Bouvia was in a competent state of mind when making her decision and was not in a comatose or terminally ill state. Regardless, the Los Angeles Superior Court argued that the denial of treatment was limited to terminally ill patients. However, under the Natural Death Act passed by the California legislature in 1976, it specifies: The procedures that a terminally ill person may follow to ensure that their right to refuse medical treatment will be respected. The Bouvia court held that although the law was directed at terminally ill patients, it expressed the state's policy that competent adults have a fundamental right to make decisions regarding their own medical care. (Fisher, 1987) Therefore, the court decided that there was no reason to limit this right to terminally ill patients only. The appeals court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, supporting his arguments for the right to refuse treatment, informed consent, the right to privacy, and not limited to terminally ill patients. These are valid and legal human rights, which belong exclusively to him and neither the medical profession nor the judiciary has a veto. The trial court did not recognize or protect the exercise of this