by adamah 285 Replies latest social current
I stand corrected on my misreading of your post regarding your paper Justy.
Let me just state this one time. My support for this woman or her husband to have the final say over her admittedly brain-dead body is trumped by my support for the life in her womb. Even if that life is flawed.
I'm a Father and could never even conceive of doing such a thing.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/22/us/pregnant-life-support-texas/index.html
Attorneys: Fetus of pregnant, brain-dead wife is 'distinctly abnormal'
(CNN) -- Attorneys representing the family of Marlise Munoz -- a pregnant Texas woman they say is brain dead -- revealed Wednesday that the "fetus is distinctly abnormal."
"Even at this early stage, the lower extremities are deformed to the extent that the gender cannot be determined. The fetus suffers from hydrocephalus. It also appears that there are further abnormalities, including a possible heart problem, that cannot be specifically determined due to the immobile nature of Mrs. Munoz's deceased body.
"Quite sadly, this information is not surprising due to the fact that the fetus, after being deprived of oxygen for an indeterminate length of time, is gestating within a dead and deteriorating body, as a horrified family looks on in absolute anguish, distress and sadness," attorneys Jessica Janicek and Heather King said in a statement.
Munoz's family has said she has been brain-dead since her husband, Erick Munoz, found her unconscious at their home on November 26. At the time, she was 14 weeks' pregnant with the couple's second child.
Munoz's husband asked a court last week to force a hospital to take her off a respirator, ventilator and other machines, saying her wishes shouldn't be disregarded just because she is pregnant.
Erick Munoz filed an emergency motion as well as a complaint against John Peter Smith Hospital, both with the same goal: to have the hospital disconnect the machines so that her family can take her body and give her a proper burial.
"Marlise Munoz is legally dead, and to further conduct surgical procedures on a deceased body is nothing short of outrageous," her husband says in the motion.
Notably, officials at the Fort Worth, Texas, hospital where 33-year-old Marlise Munoz is have not publicly declared her dead, though they have not disputed her husband's assertions either.
A hearing in the case is set for Friday, and both the hospital and the Tarrant County district attorney's office said Wednesday they would not comment before then.
Erick Munoz -- like his wife, a paramedic by training -- said the doctors told him his wife "had lost all activity in her brain stem," and an accompanying chart stated she was "brain dead," according to his lawsuit.
Hospital spokesman J.R. Labbe said last month that doctors were simply trying to obey a Texas law that says "you cannot withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment for a pregnant patient."
Munoz's husband responded by saying that "Marlise cannot possibly be a pregnant patient -- Marlise is dead." Furthermore, he argued that her wishes -- relayed, he said, in conversations but not in writing that she not be on "life-sustaining" measures when she is brain dead -- shouldn't be treated differently from a man or other woman simply because of her pregnancy.
JT, thanks for the update on the hydrocephalus, heart condition, and deformed lower limbs (for those who don't know, 'hydrocephalus' means an accumulation of cerebrospinal fluid in the head which causes the brain and skull to swell, and is common cause of brain damage with cognitive impairment, etc).
Here's a pix of a child with hydrocephalus:
Sooner said-
I'm a Father and could never even conceive of doing such a thing.
Well, it's a good thing, since you don't have any choice in the matter, since the State you live has taken away your choice and WILL decide for you, if your wife ended up in the same situation!
Here's the options for treatment for fetal hydrocephalus, so surely the State of TX will see to it that the dead body is sent out of the US so the fetus can obtain in-utero treatment (performed by a unethical medical specialist willing to perform the experiment)? Since the State assumed ALL responsibility for the fetus now, they also have an ethical/moral/legal/financial OBLIGATION and the cost will be born by Texas taxpayers (and it shouldn't be more than what, maybe a million $ or so, when all is said and done, JUST for the surgery and transport?).
Of course, if you lived in a State which didn't take the choice away from you (like CA), you wouldn't have to face the temptation to abort a deformed and cognitively-impaired child, so that works out pretty good for you. Living in a Nanny State works out well, but only if you agree with the pre-determined choice.
This is a kick to the heart strings....
This is why we use evidence and not emotions. All those defending the value of life alone, maybe now you will consider other realities such as the quality of life, the viability of life and the realities of death and nature.
Several weeks ago a family lost a wife a daughter a mother..... and now they have this to contend with because of an illegal experiment done without any evidence or scientific justidication, without the consent of the deceased or her family but in total contradiction to her requests, breaking the law. She was not a pregnant woman denying life saving treatment. She died.
What a terrible, terrible scenario.
People saw a baby, they didn't see it's immature cells in metabolic processes, they didn't think of the fragile nature of these cells and the insults that can be administered at the wrong time and place. This was all predicatable and preventable, it was illegaly done and it was done without consent.
What on earth will they do now? Their is a malformed fetus inside a dead woman. What now.........
At week 28 the pain receptors will be functional.
At week 28 the pain receptors will be functional.- snare
The poor little one suffering like this, I can't accept this is reasonable or fair. The authorities are just plain wrong. Kate xx
Would the medics involved face being charged by the police and put on trial if they switched off the machines and let the fetus die?
If so, what charges? Could it ruin their career?
Most doctors are caring and compassionate. I am sure there is more to this than bullheaded stubbornness on their part.
HB
Very sad, all around.
HB asked- Would the medics involved face being charged by the police and put on trial if they switched off the machines and let the fetus die? If so, what charges? Could it ruin their career? Most doctors are caring and compassionate. I am sure there is more to this than bullheaded stubbornness on their part.
A doctor/staff member would risk losing their license, job, career, and possibly face criminal charges if they decided to play God. Only the DA's could answer what the charges would possibly be, but it's an interesting legal question for JT.
And actually to correct a minor point mentioned by SNR, the hospital is following a TX state law that FORCES keeping "pregnant patients" on life support. However, the hospital is seemingly over-interpreting the law, so the family is pushing to obtain a court order that would force the hospital to disconnect her from life support, pointing out the obvious fact that since she already is DEAD, she no longer is the "patient", and there is no life left to support (and the hospital would argue the fetus is the 'life' in question).
The ambiguous clause quoted in the OP is part of a law called the 'Advanced Directives Act', passed by the TX State legislators with the backing of pro-life groups (who are notorious Bible thumpers: after all , this IS Texas, where the first question people asks someone who moves into the neighborhood is, "So, what church do you go to?").
The hospital has dragged their feet for two months now, seemingly buying time until the fetus reaches an age where it would be protected under ANOTHER section of the Act which says abortions are not permitted UNLESS the health of the mother is endangered. But since the mother is already DEAD, the hospital would flip-flop positions, arguing there's no need to disconnect since the mother's health is not in jeopardy (her condition is quite stable now: she is DEAD, with no hope of her condition changing!).
FHN said- I doubt they think it's about God.
No? What are you suggesting, then?
What other grounds can you think of that would justify this situation, say from an ethical or philosophical angle?
SNR brought up the good point that pain receptors typically don't develop until around the 28th week, so how is continuing to delay doing any favors to this fetus, when it'll start to actually be able to sense it's death? How is this painful situation providing any benefit to the family who watch this horror unfold before their eyes, and they are left feeling completely powerless to do anything about it?
Adam
Hamsterbait, they had no legal right to put the dead mother on life support.
As for the consequences of theire actions now, it is new territory. I imagine it was not doctors but lawyers/managers who decided to use life support on a dead person, a doctor knows the futility of this.
As for what is next, likely they will conclude that the fetus is not viable and turn the machine off, I imagine.
The alternative it to maintain the mal-development until the fetus eventually dies. Under what circumstances is an estimation only.
I imagine the legal issue is that of the original desicion. It would not be illegal to turn the machine off now with consent from family and with a doctors opinion of best interest for the fetus.
Thank goodness you don't live in Texas Adam.
