The question is: Could she consent?
A man whose wife had severe Alzheimer’s is facing up to 10 years in prison for allegedly having sex with her.
The main issue at trial is whether the 78-year-old woman, who could not recall her daughters’ names or how to eat a hamburger, was mentally capable of consenting to sex.
Staff at Donna Rayhons’ nursing home told Henry Rayhons, 78, they did not believe his wife was capable of consenting to sex, the New York Times reports.
The prominent former Iowa state legislator – who apparently told staff, “That is not a problem” – is accused of having sex with his wife eight days later.
Mrs Rayon’s daughter alerted police after her mother’s roommate said Mr Rayhons pulled the curtains around his wife’s bed shut and made “sexual noises” during a visit in May 2014.
Footage from a security camera showed Mr Rayhons dropping his wife’s underwear into a hallway laundry bag after leaving the room, the trial heard.
Arrested last year, three weeks after his 78-year-old wife died, Mr Rayhons was charged with felony sexual abuse in the third degree.
"It's Just Porridge" - A Doctor's Thoughts On Oat-Zempic
The Quicky
Mia Re-thinks Her Relationship With Social Media
Mamamia Out Loud17-Year-Old Fletcher Crowley Became Paraplegic Six Months Ago
No Filter
Top Comments
What a sad case which I have been following since it began a week ago. It has ramifications for the thousands of baby boomers who may end up like Henry and Donna. It would be natural and normal for a loving and consenting couple to enjoy sex in the earlier stages of dementia/Alzheimers in the privacy of their home. However I have some serious considerations in this case e.g. Where was Henry when Donna presented at State Chambers in a unravelled state? Surely they came together. Why was the daughter given guardianship and not Henry? Why did the doctors at the centre feel the need to tell Henry that Donna was now unable to consent to sex? Why did Henry continue to have sex with Donna after his meeting with the doctors, even if she did ask to 'play'. There was nothing but a curtain separating them from room mate who was not suffering from dementia/alzheimers.
Consider this: I am in a shared room with an ingrown toenail. I am not mentally incapacitated. My husband visits me in a shared room pulls the curtain and starts sexual advances. I am embarrassed because the other occupant and go along with it saying nothing. This is not considerate to me or the room mate.
Also consider this: I have advanced dementia/alzheimers in a shared room. My primal urges are erupting and I am wanting sex (I have been told in some cases it increases and mental capacity declines). In comes someone I don't quite know who (could be a male carer) but I like them. I have no consideration or awareness of the room mate for I have forgotten I have one. A sexual act take place (digitally).
Is this right in both cases? I think not. Donna was in a facility in which the doctors had observed her rapidly deteriorating state and made the judgement. Semen stains were found on her underwear and bedding. For Henry I will say even though he may have been sad at losing his loved one in this way, I still come back to the fact that he Henry was mentally incapacitated and perhaps should have made a more dignified judgement on his own.
Consider this: "prone to rapid fluctuations in symptoms", she may have consented or even instigated.
Also consider this: If your partner whom you love deeply is slipping away from you in this way has some RARE lucid time, WHY would you waste that infinitely precious time thinking about what other people think?.
Finally consider this: by all accounts Donna Rayhons did not see herself as a victim, and showed no sign of abuse. So just what exactly is this case with no apparent victim and no supporting evidence going to achieve beyond reasonable doubt?
It's sex, with his wife. Sex is pleasurable, if it's what you want to do, with someone you want to do it with. If she consented *at the time*, isn't that all that matters? This isn't a drunk schoolgirl who is incapacitated by alcohol and taken advantage of by a relative unknown and has regrets the next morning, this is a woman and a man who are married having intimate relations. As long as she consented at the time, it doesn't matter if she doesn't remember the next day.
I sincerely hope there is more to this than the article outlines. Violence=bad. Physical force=bad. But sex in itself is not a bad thing. Why should having Alzheimer's mean you have to miss out?
I think the point is whether or not this woman is capable of consenting in the first place, considering her deteriorating mental condition.
And that is the big question, given people with Alzheimer's can be reasonable lucid at some times, and then unable to care for themselves in the next moment.
If the prosecution is successful, that would be setting the precedent that people with a certain level of Alzheimer's cannot ever consent to sex, which also implies they cannot consent to any level of physical intimacy. Sex, kissing, hugs etc would all become a form of sexual assault. No one would expect to be charged for sexual assault for simply giving their mentally ill parent a kiss, but this could be the end result.
Deteriorating but also fluctuating mental condition, along with no allegations Mrs Rayhons showed signs of abuse. The nursing staff didn't notice any difference in her behavior, and the roommate only mentioned sexual noises and not noises of protest or struggle. I think it would be useful to know what the relationship between he and his stepdaughter was like, and if she is behind the push to prosecute?
Exactly. If, at the time, she had no idea who he was (aka a stranger to her rather than her husband) or couldn't understand what he was doing then it was rape, regardless of whether he loved her etc.
It's really a question for her doctors as to whether she was at a stage of her deterioration where she couldn't have been lucid enough to give consent.