@BunsenBurner, if a person has sex with their comatose spouse who lives with them, in Iowa, there does not appear to be a crime they could be charged with. Apparently, the conduct is not illegal. It wouldn’t get to a courtroom, because there’s no crime to charge them with.
Someone who hasn’t been reading closely also won’t remember we discussed where to draw lines pages and pages ago.
CF and Hunt have been developing some very interesting, thought provoking arguments. imho.
Brain stretchers for me.
adding: if I had a day job, I couldn’t keep up with a thread like this
With respect CardinalFang, you have the tendency to jump to conclusions as to what the law does or does not allow without any legal analysis whatsover. That’s a dangerous practice and not the way lawyers analyze the law at all. For all you know, sex with comatose spouses is explicitly covered by some other statute. Or by some common law principle. You don’t know, because you haven’t analyzed it.
Same thing with your analysis of statutes to conclude something is illegal. There are statutory interpretation principles, competing state law statutes, myriad defenses, some codified, some not, federal preemption principles, state and federal constitutional principles, as well as many other things that you need to consider.
You might consider saying, “Based on my interpretation of the plain language of this statute, it appears that …” Instead of making blanket pronouncements on the law.
OK fine. There does not seem to be any Iowa statute that criminalizes sex with a comatose spouse, provided that the comatose spouse lives with the other spouse. I find that creepy.
I agree. There are so many considerations though (and so many gray areas) when it comes to the elderly and nursing homes. For example: how do you criminalize sexual assault without criminalizing nursing care. In reality it is all about intent.
If you don’t follow the thread closely, then go back and check before accusing a poster of saying something they didn’t say. Or at least apologize if you mistakenly accuse someone of saying something they didn’t say.
I too appreciate @CF’s insights on these threads and I do not think she is any quicker than the rest of us to post her opinions and conclusions. On many of these threads we are going on conflicting press accounts and unfamiliar law from jurisdictions outside of where we live or practice. I know I don’t do extensive research before I post, I read what is in front of me and offer my thoughts. We are bantering on a public forum not arguing before the SCOTUS.
Re post 323: OMG. How can you possibly say that? What research have you done? The most you can say that based on the excerpt of the particular statute quoted above, and not considering definitions and any other part of the statute, that particular statute does not seem to cover whether or not it is permissible to have sex with a comatose spouse with whom you live. It certainly does not declare it legal.
HarvestMoon1: I generally agree but there comes a time where people make blanket pronouncements on the law that tend to shape the rest of the discussion. It is worth pointing out that there is uncertainty on points that are being reported as black-letter law.
nottelling, I know how to use Google to bring up the entire Iowa code, and I know how to read. I don’t have to rely on HarvestMoon’s snippet, because I already read the parts of the penal code that deal with rape: 702.17, the definition of sex act, and all of 709. Should I worry that this hypothetical Iowa law against having sex with someone comatose is hiding in section 165, Eradication of Bovine Tuberculosis, or section 781B, Impersonating a Decorated Military Veteran? I’m not. This is a message board, not the Supreme Court (and I’ve got to say, having read some of the amicus briefs put before the Supremes, the quality there is not always the highest either).
when someone is hospitalized, are they no longer living at home? What about when someone is at a hotel?
Re post 328: Reading those sections still doesn’t resolve the question. You’d have to consider, for example, the general law concerning assault in Iowa Code 708. How can you say whether it would or would not apply in any particular hypothetical case? I’m not saying it ever would apply but it would certainly be something that someone would have to research, analyze and consider. The research would also have to include published decisions interpreting the law. Of course, any analysis would depend on the particular facts and circumstances in the case.
I’m only pointing this out because you seem so certain in your conclusions, not because anyone would be expected to do this before opining on a message board.
My point is that this stuff is way more complicated and nuanced than you recognize.
Anyway, I’m done. Goodbye.
All I can say is thank doG that the jury found him not guilty.
Those of us who are concerned that our spouses will eventually use us like a blow-up party doll should clearly consider going to a lawyer and drawing up an advanced directive. 
And people who think it’s just fine to for a husband to have sex with his comatose wife should be filled with delight. He’s her husband so he knows what she would have wanted.
Wait a minute…now you ARE saying she was comatose??? :-S
No, I’m saying that those of you who say that the healthy spouse has the best interests of the incapacitated spouse at heart will be of great comfort to people who think it’s a good idea to have sex with their comatose spouse.
That’s just a ridiculous distortion.
I really don’t think it is ridiculous. Young women live in situations of domestic abuse. Elderly women will not be any different. While most spouses may have their partner’s best interests at heart, this is not universal. I understand a concern for those who are vulnerable.
OTOH - It isn’t totally clear to me that everyone is actually in agreement that sex with a comatose spouse is a ridiculous idea. Some seem to feel that way. I am not clear how everyone reacts to the idea.
I am not completely sure how I feel about a spouse giving an advanced directive giving consent for comatose sex if it is something the healthy spouse desires. I thought that was one of the conundrums under discussion here.
There is a debate about “best interests” imho. and whose “best interests”
and when we are all elderly and demented, it may matter.
adding: elder abuse seemed inconceivable to me until it impacted my family. I doubt elder abuse is very common, but it became a huge concern to me at that point in time.
??
Where was there ANY evidence that this man had abused his wife in any way during their marriage???
Other than letting her run around half naked at the State Capitol?
^^^exactly how was that his fault? He was at work and she dressed and showed up.