I invite you to log onto the home page - www.thealzheimerspouse.com - and read today's blog. It deals with the controversial subject of sexual intimacy between "well" spouses and "demented" spouses who are living in a long term care facility. As requested in the blog, please read the article and notice following it very thoroughly before commenting.
I ask that you be careful and respectful with the language you use in your discussion. My host server has very strict guidelines for subject matter, and I am obligated to delete or change any inappropriate language or vocabulary.
When I visited my husband in several different nursing homes during respite, I did not see a lot of people who seemed like they would be competent to give consent for a sexual encounter. When someone is already confused by normal, everyday activities, having sex seems like it would be very upsetting. In many cases people do not even recognize their spouse any longer, which would only make this worse. In this case, it happened in May and she died on August 8. I really do doubt that she was competent to give consent three months before her death. More to the point--if the husband was told prior to this incident that she lacked the mental capacity to give consent, then yes, I believe it was a sexual assault. Some of us do still see a spark of that person we loved, but a momentary spark and capacity to consent to sex are two different things. IMHO
From the article about the case there really is not enough information as to the whole situation to form an opinion regarding that case. The fact the other person in the room saw nothing or heard noises, and what is her mental condition leaves a lot of questions. Is it sexual abuse when the husband has sex with an ill spouse? I think a lot would depend on their before relationship. Were the noises the other lady heard noises of pain, fear, force? Or were they normal noise of pleasure or enjoyment? Were the noises from the woman or the man? Was there any evidence of force or injury to her? In this case there are so many unanswered questions. Somewhere deep inside did the woman realize what was going on and was comforted knowing her husband still loved her?
I am one that has long lost a desire for my husband. He has had ED for at least 15 years, long before AD was diagnosed. I learned during those years to turn off the desire which probably has made the transition easier. Even if ED had not shown up, I don't think at this time I would want. If he was able, would he want to? I believe he would.
Is it sexual abuse in general when a spouse has sex with an ill spouse? My heart says if the man was gentle with his wife and she is not hurt and not comatose, then probably not. If he was doing it just to satisfy himself I think it would be rough with a lets get this over with attitude - then that could be sexual abuse.
Significant to this incident in my opinion are the established prior incidents. This man according to the article had been instructed not to be in the room with his wife and the door closed. This appears to be an outcome of the daughter being named temporary guardian. Since these changes were made through the courts necessarily there is establishment of her mental incompetence. That's not said in the article but it would have to have been part of the courts taking her from his custody and naming the daughter instead.
That in my mind is why the police when the complaint was registered, arrested him.
He will not be convicted of assault or rape based on the absence of any evidence of what occurred in the room. It's unlikely the underwear were disposed of for any other reason than that he had sex with her; but, that will not likely be enough to convict. Instead I project he will be charged with contravening prior court agreements and is likely to be charged with keeping a certain distance from her in future.
My own reading is the man wanted sex and didn't care about much else.
I was glad the article made a reference to the change in U.S. law that marriage does not mean obligation to have sex and that forced sex is rape regardless of relationship.
I believe so many suffer from a lack of being taught intimacy in the true sense of that word which does not involve genitalia whatsoever. Learning to get along as a toddler and forward is a necessity in any family; but, learning how to empathize and care about others and want that same kind of intimacy back is not that common.
Even giving Henry Rayhons the benefit of doubt, it's clear he's one of the throngs who has no real idea what intimacy and love actually are. What he doesn't understand is tenderness or friendship.
When my DH was in a care facility, another woman came after him and grabbed him away from me when I'd visit. My DH introduced her to everyone was 'my wife, Betty Lee,' and that told me he still wanted to be married to me. Staff said they would keep them apart, but I said, 'leave them be.' They were never alone together in a room, it was all out in the open. Some thought I should pull her hair out, force a transfer, whatever, but DH was getting comfort and affection, I was happy for him. I certainly wasn't getting any!
At the same time, a man came weekly to have sex with his wife, also an AD patient there. Everyone knew it, no one stopped him or made a fuss, it was a private room, no roommate to hear 'noise.' I thought a lot about that at the time and never knew the stage his wife was in, but I concluded that maybe she enjoyed those times, she got comfort, affection and, somewhere inside, knew she was loved. I cannot agree that Rayhons does not understand tenderness or friendship. Quite the opposite, he may be very gentle and caring with her. It isn't that hard for a man to get sex outside of marriage--does it have to be her? Maybe he disposed of the underwear because she was incontinent, and her being declared incompetent by the court does not preclude her enjoying the event, why deny her that pleasure? She may have been more than willing. Maybe he is an ogre, but my take, until I hear otherwise, is that there may be conflict between the daughter and husband and quite a bit of feigned political outrage.
If you follow the link Joan provided and follow the links there, you will find a copy of the Criminal Complaint. It says that on March 29, the wife, who had AD, was admitted to LTC. On May 15, the husband was informed at a care conference that the wife did not have the cognitive ability to consent to sexual activity. On May 23, the husband entered the wife’s room at 7:43 p.m. and left at 8:13 p.m., throwing underwear into a trash can. The wife’s roommate told police that she heard noises indicating that the husband was having sex with the wife. Police say that on June 12, the husband admitted having sexual contact with the wife on May 23rd. On June 3, the wife’s daughter was appointed as guardian of the wife. The wife died in August 8. On August 14, a Criminal Complaint was signed, charging the husband with the crime of performing a sex act on a person whose mental incapacity precludes giving consent.
The only suggestions about the husband’s defense are in his children’s statements. The statement at the end of the newspaper article implies that the motivation for the Complaint is “political or monetary.” (The husband was formerly a state legislator.) The husband’s son also told the newspaper that the “sexual contact” the husband admitted to, "could be anything from a hug or a kiss." I don’t know the law of Iowa, but I will bet that it does not view a hug or a kiss or even a cuddle as performing a sex act. Usually, sexual contact requires touching of the buttocks or genitals or, in the case of a female, the breasts. I also question why the husband was warned about sexual activity at the care conference in mid-May. Something involving sex must have happened before then.
The only other defense would be that the wife had the capacity to consent to sexual activity. Joan asked that before we discussed this matter we assume that the wife had that capacity, but after reading these materials, I cannot make that assumption. Nothing suggests that the wife had the ability to consent to sexual activity and there is a lot that says she did not have that ability. My views about what probably happened are more in line with Wolf’s, although more information might change my mind. Charlotte is right that we don’t know enough, especially about the wife’s cognitive ability or about what kind of sexual contact the husband admitted to, which are both big pieces of the puzzle.
Of course, all this concerns the legal case, not the moral or ethical aspect of what happened. We all know that there are different phases of dementia and just because a person has this disease does not mean they do not have the ability to consent to sex. I suppose every case is different but it seems to me that if a person's disease is so far advanced that they cannot consent to having sex, a spouse would be morally wrong to engage in sexual activity with them.
Given the length of my previous post, it’s hard to believe that I left something out, but I did!
If you look at the first paragraph of the Complaint, you’ll see that it charges the husband with performing a sex act on a person with a mental defect or incapacity which precludes giving consent , “and with whom he was not cohabiting as husband and wife at the time.. . . “ I take this to mean that even if the husband did what he was accused of, it would not be a crime if the wife had been living in their home, instead of in a NH. That’s odd, isn’t it?
I also missed the suggestion to view that the wife could give consent. If that were the case how could there be any issue when two consenting adults who are married have sex?
On the subject of morally wrong; however, I could see that if a couple really enjoyed their sex together all their lives and the husband knew the wife was incompetent but could still enjoy this together I can see that might not be morally wrong. I'm not qualified to judge other people's morals.
In my own personal experience as one of the very few males here right now, my wife's personality and with that the nuance of her own desires in life drifted away together. Her awareness of having guests and her normal personality, role, and concerns in that were clearly absent while she still walked around and functioned decently with sitting and walking and talking and other normal easier things.
My wife could have given consent at that time verbally and was not declared incompetent because on the whole it could be argued she wasn't. But, and to me this is the central point in any discussion of the moral nature of this - it was crystal clear that I would be taking advantage. I debated this back then because we never had an incident where she showed she was uncertain or uncomfortable. But that's because it was early when it became clear the other half of consent was unavailable just as putting together an evening with guests was. Such behaviour would have been unpardonable even then when she still knew who she was and I seriously believe would have passed the very basic questions that a competency test establishes.
Yet she never once mentioned sex or showed any interest or questioned or seemed aware that we had stopped. That was six years ago and every once in a while I notice little darth vader is still hanging around and we wave at each other wistfully.
There was an incident with Dianne in the nursing home where a male patient grabbed her breasts. Two police officers came to my door and asked me if I wanted to press charges. She hadn't been hurt. He simply touched them. They transferred him somewhere else. I felt sorry for them both and said no.
I've read more about the reverse question on this topic. The male who has dementia wanting sex (or female I suppose). Would these charges have been laid if as Myrtle says Joan asked: we consider the male consenting/initiating and that the person charged was a woman?
...
Myrtle, I see your additional comment. Perhaps there was some separation or something that occurred before all these incidents did.
I agree with others that we could use more information about the case.My "gut" feeling is that the husband's behavior was inappropriate, and it is telling that he was not made the guardian of his wife. Why was that? There probably were reasons that we are not told. But I do think the case being publicized had something to do with politics or money somewhere. I am surprised that the patient's confidentiality was breached by this story making the newspapers. I would have thought that to protect the wife, the story should not have been published. Again…politics? Family vendetta? Money issues somewhere? There is more to this than we are told.
But to add my own personal footnote, which I think is similar to what Wolf said about him and Dianne: As Larry declined mentally and physically, any interest he had in our personal relationship just seemed to drift away. And I found that, no matter how close we had been in the past, I did not want to have a physical relationship with somebody who was confused, forgetful, and had impaired judgement. It just did not seem right. As Wolf said, it seemed like I would have been taking advantage. I think the feeling would be comparable to having a relationship with an underage boy…it wouldn't be right… a principled person wouldn't do it. Larry and I were always affectionate in the later years--a hug here or a kiss there--but that was all it was--affection. I think Alzheimers really tested our love…and guess what…it was true love…whether we were swinging from the chandeliers or not.
Weird case. I tend to want to believe everybody. I think the husband exercised poor judgment. I would like a statement from the caregivers at the facility as to whether the wife seemed distressed or happy following her husband's visit.
I sort of think that this should NOT have been prosecuted and made so ridiculously public, unless it was clear that physical or emotional hurt occurred.
I agree with emily*, the entire case is a monument to poor taste and flawed judgement. I cannot conceive of wanting to make love to a woman who has no concept of who you are. lacks the ability to recognize your existence or even possesses the capability to demonstrate awareness of your presence. There is just no excuse for this type of behavior, pathetic. tragic, sad, YES! Criminal ?? this disease inflicts a sentence worse than any criminal penalty
.....I've been reading this very interesting thread since it started, and am amazed at how well everyone has analyzed this subject and contributed their opinion. As for my own opinion, I can't imagine how this could happen under the circumstances that Helen and I went through. I realize that everyone is different and I can't condemn anyone for being different than me as long as what they do is entirely for their loved one and not for themselves. .....When my Helen was in the stage of partial incontinence, she recognized me as two different Georges. Sometimes I was the Real George and sometimes I was the Other George. In the evenings we would sit on the sofa holding hands, watching the TV, and she would ask me things like "What is your name?" and I would tell her "My name is George". Then she would say "You're not George" and I would tell her "I'm the other George" and that would satisfy her. Then sometimes she would ask "Where's George?", and I would say "They called him and he went down to FDS".(FDS was the place he used to work) Sometimes she would ask "Are you married? Do you have a family? Do you have a car?" and I would always give her an appropriate answer that she would be content with. With me playing the part of the Other George, we could spend a fairly nice evening together. .....When we were playing around in bed at night...just hugging and cuddling, which she always enjoyed.....she would say things like "I'm not supposed to be sleeping with you". and "I hope George doesn't find out about us". And sometimes she would tell me about the fun, sexual things she and George did together but I could easily tell that as much as she enjoyed the close contact. she did not have any real sexual desires, nor did I. ....After I had to place her in long term care, she still enjoyed the hugging and holding hands all the way to the end but I was still the other George. ....When she passed, she was 86 and I was 90 but in spite of our old age, we were fairly active sexually until dementia hit us the last eight years. ...........And that's the way it was with Helen and me.
Wow. Going strictly by the article, the daughters look like a couple of witches. And I'm not sure of my ground here, but isn't a married couple entitled to their privacy in a facility? The nursing home was not up to speed on proper assessment of the patient or of current best practices. All my nursing work experience in NY is from 1982--2012, so the comments by the NY nursing home official sound about right to me. I realize regulations may vary in other states. On the other hand, it sounds as if the husband loved his wife, but did not know how best to take care of a dementia patient. (Too bad he didn't find this site.) A sad, pathetic story…demeaning to what seems like a very nice couple. I think it's time to leave the husband alone--he's having a hard enough time as it is. There is obviously a huge financial agenda on the part of the daughters.
If she was not a victim of elder abuse or neglect, the children should not have kidnapped her. This is not the first time demented people have been kidnapped by others for a variety of reasons.
Further, a lot depends on how people look at sex, especially among the elderly and the demented. Contrary to what most people think, it is NOT a bad thing, the children & the courts should butt out. There is nothing to indicate she was abused in any way.