ILCS » Chapter 755 · Act 40
Illinois Compiled Statutes

755 ILCS 40/5 (2026)

Legislative findings and purposes

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(755 ILCS 40/5) (from Ch. 110 1/2, par. 851-5)
    Sec. 5. Legislative findings and purposes.
    (a) Findings.
    The legislature recognizes that all persons have a fundamental right to make decisions relating to their own medical treatment, including the right to forgo life-sustaining treatment.
    Lack of decisional capacity, alone, should not prevent decisions to forgo life-sustaining treatment from being made on behalf of persons who lack decisional capacity and have no known applicable living will or power of attorney for health care.
    Uncertainty and lack of clarity in the law concerning the making of private decisions concerning medical treatment and to forgo life-sustaining treatment, without judicial involvement, causes unnecessary emotional distress to the individuals involved and unduly impedes upon the individual right to forgo life-sustaining treatment.
    The enactment of statutory guidelines for private decision making will bring improved clarity and certainty to the process for implementing decisions concerning medical treatment and to forgo life-sustaining treatment and will substantially reduce the associated emotional distress for involved parties.
    (b) Purposes.
    This Act is intended to define the circumstances under which private decisions by patients with decisional capacity and by surrogate decision makers on behalf of patients lacking decisional capacity to make medical treatment decisions or to terminate life-sustaining treatment may be made without judicial involvement of any kind.
    This Act is intended to establish a process for that private decision making.
    This Act is intended to clarify the rights and obligations of those involved in these private decisions by or on behalf of patients.
    This Act is not intended to condone, authorize, or approve mercy killing or assisted suicide.
(Source: P.A. 90-246, eff. 1-1-98)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1995–2009 · leading case: Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “755 ILCS 40/5, 15 (West 1998). Simply stated, the Act provides a means of obtaining consent, while the common-law emergency exception provides a means of obviating consent.”
Curtis v. Jaskey, 759 N.E.2d 962 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “Thus, the necessity of obtaining consent before a medical procedure is performed has long been a part of American law.”
Ficke v. Evangelical Health Sys., 674 N.E.2d 888 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 2× “Although plaintiffs are correct that the Act was intended to aid both the incompetent patient and other "involved parties" (755 ILCS 40/5(a) (West 1992)), a cause of action for such "involved parties" was not similarly contemplated.”
People v. Larry B., 914 N.E.2d 1243 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “See 755 ILCS 40/5 (West 2008). There is a federal constitutional right to refuse psychotropic medication under the liberty interests recognized in constitutional jurisprudence.”
Prairie v. Univ. of Chicago Hospitals, 698 N.E.2d 611 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “755 ILCS 40/5 (West 1996); see also In re Fetus Brown, 294 Ill.”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 821 N.E.2d 316 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “” 755 ILCS 40/5(b) (West 2000). To effectuate this goal, the legislature has chosen to mandate that a single individual, namely, the patient’s attending physician, determine in writing whether the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
People v. Brown, 689 N.E.2d 397 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 2× “The intent of the Act is: "[T]o define the circumstances under which private decisions by patients with decisional capacity and by surrogate decision makers on behalf of patients lacking decisional capacity to make medical treatment decisions or to terminate life-sustaining…”
People v. Branning, 674 N.E.2d 463 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “” 755 ILCS 40/5(a) (West 1994). There is a significant liberty interest in refusing section 2 — 110 services.”
In Re Est. of Austwick, 656 N.E.2d 773 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). “Austwick's attending physician to place the DNR in her nursing home medical chart.”
Murphy v. Lower, 656 N.E.2d 773 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “851—5(b) (now 755 ILCS 40/5 (b) (West 1992)).) When a person lacks such "decisional capacity” and suffers from a "qualifying condition,” that is, a "terminal condition,” "permanent unconsciousness,” or "irreversible condition” (Ill.”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp. (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “” 755 ILCS 40/5(b) (West 2000). To effectuate this goal, the legislature has chosen to mandate that a single individual, namely, the patient’s attending physician, determine in writing whether the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
In re Brown (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 2× “" 755 ILCS 40/5 (West 1996). The intent of the Act is: "[T]o define the circumstances under which private decisions by patients with decisional capacity and by surrogate decision makers on behalf of patients lacking decisional capacity to make medical treatment decisions or to…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— 755 ILCS 40/5(a) — 3 cases
Ficke v. Evangelical Health Sys., 674 N.E.2d 888 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “Although plaintiffs are correct that the Act was intended to aid both the incompetent patient and other "involved parties" (755 ILCS 40/5(a) (West 1992)), a cause of action for such "involved parties" was not similarly contemplated.”
People v. Branning, 674 N.E.2d 463 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “” 755 ILCS 40/5(a) (West 1994). There is a significant liberty interest in refusing section 2 — 110 services.”
Ficke v. Evangelical Health Sys. (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).
— 755 ILCS 40/5(b) — 4 cases
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 821 N.E.2d 316 (Ill. 2004). “” 755 ILCS 40/5(b) (West 2000). To effectuate this goal, the legislature has chosen to mandate that a single individual, namely, the patient’s attending physician, determine in writing whether the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
In Re Est. of Austwick, 656 N.E.2d 773 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). “Austwick's attending physician to place the DNR in her nursing home medical chart.”
Murphy v. Lower, 656 N.E.2d 773 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). “851—5(b) (now 755 ILCS 40/5 (b) (West 1992)).) When a person lacks such "decisional capacity” and suffers from a "qualifying condition,” that is, a "terminal condition,” "permanent unconsciousness,” or "irreversible condition” (Ill.”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp. (Ill. 2004). “” 755 ILCS 40/5(b) (West 2000). To effectuate this goal, the legislature has chosen to mandate that a single individual, namely, the patient’s attending physician, determine in writing whether the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.