I really hate to say this, but is there any evidence that the late wife would not have wanted sex with her husband? I know young people tend to think us olds have no interest in woohooing or worse, that it is disgusting if we woohoo, but that is a form of ageism. Certainly, nursing homes would rather not have to deal with people in their care engaging in woohoo, as it creates difficulty for them, so certainly are biased against the practice. However, if we are going to be so hyper protective as a society as to make it the default that old people can reach the point that they won't be allowed to woohoo with those they were woohooing with, then we should be able to have documents similar to a living will detailing who we want to be able to woohoo with once we are legally unable to give consent.
I don't know US law, but in Canada, the courts repeated many times than "advance consent" or something similar has no stading in law and is completely opposed and incompatible with the idea of continuous consent. The person may remove its consent at any point during the activity. Your idea is pretty much like allowing spousal rape on senile people. We could easily run in issues in case where the person isn't recognising people anymore (it would be like being raped by a stranger for the victim).
I can understand the reasoning, and in general support it, but the right to engage in sex when one wants to engage in it seems so fundamental that until a person reaches the state where it would be impossible for them to derive any enjoyment from it or to express a desire to stop, there ought to be some mechanism for those who have lost the legal capacity to consent to pre-consent.
This is one of the most disturbing things I have ever read on this forum, with it having been made more disturbing by who typed it.
Seriously, is there no reason why he couldn't have taken care of himself or gotten a prostitute to help him? Try to help me understand.
Are religious people so screwed up in the head that they'd rather rape an Alzheimer's patient than (God forbid!) touch themselves or pay someone to do it with them?
Is a contract consenting to sex beyond the point where they could normally consent really the solution? You couldn't just take care of it yourself or pay a prostitute? How far does this logic extend? If your wife is sleeping and you're really desperate to do it, do you just stick it in without asking? What if you're estranged from your wife but still married? What if she says no? Hey, if the right to engage in sex when one wants to is so fundamental that it could trump consent, then is rape morally ok? What the f is wrong with people.
