?’ And the staff members do really and truly believe they are doing the right thing.”

Dementia can cause some people to become sexually disinhibited, so facilities like Hebrew Home monitor patients to prevent situations that threaten or make other patients uncomfortable, such as patients masturbating in public rooms.

Experts say adult children whose parents are in second or third marriages may have more difficulty condoning sexual activity with the newer spouse, something that may have played a role in Iowa, where Mrs. Rayhons’s daughters and husband disagreed about her care.

During opening arguments last Thursday, the prosecutor, Tyler Buller, said, “On May 23 of last year, Donna Rayhons couldn’t make her own decisions.” He also said seminal fluid corresponding to Mr. Rayhons’s DNA was found on sheets, a quilt and Mrs. Rayhons’s panties.

The defense lawyer, Joel Yunek, said a rape kit found no semen in Mrs. Rayhons’s vagina or signs of tearing. He said Mr. Rayhons had had sex with his wife at the nursing home, but not on May 23.

On Monday, Mr. Yunek asked Dr. Brady if “Donna is happy to see Henry — hugs, smiles, they hold hands, they talk — would that indicate that she is in fact capable at that point of understanding the affection with Henry?” Dr. Brady said no, calling that a “primal response” not indicative of the ability to make informed decisions.

Dr. Alireza Yarahmadi, a neurologist testifying for the prosecution, also disagreed with Mr. Yunek’s contention, saying, “They do have feelings, but they don’t have good judgment.”

Mr. Rayhons may testify this week. His lawyer and his son, Dale, declined to comment, but soon after the arrest, his family issued a statement saying in part: “Accusing a spouse of a crime for continuing a relationship with his spouse in a nursing home seems to us to be incredibly illogical and unnatural, as well as incredibly hurtful.”

 

 

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/sex-dementia-and-a-husband-on-trial-at-age-78/ar-AAaY5rb

 

 



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

WTF? Don't they have real crimes to deal with?

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Status: Offline
Posts: 7536
Date:
Permalink  
 

Since her doctors told him she didn't have the mental capacity to consent, and that he needed to stop, and he did it anyway...that's trouble some to say the least. She is basically the same as a mentally disabled person, and we all acknowledge they don't have the ability to consent. I don't see this as any different. The woman had no mental ability to consent.

__________________

Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite ! 



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

This is heart-breaking on so many levels.

flan

__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:

Since her doctors told him she didn't have the mental capacity to consent, and that he needed to stop, and he did it anyway...that's trouble some to say the least. She is basically the same as a mentally disabled person, and we all acknowledge they don't have the ability to consent. I don't see this as any different. The woman had no mental ability to consent.


 They have been married for how many years?  And she didn't say no?  So what, their marriage is over because one gets alzheimer's?  This is not something that a doctor should even be involved in.  If he was caring for her in their home - this wouldn't even be an issue.  This is more governmental over-interference.  This man has been married to his wife for decades and loves her and wants to be close to her as long as he can.

There are some things people just need to MTOB about.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Status: Offline
Posts: 7536
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.

__________________

Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite ! 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 6573
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

Since her doctors told him she didn't have the mental capacity to consent, and that he needed to stop, and he did it anyway...that's trouble some to say the least. She is basically the same as a mentally disabled person, and we all acknowledge they don't have the ability to consent. I don't see this as any different. The woman had no mental ability to consent.


 They have been married for how many years?  And she didn't say no?  So what, their marriage is over because one gets alzheimer's?  This is not something that a doctor should even be involved in.  If he was caring for her in their home - this wouldn't even be an issue.  This is more governmental over-interference.  This man has been married to his wife for decades and loves her and wants to be close to her as long as he can.

There are some things people just need to MTOB about.


 

(But Ms. Dornbier acknowledged that Mrs. Rayhons “was always pleased to see Henry.” And Dr. Boedeker acknowledged that “intimacy is beneficial for dementia patients.”)

 Absolutely. The doctor they interviewed even said that dementia patients benefit from intimacy.



__________________

“Until I discovered cooking, I was never really interested in anything.”
― Julia Child ―


 

 

 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.


 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Alzheimer's patients can have periods of lucidity and when they have been married for a long time, the spouse is usually the one they DO remember.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

Elderly abuse does exist, so I'm guessing they are erring on the side of caution.

It also sounds like her children had a say in charging him:

Experts say adult children whose parents are in second or third marriages may have more difficulty condoning sexual activity with the newer spouse, something that may have played a role in Iowa, where Mrs. Rayhons’s daughters and husband disagreed about her care.

flan

__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Regular

Status: Offline
Posts: 288
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.


 

While I agree with what you are saying here, LL, they weren't married for decades. They were married in 2007. I really think the daughter is the problem here.



__________________

Well, that's just toady!



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:

Elderly abuse does exist, so I'm guessing they are erring on the side of caution.

It also sounds like her children had a say in charging him:

Experts say adult children whose parents are in second or third marriages may have more difficulty condoning sexual activity with the newer spouse, something that may have played a role in Iowa, where Mrs. Rayhons’s daughters and husband disagreed about her care.

flan


 "Erring on the side of caution" does not put a husband on trial for rape.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Oughttabeworking wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.


 

While I agree with what you are saying here, LL, they weren't married for decades. They were married in 2007. I really think the daughter is the problem here.


 Ahh, I see.  It really doesn't change much, though.  If they married in 2007 and she was still a sexual being who enjoyed sex with her new husband, why does anyone else get to say she wouldn't continue to enjoy it?



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1586
Date:
Permalink  
 


if they can't prove that she did consent then they can't prove that she didn't--seems a rather simple matter--and a private one, between spouses

lord, big brother


__________________

" the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. "--edmund burke

 



Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Status: Offline
Posts: 7536
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Oughttabeworking wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.


 

While I agree with what you are saying here, LL, they weren't married for decades. They were married in 2007. I really think the daughter is the problem here.


 Ahh, I see.  It really doesn't change much, though.  If they married in 2007 and she was still a sexual being who enjoyed sex with her new husband, why does anyone else get to say she wouldn't continue to enjoy it?


 The article says she doesn't know the definition of the word "sock" so she does not have the mental capacity to understand or consent to sex. It's pretty simple. Just because you once did something, and once enjoyed it, and once consented, doesn't mean you always will ad infinitum.  She lacks the mental capacity to understand the actions. Even mentally disabled people claim to "enjoy it" - but society says they cannot consent because of their limited mental capacity. Shoot - 13 year olds will say they consent and enjoy it, but as a society we have said they lack the skills to make an informed decision. Surely this woman, who does not possess the mental ability to define the word "sock" or the word "bed" has as many rights and protections as a teenager or a mentally disabled person (which she is!). 

If this was a stranger who was having sex with her, what would your reaction be? If it was a random person off the street - would that be ok? 



__________________

Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite ! 



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

He lied about having sex with her. Why?

Frankly, it sounds selfish on his part.

flan

__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Oughttabeworking wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.


 

While I agree with what you are saying here, LL, they weren't married for decades. They were married in 2007. I really think the daughter is the problem here.


 Ahh, I see.  It really doesn't change much, though.  If they married in 2007 and she was still a sexual being who enjoyed sex with her new husband, why does anyone else get to say she wouldn't continue to enjoy it?


 How do you know she did?

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Oughttabeworking wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.


 

While I agree with what you are saying here, LL, they weren't married for decades. They were married in 2007. I really think the daughter is the problem here.


 Ahh, I see.  It really doesn't change much, though.  If they married in 2007 and she was still a sexual being who enjoyed sex with her new husband, why does anyone else get to say she wouldn't continue to enjoy it?


 How do you know she did?

flan


 How do you know she didn't?  Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Oughttabeworking wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

 Yes, married people can be raped, but if they have had a loving relationship for decades, do you really think she would consider it rape?  I think there are bigger things to worry about.


 

While I agree with what you are saying here, LL, they weren't married for decades. They were married in 2007. I really think the daughter is the problem here.


 Ahh, I see.  It really doesn't change much, though.  If they married in 2007 and she was still a sexual being who enjoyed sex with her new husband, why does anyone else get to say she wouldn't continue to enjoy it?


 The article says she doesn't know the definition of the word "sock" so she does not have the mental capacity to understand or consent to sex. It's pretty simple. Just because you once did something, and once enjoyed it, and once consented, doesn't mean you always will ad infinitum.  She lacks the mental capacity to understand the actions. Even mentally disabled people claim to "enjoy it" - but society says they cannot consent because of their limited mental capacity. Shoot - 13 year olds will say they consent and enjoy it, but as a society we have said they lack the skills to make an informed decision. Surely this woman, who does not possess the mental ability to define the word "sock" or the word "bed" has as many rights and protections as a teenager or a mentally disabled person (which she is!). 

If this was a stranger who was having sex with her, what would your reaction be? If it was a random person off the street - would that be ok? 


 Of course not.  That is a stupid comparison.  This is her husband - a man she voluntarily married, and whom she has never accused of abuse that we know of.  Can he help her get dressed b/c then he sees her naked and has to touch her.  There are some things that are nobody else's business unless one of the parties makes it so - and one of those things is the marital bed.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

From the OP:

Henry Rayhons, 78, has been charged with third-degree felony sexual abuse, accused of having sex with his wife in a nursing home on May 23, 2014, eight days after staff members there told him they believed she was mentally unable to agree to sex.

On May 23, Mrs. Rayhons was moved from a private room to a double. That evening, her roommate reported that Mr. Rayhons drew the curtain around his wife’s bed and that sexual noises were heard. Later a security camera recorded Mr. Rayhons dropping his wife’s underwear into a hallway laundry bag after leaving her room.

Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

What was the argument on the thread about priests and celibacy? That we were not rutting animals & could practice self-control?

flan

__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 6573
Date:
Permalink  
 

In an interview with a state investigator, Mr. Rayhons said that his wife still enjoyed and occasionally asked for sex, but he did not remember having sex in the shared room that night. The investigator implied, apparently erroneously, to Mr. Rayhons that cameras had recorded sexual activity, which seemed to persuade him to acknowledge having had relations.
flan327 wrote:

He lied about having sex with her. Why?

Frankly, it sounds selfish on his part.

flan


 

He didn't lie, he said he didn't remember , then they lied about having it on tape, so he thought he had just forgotten.

 



__________________

“Until I discovered cooking, I was never really interested in anything.”
― Julia Child ―


 

 

 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 6573
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:

What was the argument on the thread about priests and celibacy? That we were not rutting animals & could practice self-control?

flan


 

 

Having sex with your wife is in no way similar to taking a vow of celibacy and the molesting little boys...sheesh.

 



__________________

“Until I discovered cooking, I was never really interested in anything.”
― Julia Child ―


 

 

 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:

What was the argument on the thread about priests and celibacy? That we were not rutting animals & could practice self-control?

flan


 When you are married, you don't have to when the participants are willing.  So, should nobody with mental illness ever be able to have sex b/c the state thinks they know better?



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is Sasha, too!

Status: Offline
Posts: 6679
Date:
Permalink  
 

I agree that she wasn't able to consent but I don't consider it rape either. The consent is sort of implied if they had a healthy sex life before she was confined to a nursing home. I think he was kind of a jerk but not a rapist.

__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:

From the OP:

Henry Rayhons, 78, has been charged with third-degree felony sexual abuse, accused of having sex with his wife in a nursing home on May 23, 2014, eight days after staff members there told him they believed she was mentally unable to agree to sex.

On May 23, Mrs. Rayhons was moved from a private room to a double. That evening, her roommate reported that Mr. Rayhons drew the curtain around his wife’s bed and that sexual noises were heard. Later a security camera recorded Mr. Rayhons dropping his wife’s underwear into a hallway laundry bag after leaving her room.

Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

flan


 And why the hell do staff members get to control his marital relations because of what they BELIEVE? 

 

This will be dropped.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lexxy wrote:

I agree that she wasn't able to consent but I don't consider it rape either. The consent is sort of implied if they had a healthy sex life before she was confined to a nursing home. I think he was kind of a jerk but not a rapist.


 She may have enjoyed it.  Just because she can't remember stuff doesn't mean she won't enjoy sex.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



My dog name is Sasha, too!

Status: Offline
Posts: 6679
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lexxy wrote:

I agree that she wasn't able to consent but I don't consider it rape either. The consent is sort of implied if they had a healthy sex life before she was confined to a nursing home. I think he was kind of a jerk but not a rapist.


 She may have enjoyed it.  Just because she can't remember stuff doesn't mean she won't enjoy sex.


 She could or he could just be taking care of his needs.  Nobody really knows.  I hope she enjoyed it.



__________________


Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Status: Offline
Posts: 7536
Date:
Permalink  
 

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?

__________________

Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite ! 



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 Because obviously she enjoyed it...no

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:

From the OP:

Henry Rayhons, 78, has been charged with third-degree felony sexual abuse, accused of having sex with his wife in a nursing home on May 23, 2014, eight days after staff members there told him they believed she was mentally unable to agree to sex.

On May 23, Mrs. Rayhons was moved from a private room to a double. That evening, her roommate reported that Mr. Rayhons drew the curtain around his wife’s bed and that sexual noises were heard. Later a security camera recorded Mr. Rayhons dropping his wife’s underwear into a hallway laundry bag after leaving her room.

Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

flan


 And why the hell do staff members get to control his marital relations because of what they BELIEVE? 

 

This will be dropped.


 Then keep her at home.

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 10215
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.


 Pure BS.  There was no rape here.  This is a case of biological children vs. a new spouse for their parent.  If they were his children this wouldnt be an issue.

 

you are also wrong about the mentally disabled.  More than a few mentally disabled persons have won the right to marry, including having sex, in court.



__________________

I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.

 

Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.


 Pure BS.  There was no rape here.  This is a case of biological children vs. a new spouse for their parent.  If they were his children this wouldnt be an issue.

 

you are also wrong about the mentally disabled.  More than a few mentally disabled persons have won the right to marry, including having sex, in court.


 I was hoping you would check in, husker.

Can I ask how you would handle a similar situation?

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 10215
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.



__________________

I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.

 

Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 10215
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.


 Pure BS.  There was no rape here.  This is a case of biological children vs. a new spouse for their parent.  If they were his children this wouldnt be an issue.

 

you are also wrong about the mentally disabled.  More than a few mentally disabled persons have won the right to marry, including having sex, in court.


 I was hoping you would check in, husker.

Can I ask how you would handle a similar situation?

flan


 I'd mind my own business.  They are married.  There is zero evidence of any coercion. It's not rape.  



__________________

I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.

 

Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

huskerbb wrote:
flan327 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.


 Pure BS.  There was no rape here.  This is a case of biological children vs. a new spouse for their parent.  If they were his children this wouldnt be an issue.

 

you are also wrong about the mentally disabled.  More than a few mentally disabled persons have won the right to marry, including having sex, in court.


 I was hoping you would check in, husker.

Can I ask how you would handle a similar situation?

flan


 I'd mind my own business.  They are married.  There is zero evidence of any coercion. It's not rape.  


But the staff felt differently. They saw the patient as the priority. There is no coercion, maybe, but she can't give consent.

flan

 



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Status: Offline
Posts: 7536
Date:
Permalink  
 

huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.



__________________

Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite ! 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 10215
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
flan327 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

Mentally retarded people often don't say no either. They lack the capacity to consent. Just like the woman in the OP. Going by the "she didn't say no" logic, any patient in a coma would be ok to have sex with. Hey - they have been married for years, so it's ok right?! Even married people can be raped.

It's horribly sad. But the doctors told him she lacked the capacity to consent to sex (even married couples have to consent!) and the husband had sex with her anyway. Its not right.


 Pure BS.  There was no rape here.  This is a case of biological children vs. a new spouse for their parent.  If they were his children this wouldnt be an issue.

 

you are also wrong about the mentally disabled.  More than a few mentally disabled persons have won the right to marry, including having sex, in court.


 I was hoping you would check in, husker.

Can I ask how you would handle a similar situation?

flan


 I'd mind my own business.  They are married.  There is zero evidence of any coercion. It's not rape.  


But the staff felt differently. They saw the patient as the priority. There is no coercion, maybe, but she can't give consent.

flan

 


 BS.  They didn't even get involved until one of her daughters started bitching.



__________________

I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.

 

Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

This says a lot:
Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

So they didn't want him to visit his wife's room? That's not up to the staff. He is her guardian. This will be tossed...

__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 10215
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.



__________________

I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.

 

Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.



Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Status: Offline
Posts: 7536
Date:
Permalink  
 

huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.


 I am confident that the fact that she cannot define words like bed, sock, and blue, shows us exactly where she is on that spectrum. She has a negligible IQ at this point. She cannot give consent. 

I am not saying he is a typical rapist. I am sure he means well and is trying desperately to connect with her in any way he can. But he is having sex with a shell of a person at this point. Any reaction on her part is purely a "primal response" according to her doctors. This isn't intimacy. Its a one sided transaction and I can't understand why her husband would want that.

And the fact that he is having sex with her while another person is in the same room, on the other side of the curtain, is sure to make that other person uncomfortable and likely the reason he was asked not to visit her in her room. He is free to visit with her in the common area. 



__________________

Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite ! 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 10215
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.


 I am confident that the fact that she cannot define words like bed, sock, and blue, shows us exactly where she is on that spectrum. She has a negligible IQ at this point. She cannot give consent. 

I am not saying he is a typical rapist. I am sure he means well and is trying desperately to connect with her in any way he can. But he is having sex with a shell of a person at this point. Any reaction on her part is purely a "primal response" according to her doctors. This isn't intimacy. Its a one sided transaction and I can't understand why her husband would want that.

And the fact that he is having sex with her while another person is in the same room, on the other side of the curtain, is sure to make that other person uncomfortable and likely the reason he was asked not to visit her in her room. He is free to visit with her in the common area. 


 Lol!!!  What a load of bull.  Obviously you've never dealt closely with anyone who had dementia.  Human touch and closeness, sexual or not, is very powerful to people in that state.  To dismiss it as simply primal is beyond ignorant.



__________________

I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right.

 

Well, I could agree with you--but then we'd both be wrong.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.


 I am confident that the fact that she cannot define words like bed, sock, and blue, shows us exactly where she is on that spectrum. She has a negligible IQ at this point. She cannot give consent. 

I am not saying he is a typical rapist. I am sure he means well and is trying desperately to connect with her in any way he can. But he is having sex with a shell of a person at this point. Any reaction on her part is purely a "primal response" according to her doctors. This isn't intimacy. Its a one sided transaction and I can't understand why her husband would want that.

And the fact that he is having sex with her while another person is in the same room, on the other side of the curtain, is sure to make that other person uncomfortable and likely the reason he was asked not to visit her in her room. He is free to visit with her in the common area. 


 Who does this?

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ohfour wrote:

This says a lot:
Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

So they didn't want him to visit his wife's room? That's not up to the staff. He is her guardian. This will be tossed...


 Doesn't this say the daughter is now the guardian?

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Hooker

Status: Offline
Posts: 12666
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:

This says a lot:
Soon after, Ms. Brunes successfully petitioned for guardianship of her mother. The petition did not mention sexual activity, but said that Mr. Rayhons disregarded staff members’ recommendations, including that he not visit his wife’s room because of “conflicts with her roommate.”

So they didn't want him to visit his wife's room? That's not up to the staff. He is her guardian. This will be tossed...


 Doesn't this say the daughter is now the guardian?

flan


But he was at the time.  They can't tell him he can't go into her room! 



__________________

America guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcome...



Owl drink to that!

Status: Offline
Posts: 4799
Date:
Permalink  
 

I can't really decide :( but I lean towards letting it happen. Although MM definitely brings in good points.

__________________

Was it a bad day?

Or was it a bad five minutes that you milked all day?



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 6573
Date:
Permalink  
 

huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.


 I am confident that the fact that she cannot define words like bed, sock, and blue, shows us exactly where she is on that spectrum. She has a negligible IQ at this point. She cannot give consent. 

I am not saying he is a typical rapist. I am sure he means well and is trying desperately to connect with her in any way he can. But he is having sex with a shell of a person at this point. Any reaction on her part is purely a "primal response" according to her doctors. This isn't intimacy. Its a one sided transaction and I can't understand why her husband would want that.

And the fact that he is having sex with her while another person is in the same room, on the other side of the curtain, is sure to make that other person uncomfortable and likely the reason he was asked not to visit her in her room. He is free to visit with her in the common area. 


 Lol!!!  What a load of bull.  Obviously you've never dealt closely with anyone who had dementia.  Human touch and closeness, sexual or not, is very powerful to people in that state.  To dismiss it as simply primal is beyond ignorant.


 

"But Ms. Dornbier acknowledged that Mrs. Rayhons “was always pleased to see Henry.” And Dr. Boedeker acknowledged that “intimacy is beneficial for dementia patients.”

 

Proving huskers point.



__________________

“Until I discovered cooking, I was never really interested in anything.”
― Julia Child ―


 

 

 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 6573
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.


 I am confident that the fact that she cannot define words like bed, sock, and blue, shows us exactly where she is on that spectrum. She has a negligible IQ at this point. She cannot give consent. 

I am not saying he is a typical rapist. I am sure he means well and is trying desperately to connect with her in any way he can. But he is having sex with a shell of a person at this point. Any reaction on her part is purely a "primal response" according to her doctors. This isn't intimacy. Its a one sided transaction and I can't understand why her husband would want that.

And the fact that he is having sex with her while another person is in the same room, on the other side of the curtain, is sure to make that other person uncomfortable and likely the reason he was asked not to visit her in her room. He is free to visit with her in the common area. 


 Who does this?

flan


 

"In an interview with a state investigator, Mr. Rayhons said that his wife still enjoyed and occasionally asked for sex, but he did not remember having sex in the shared room that night. The investigator implied, apparently erroneously, to Mr. Rayhons that cameras had recorded sexual activity, which seemed to persuade him to acknowledge having had relations."

 

He may not even have done this according to this paragraph.



-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 14th of April 2015 02:01:00 PM

__________________

“Until I discovered cooking, I was never really interested in anything.”
― Julia Child ―


 

 

 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

flan327 wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:

She lacks the mental capacity to consent according to her doctor -- who examined her and says she doesn't know what the words "sock" or "bed" mean. She cannot consent because she doesn't understand what consent even is!

She does not have the mental capacity to consent. As a society, we have decided that people without the mental capacity to understand the decision making involved with sex cannot have consensual sex. This applies to people not of age, and people with a mental defect of some kind - which applies to the OP. Surely she has as many rights under the law as a 13 year old.

Are you arguing that her doctor is wrong and that she CAN in fact consent, even though she cannot define simple words like sock and bed? Or are you saying that her ability to consent does not matter?


 No.  You are dead wrong.  That issue is FAR from decided and many mentally disabled people have sued, and won,  the right to marry, have boyfriends/girlfriends--and have sex.


 It depends on their level of disability. Surely the people you are referring to, who are mentally disabled and married, can define simple words like sock and bed. This woman cannot. And no. The profoundly mentally disabled, whose care is in the hands of others, are not the ones getting married. The mentally disabled, who are living in a home because they lack the basic skills to care for themselves are NOT being given permission to marry. Those you refer to have more basic life skills than the woman in the OP.


Irrelevant, and, as it happens, you don't know where she might fall on that spectrum, anyway. Who are you to deny her, or anyone the joy of human intimacy?  That's just cruel.  

The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.  There is ZERO reason to assume she would not have wanted her loving marriage to continue.


 I am confident that the fact that she cannot define words like bed, sock, and blue, shows us exactly where she is on that spectrum. She has a negligible IQ at this point. She cannot give consent. 

I am not saying he is a typical rapist. I am sure he means well and is trying desperately to connect with her in any way he can. But he is having sex with a shell of a person at this point. Any reaction on her part is purely a "primal response" according to her doctors. This isn't intimacy. Its a one sided transaction and I can't understand why her husband would want that.

And the fact that he is having sex with her while another person is in the same room, on the other side of the curtain, is sure to make that other person uncomfortable and likely the reason he was asked not to visit her in her room. He is free to visit with her in the common area. 


 Who does this?

flan


 College students.



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

These people may have actually discussed what was happening to her. Dementia is not a sudden, wake-up one day condition. Nobody has any idea what their conversations were. I will make a point of going home and telling my husband he has my consent to have sex with me when my mind is gone. And nobody here knows whether or not they ever had the same kind of conversation. "Please don't abandon me when I can't remember you. Please continue to treat me as your wife. I want you to hold me and love me."

Their marriage is THEIR business.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 

1 2 38  >  Last»  | Page of 8  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard