Dead pregnant woman forced to stay on life support, due to TX State law

by adamah 285 Replies latest social current

• 

  adamah

  FHN said- Im looking at your chart again, Adam. Let me point out that the picture representing the word foetus is of an embryo.

  FHN, sorry for not providing a link to the commonly-accepted definitions used in medicine and biology; the pix was chosen as a short-cut so as not to get buried down in the details, but since you asked, here's the wikipedia page which discusses the stages of life for human development:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_development_%28biology%29

  We can go to more heavy-duty medicine-based sources, if you want....

  ---

  On the embryo vs fetus distinction:

  In humans, the embryo is referred to as a fetus in the later stages of prenatal development. The transition from embryo to fetus is arbitrarily defined as occurring 8 weeks after fertilization. In comparison to the embryo, the fetus has more recognizable external features, and a set of progressively developing internal organs.

  Also, note this:

  Childbirth is the process in which the baby is born. Age is defined relative to this event in most cultures.

  Physical stages

  There are no universal definitions for terms of age-related physical development stages, but following are some approximate age ranges:

  Stages in prenatal development.

  • Prenatal (sperm fertilizes egg - birth)
    • Embryo - fertilization - 8 weeks after fertilization)
      • Zygote, the single cell stage which occurs after fertilization
      • Blastocyst, the stage prior to implantation, when the embryo is a hollow sphere
      • Post-implantation embryo, the period 1 – 8 weeks after fertilization (3 to 10 weeks gestation)
    • Fetus, (10th week of pregnancy - birth)

  Approximate outline of development periods in child development.

  • Childhood/Juvenile (Childbirth)(0 - 19)

  Further information: Child development and Child development stages

  • • Neonate (newborn) (0 – 30 days)
    • Infant (baby) (0 month - 12 months)
    • Toddler (1 – 3 years)
    • Play age (4–5 years)
    • Primary school age (middle childhood also called prepubescence) (4-12)
      • Elementary school age (6-12)
      • Preadolescence (preteen.The child in this and the previous phase are called schoolchild (schoolboy or schoolgirl), when still of primary school age.) (10 – 12 years)
    • Adolescence and puberty (13 – 19 years)
      • Peripuberty (8 [ 3 ] -10 [ 4 ] until 15 [ 4 ] -17 [ 5 ] )
  • Adulthood (20+ years)
    • Young adulthood (20 – 39 years)
    • Middle adulthood (40 – 59 years)
    • Advanced adulthood/Senior citizen (60+ years)
  • Death (occurs at various ages, depending on person)
    • Decomposition (breakdown of the body after death)
• 

  sooner7nc

  I would really like to know if Mr. Perez has any medical training except for googling things that he agrees with pertaining to healthcare.
• 

  Paralipomenon

  Just to weigh in my two cents.

  I am not remotely religious. I am also pro-choice.

  That said, early in our marriage my wife had a miscarriage and the fetus was lost. It had progressed far enough that the doctor was able to tell us that it was female.

  I know that legally it was classified as a fetus and as such had no legal standing, but there is so much of a difference between having no legal standing and not being alive.

  To me, I see no difference between those that lack any compassion towards those that lose a child in the womb because it doesn't suit their political agenda and those that try to deny women the right to choose. Both insist that their own narrow view should be painted across all people.

  I do not envy any women that needs to make such a choice. While some use abortion as a form of birth control, and cases like that sadden me, it is not the measuring stick for the issue at large. A pregnant woman is a complex legal entity, a line needed to be set for when the rights of the child will supercede the rights of the mother but that is the issue, legal definition.

  There is such a difference between when a fetus is recognized legally and when it is alive. To a loving couple, it is alive from the moment they learn of it. It is a baby and their child and the loss is traumatic.

  Pro Choice does not give you the right to decide for others when they should feel a fetus is alive. Those that view the growing fetus as a child or baby are using their choice just as much as someone considering abortion.
• 

  FlyingHighNow

  Thank you, Par, for your post. Your baby sounds about the same gestational age as my fifth brother, when he was lost. My mother grieved. We siblings grieved. Im grateful to Dad for letting us see him. The medical field backs you up in calling your lost child a baby. You are still pro choice. Im still pro choice, especially since many pro lifers really are only pro birthers, when it gets down to it.
• 

  LisaRose

  Just like you Adamah, argue to the death over the meanings of words, because you always have to have the last 500 of them.

  I am very happy the hospital will finally let this poor woman be buried. The husband and parents can now grieve and get on with their lives.
• 

  adamah

  Sooner said- I would really like to know if Mr. Perez has any medical training except for googling things that he agrees with pertaining to healthcare.
  
  Hmmm, why don't you google it and see what you can find?

  Paralip- There is such a difference between when a fetus is recognized legally and when it is alive. To a loving couple, it is alive from the moment they learn of it. It is a baby and their child and the loss is traumatic.

  Thanks for adding your thoughts, Paralip.

  That actually reminds me of something that wraps up a few lingering questions.

  Apparently there's a distinction JPS was drawing between 'meeting the clinical criteria of brain death' and actually being 'pronounced brain dead'.

  It seems that during the past two months, her JPS attending physician never quite got around to signing her death certificate (they must've been too busy doing other things). This explains the hospital's little 'game' of holding off on pronouncing her death, because they didn't even consider her officially dead.

  The JPS defense (in the affadavit) was based on asking the judge for clarification of applicability of 166.049, since their unstated assumption was she still was alive, despite meeting all the clinical criteria of death, simply based on their failure to take the last step and officially certify her death! So although the patient died on Nov 28th and met the clinical criteria of death at that time, the hospital only conceded that point in writing just a few days ago, only hours before the judge heard the case.

  Their lack of pronouncement of death also explains why the JPS lawyers failed to mention the Martin case in their affadavit, since in the eyes of JPS, the fact-pattern was sufficiently different (Martin had been 'declared dead', a factor which triggered the reversal of the ruling) didn't apply to Munoz (who hadn't yet been 'declared dead').

  From the LA Times article:

  Given the clarity of this statutory language, it is hardly surprising courts have determined it inapplicable after a determination of death. For example, in a similar case in Houston, a Texas court ordered a hospital to continue treatment for a comatose Tammy Martin, who was then 15 weeks pregnant. But the court reversed the order, a few weeks later, once Martin had been declared dead.

  As hinted at earlier, JPS' strategy seems to have been to drag their feet on declaring death until after the fetus hit the age of viability, maintaining her on life-support for the sake of the fetus and then performing a C-section, and only THEN pronounce her dead, so they weren't even guilty of mutilating a corpse.

  In their eyes, JPS was not even violating Section 42.08 (Abuse of Corpse) by failing to turn over her dead body to Erick, since she hadn't yet been declared dead by them!

  This also explains why the judge's ruling not only mentioned the non-applicability of 166.049 (since JPS admitted only hours earlier that she met the clinical criteria of death found in 671.001), but also included the order for JPS to pronounce her dead before 5PM Monday (apparently a judge cannot pronounce death, but CAN order the hospital to do so).

  I'd call it brilliant, if it weren't so downright Machiavellian, suggesting intent of the State to rob the personal liberties of citizens.
• 

  FlyingHighNow

  She can rest peacefully now with her baby. Did they ever determine whether it was a son or daughter? Maybe they will do an autopsy. They should do one for accurate information in case this kind of tragedy happens again. Very sad and they should not add insult to injury by billing this father for anything other than the initial intake and tests.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Birth matters. We celebrate birthdays, not fetal days. Loving parents don't matter when it comes to setting const'l norms. When I substitute taught, the lack of loving parents for real born children was revolting. Roe leaves the decision with the woman. Her husband has not legal standing. I am fed up with people asserting that one must be a biological mother to love children. Everyone faces different circumstances and has different values. I repeat that if women who were active in Roman Catholicism or fundie religions voluntarily refrained from seeking abortions, the rate would plummet.

  Before we worry about fetuses and keep a dead woman as a baby mama, children alive need to be adopted. They need school supplies. I saw my students with welfare moms eating their daily breakfast or orange soda and popsicles. Only one popsicle. There is a host of things that living children need.

  Women deserve a zone of privacy concerning reproduction issues. The hospital should be sanctioned in some manner. I don't know what was worse in this case. The facts themselves or the entire world knowing their private heartbreak.
• 

  adamah

  BOTR said- The hospital should be sanctioned in some manner.

  In a perfect World, BOTR.....

  Being that JPS relied on a legal-technicality which didn't come out until pressed on the point (i.e. the difference between 'clinical determination of death' vs 'declaration of death', where the obvious assumption is one should follow the other without significant delay, and certainly NOT intentionally-delayed for over TWO MONTHS!), it looks to be driven by the hubristic attitude of "doctor is God".

  The ones who should be worried are the citizens of the Great State of Texas, since unless I'm missing something here, the Munoz finding is actually a 'one-off' ruling, and NOT setting any precedent which prevents using the same strategy; nothing prevents JPS or another hospital from playing the same game by failing to pronounce death for a clinically-dead pregnant patient, until they're good and ready to say she is dead.

  So family members would still need to force hospitals to fess up to having determined clinical death (and Erick, a paramedic, saw the words noted in her chart and knew what it meant, unlike most lay-people); if the hospital fails to declare death, the next-of-kin would STILL need to seek a court order forcing hospital to do so (I doubt the broader statute found in 671.001 defining clinical criteria of death would be sufficient, without the pressure of a statute to put "teeth" into it).

  Instead, there should be a TX state law (and already may be; I haven't looked, or checked if UDDA states time-lines) requiring physicians to declare death within a reasonable period of time (say, 1-2 days) after a clinical determination of death is made, as that would prevent a recurrence of similar episodes.

  With such a state law, doctors would face criminal prosecution and have to defend their licenses before the Texas Medical Board, accused of unprofessional conduct after a complaint is filed by the family. It's funny how easily doctors 'remember' to do things and not play such games when it's their license on the line....

  Will such a law be passed in pro-life Texas? I wouldn't hold my breath (and if anyone does, hopefully someone will respect your DNR)!
• 

  sammielee24

  If a fetus is just a fetus - why is it a child in cases of homicide? There are people in prison for killing a woman and charged with a double homicide - if a fetus is just a fetus - there should be no such thing as legal rights...sw

  The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a child in utero as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb". [1]