Constitutional Rights and Conjoined Twins

(1/1)

Skill and Chance:
In some cases, medical care is sufficient for conjoined twins in various configurations to survive to adulthood, but insufficient to non-fatally separate them.  Our legal system and culture has heavily evolved around individual rights.  Conjoined twins present a serious challenge to this, particularly when they are conjoined for life.  It seems that history has erred on the side of treating them as 2 people to the greatest extent possible, e.g. Chang and Eng Bunker were able to legally vote twice, marry 2 women, and own property independently of each other.  They became multimillionaires in today's money and made an agreement where they spent every other week at a separate home with one twin's legal wife).  It hasn't been 100% consistent, though. Famous female conjoined twins Violet and Daisy Hiltonn were repeatedly denied marriage licenses in the early 20th century.   

How would it be handled if e.g. there were conjoined twins where one was clearly guilty of a violent crime and the other clearly innocent?  Say there was a video recording of one twin using a weapon to kill someone with body parts they control, while the other twin is clearly using the body parts they control to disarm the other, but narrowly fails?  Assume court-ordered separation surgery would be fatal to the innocent twin.  What action can the criminal justice system possibly take against the guilty twin that wouldn't violate the due process rights of the innocent one? 

*I suppose this is also of more general interest because the same argument could be made to preempt any criminal justice system action against a pregnant woman during her pregnancy in fetal personhood states?

Navigation

[0] Message Index