Sorry FHN. I should have said "come back" because they won't be able to resist.
Dead pregnant woman forced to stay on life support, due to TX State law
by adamah 285 Replies latest social current
-
-
adamah
FHN, thanks for the photos of a normal pregnancy.
JT already explained how doctors will often play along with the mom's desire to bond with their fetuses by using the words "baby", etc, since that's simply part of offering a caring bed-side manner. Few moms would go back to a 'cold fish' doc who insisted on semantic accuracy, refusing to acknowledge the role of tact when communicating with patients. Instead, most docs realize patients KEEP THEM in practice, giving the provider the PRIVILEGE of treating by placing their trust in their hands (note: managed-care plans and State-run healthcare systems are largely exempted, although pt complaints are always good to avoid!).
However, there's a downside of feeding into the patient's desire to bond with the fetus: some 50% of pregnancies are spontaneously-aborted (i.e. miscarried), and the bonding and attachment likely makes it more emotionally-painful IF something goes wrong (as it did, in this case).
It's also feeding in to those who are pro-life and don't want others to have a choice, those who cannot recognize the issue is much-more complex than they want it to be. That's why this case is a 'teachable moment', serving as a wake-up call as to the folly of thinking ANYONE has all the answers to make decisions for others.
FHN said- Oh my stars, BOTR, you dont answer a rhetorical question to anyone but yourself.
Well, since you admit above it's a rhetorical question, it doesn't even allow a response, much less demand a response!
From http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=rhetorical%20question
- S: (n) rhetorical question (a statement that is formulated as a question but that is not supposed to be answered) "he liked to make his points with rhetorical questions"
Adam
-
adamah
Oh, let's go back to this:
SNR said- from my very first post, I have said they have missaplied the law, therefore it is illegal.
Yeah, that's wrong. You seem to believe 'misapplication of law' is a synonym for 'illegal' (breaking a law): it's not.I repeatedly asked you to cite WHICH SPECIFIC LAW you felt JPS was breaking (i.e. was illegal) by failing to turn her body over to her next-of-kin, and you didn't answer. You didn't even have to search through the entire Texas Penal Code, since the answer is explicitly provided in the request for relief filed by Erick Munoz (I gave the link to the PDF back on page 1).
Here's the applicable code:
Sec. 42.08. ABUSE OF CORPSE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person, without legal authority, knowingly:
(1) disinters, disturbs, damages, dissects, in whole or in part, carries away, or treats in an offensive manner a human corpse;
(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(c) In this section, "human corpse" includes:
(1) any portion of a human corpse;
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Renumbered from Penal Code Sec. 42.10 by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994. Amended by: Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 1025, Sec. 1, eff. June 18, 2005.Hence, the general principle of the rights of the next-of-kin to the decedent's remains is codified within this statute, and in Texas, violating the law is a Class A misdemeanor.
So why didn't Erick call the sheriff back in December, reporting JPS for violating Sec 42.08 and demanding the hospital withdraw the body off life support since not doing so is a misdemeanor? The hospital would say, "Not so fast there, pardner (sheriff): unplugging her mightily looks to be homicide, a felony criminal bush-whackin' offense, per this here law which gives the fetus rights from the moment of conception!" (Sorry, couldn't resist adding in some local color with the accent).
Law enforcement officers are NOT judges, and hence why Erick went to court seeking a judge's ruling, and ordering JPS to comply. So if JPS fails to comply with the court order NOW, the hospital faces being charged for violating Sec 42.08 (since they now have no 'legal authority' to do so, and instead additional criminal charges of contempt of court).
(And the issue of who bears the responsibility came up when JT explained how the hospital with 'deep pockets' could've clarified the issue on their own, without forcing the lowly-paid public-servant Erick to obtain a court order instead of dragging their heels.)
And since the DA's office was handling the defense for JPS, I'm sure the hospital was hardly shaking in their boots at the prospect of facing some criminal liability for a Class A misdemeanor. Besides, the plaintiff may still appeal the decision to a higher court, all the way up to the SCOTUS.
In the US, legality or illegality are not conclusively-determined until after the fat lady sings, and certainty not BEFORE the case is even heard by a judge! Instead, we rely on the presumption of innocence ("innocent until proven guilty"). That applies to all cases, not just this one.
SNR said- i am done arguing with you
Well, thanks for sharing your unique perspective and understanding of basic principles of law.(JT and others, please feel free to correct me on any of this if you see it as questionable or flat-out wrong, as I welcome input. We only learn by allowing for the fact that others just might know something we don't.)
-
FlyingHighNow
Yeah, Adam, BOTR got kind of irrate about my rhetorical questions to her, after her insisting that a fetus is not a baby. I also looked up the Mayo Clinic's description of the stages of pregnancy. They, too call the fetus a baby. The fetus doesnt become a non baby just because it has malformation. No matter what you call this Texas fetus/baby, it's been a tough situation. I posted the medicenenet pics and captions to illustrate that yes, a fetus is a baby, whether we like that or not.
-
LisaRose
I glad that I am not in the shoes of anyone about to make a decision whether or not to end a pregnancy, whether it is this case of a pregnancy inside a brain dead mother, or it is a healthy, living mother making the decision, hopefully much earlier in her pregnancy. I'm pro-choice. I find the whole question of abortion makes me queasy. I'm still pro choice. I hope that no one takes the decision to end a pregnancy lightly. I'm speaking more of choosing to use the term embryo or fetus to lessen the impact and profundity of such a decision, in my lastest posts. Any of us who have been pregnant, especially if we wanted the baby, know that a pregnancy is nothing trivial to just have removed as if it were tonsils or a gallbladder.
FHN, I agree with you on this 100%. I dont like abortions, but I am pro choice. I am glad I never had to make this choice, both my children were wanted and I was in a position to love and care for them. I honestly don't know what I would have one under different circumstances. But to say there is no difference between a few cells in early pregnancy and a full tern baby is to ignore common sense, IMO. There are so many variables that I believe we must leave it up to the pregnant woman to decide what is right for her and the life she carries, at least in the early stages of pregnancy. The law agrees, abortion is legal.
This case is not about abortion, but about a hospital running amuck either because they would rather force a horrific situation on a family to protect their financial interests, or because they are against abortion on moral grounds. Since the woman who died was in the early stages of pregnancy, she could have had an abortion, since she is dead her husband should have been able to decide for her. The husband is forced to live with this even though he knows it is not what his wife would want. This was in the news this morning:
Munoz described in a signed affidavit filed Thursday what it was like to see her now: her glassy, "soulless" eyes; and the smell of her perfume replaced by what he knows to be the smell of death. He said he's tried to hold her hand but can't "Her limbs have become so stiff and rigid due to her deteriorating condition that now, when I move her hands, her bones crack, and her legs are nothing more than dead weight," Munoz said.
I think this is cruel, especially since the fetus is profoundly damaged. If you think abortion is wrong, then work to get the law changed, but this is not the case to take a stand on about it. Nothing that this hospital is doing is either legal, moral or ethical in my opinion.
-
adamah
FHN said-
I also looked up the Mayo Clinic's description of the stages of pregnancy. They, too call the fetus a baby. The fetus doesnt become a non baby just because it has malformation. No matter what you call this Texas fetus/baby, it's been a tough situation. I posted the medicenenet pics and captions to illustrate that yes, a fetus is a baby, whether we like that or not.
Yeah I get that, FHN, and I simply don't know how to explain it any differently than others have already tried, since SURE, a page that is designed for non-medical professional patients (i.e. expectant mothers and fathers) is obviously going to use terms that people want to hear, since they want want to apply it their situation. I could just-as-easily link to pages designed for docs (OB/GYN, etc) that use the more-proper term used within medicine, and for very good reasons.
In fact, use of such language amongst providers is common, primarily because docs understand that such emotional attachments are well-known to effect and impair/color judgment, which can interfere with their ability to do their job. Who do you want to perform your surgery: a caring and empathetic skilled surgeon who understands you as a person, but also has the tendency to freak out and run away when the going get tough (abandoning you in the surgery suite), or a skilled surgeon who remains calm under pressure? Obviously a middle-ground is desirable, as the traits aren't mutually-exclusive.
That need for a level of clinical detachment is why it's considered unprofessional for a doctor to treat his family members: they're too emotionally-attached to the patient, and it potentially clouds their judgment of the care they deliver. Docs are human, and (most) aren't machines.
But ultimately it's 'begging the question', since as Shakespeare said, "A rose by any other name is still a rose". I mentioned that point in a prior post when I said we could call that 'thing' inside the womb ANYTHING WE WANT ('God', 'Satan', hedgebush, etc) and ultimately it's irrelevant to the actual issue in the abortion dabate of WHO gets to decide, the woman or the State.
-
Band on the Run
This is not a religious nation. FHN, it is not your individual country. As far back as the Middle Ages (and it may go back to ancient times), fetuses were not considered babies. If you consult dictionaries, the definitions are not the same. Roe v. Wade is settled law. Since we live in no theocracy but do live in a diverse country with no consensus on abortion, certain areas are viewed as too intimate for the government to intervene. We have zones of privacy. No woman is forced to have an abortion. It is a woman's decision that she is free to make in consultation with her physician.
What a fetus looks like is irrelevant. I will fight in the streets if need be to never return to the days when married couples could not learn about contraception. You can choose to have a child, if the fetus develops fully. As a pro-choice woman, fetuses are not babies. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held they are not babies.
No one knows what they will do until they face the circumstance. The common law had no proscriptions against abortion. A cadaver being maintained to host a nonviable fetus is gross. If she were alive, she had every right to abort the fetus. The hospital overreached and overreached greatly.
The law gives you autonomy over your own body. Don't impose your religous notions and butterly notions on other women.
-
adamah
Lisa Rose said- FHN, I agree with you on this 100%. I dont like abortions, but I am pro choice. I am glad I never had to make this choice, both my children were wanted and I was in a position to love and care for them.
I doubt very few people who are pro-choice LIKE abortions, and enjoy the thought of a fetus ripped out of the womb. It's a waste of something very precious, and represents potential for what could've been but will never be. Heck, I hate to look at that picture of a chicken embryo, for the same reason!
But what I hate even more is the idea of others daring to possess the RIGHT to decide for others, when it really should be an intensely-personal decision made by the persons involved. Granted, some women WILL abuse their right and use abortion as a form of birth control, but we cannot allow the rights of the far-greater majority who do responsibly use their rights to be eroded by those who'd point to those who abuse the right.
That's the irony here: Erick and Marlise are paramedics, trusted and licensed by the State of Texas to SAVE the lives of others; but suddenly they become unable to be trusted to make a decision pertaining to themselves (which was made beforehand, based primarily on their experience AS paramedics seeing those people in a coma/PVS without ANY quality of life). So the State decides for them?
-
Band on the Run
This case ignited the abortion wars again. The main anti-choice group decided to back away from insistence on denying other women a right to choose. I am not irate. My personal autonomy and the autonomy of others is valued highly precisely b/c of Jehovah's Witnesses. I had no autonomy over anything. They were monsters. We don't live in candy land but in the United States of America, a secular nation. I don't give a damn what the Mayo Clnic calls a fetus.
I will not sap my strength and resources arguing with close minded people. These are hard choices for women-and their famiilies. Fetuses are not babies. Babies are born. They breathe. No, I will not engage in nonsense on this forum. No one here is worth the effort. You are not decision makers. I will make the case before judges, legislatures, and public opinion. I don't know a woman I respect who thinks a fetus is a baby. The people I respect labored long to make Roe a reality.
If every woman raised a Roman Catholic or fundie Christian refrained from obtaining abortions based on moral argument, the abortion rate would plummet. It is unfair to enlist the government to enforce your basic moral structure. Also, so far there has been a sore lack of care for living children. The abortion wars distract from providing food, shelter, and love from living children.
I will argue that pro-choice women fought for the right to have choice. Abortion was viewed as the lesser of two evils. Certainly, women who had no access to fairly permanent birth control methods might have three or four abortions over a lifetime. I have yet to meet a woman ecstatic that she had to have an abortion. The procedure itself is not fun. It is a lesser of two evils. My mom processed health insurance claims. She told me that some women were having 20-30 abortions. It was a small set but it happened. There is no consensus in society. Educated and urban women tend to be pro-choice. I will not permit anyone to remove my autonomy. So many women who scream against abortion have abortions.
This is NOT a religious country. Women, such as FHN, have no right to impose their beliefs on other women. Mind your own business. Why abortion as the centerpiece of the culture wars? Go move to Taliban controlled territory. This is the United States of America. Women have const'l rights. Your silly illustrations nothwithstanding. And-it is a fact that most anti-choice activists do not use neutral illustrations. They are designed to inflame and give an incorrect impression.
Well, FHN, come Monday a.m. NARAL is getting a nice check from me. We are clearly opponents. Why don't you start with wildlowers and butterflies. There are some legitimate discussions you can term "wars" and intercede as peace marshall with no authority.
-
FlyingHighNow
BOTR, try reading our posts. I'm pro choice and my stand on the question is not based on religion, any more than yours is. I can tell you though, that I've had two pregnancies and two live births. My doctors called my children babies, just like the mayo clinic and medicenenet do today. Sure, just like human beings go through different stages of development, infancy, toddlerhood, adolescence, etc., where bones and sexual organs are still developing, babies go tbrough the emryonic stage of development, then go through the fetal stage of development. Physicians and people still call the product of conception a baby, though they will sometimes refer to its stage of development. We call someone going through adolescence and an adolescent. The adolescent is still a child. A person's bones don't fully develop until the age of 11 or 12, but the person is still a human being. Though I find the thought of an abortion to be unsettling, I am very, passionately pro choice. You can protest until the cows come home that a fetus is not a baby, but medical literature does not concur. As some of us mentioned earlier, we dont ask parents about the fetus they are expecting, we ask about their baby. In case you just skimmed my comment, again, I am pro choice.