Justitia Themis

Joined

• started 161 topics
• posted 2,529 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Justitia Themis

• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  FHN said- I don't know why people are making this about religion. Has the hospital really made this about religion?

  You are seemingly unaware of the ongoing battles between Xian pro-lifers and pro-rights groups in TX

  FHN, while I appreciate your desire to examine only what JPS has expressly said, one can't ignore the underlying religio-political right-to-life issue and extremist Texas lawmaker's penchant for tyring to legally impose their beliefs.

  I am more concerned that the hospital has an agenda since learning that the existing Texas case law directed them to disconnect "life" support when she was declared brain dead. And as I posted earlier, if it was truly confused as to the law, it could have filed a motion for clarification.

  Additionally, I am in the midst of researching the JPS' executive officers' backgrounds because at best, their internal baises will affect their decisions, and at worst, will drive their decisions.

  The CEO, Robert Early, is a former Republican Texas legislator who championed right-to-life issues.

  However, I can't even find an in-house counsel! Someone please tell me they actually HAVE in-house counsel, and that the hospital was not relying merely upon its HR risk manager!!!

  Edited to add:

  Found the chief counsel under the parent company. He is a buddy of Rick Perry's and a staunch right-to-lifer.

  Pojman remembers one local activist who helped get abortions banned at JPS: lawyer Neal Adams of Euless-based Northeast Tarrant Right-To-Life. Adams remains on that group’s advisory board along with Hancock and both Tarrant County Judge Glen Whitley of Hurst and County Commissioner Gary Fickes of Southlake, who help appoint the heavily Republican board of hospital managers

  Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/09/5474256/marlise-munoz-and-the-politics.html?storylink=addthis#storylink=cpy
• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Sooner7nc suprised me with what he said about the USA

  Sooner was wrong Snare.

  However, you are correct. There is consensus in the American medical community that Ms. Munoz is dead by any definition.

  Thank you for providing a citation. For those who want to perform further research, here is a quote from a paper I wrote, along with the supporting citation, concerning the disconnect between the public's and the medical field's definition of death, especially in the organ donation setting. Between this citation and Snare's, one should have plenty of authoritative information on defining death.

  "Death is defined by state law, which often relies upon the Uniform Determination of Death Act’s bifurcated definition: 1) irreversible loss of all brain function, and 2) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory function, with or without brain death. [1] "

  ---

  [1] David Rodriguez-Arias & Maxwell Smith, et al., Donation After Circulatory Death: Burying the Dead Donor Rule, 11 Am. J Bioethics 36 (2011).
• 
  7

  Inspiring Commercial - Go Seahawks!!

  by tresdecu in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  derrick coleman fullback for seattle seahawks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2hd57z4f8e.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  OMG! The girl has got balls; I'm would never risk 40-whiner cook spit....

  My daughter just posted this on facebook:

  I went to Slaters 50/50 here in SD for some friends birthdays. I created and named my burger "The 12th Man Burger", so that when they called it out I could proudly claim my allegiance. I'm absolutely positive that I ate some 40-whiner cook spit tonight, but that's what true fans endure while in enemy territory.
• 
  7

  Inspiring Commercial - Go Seahawks!!

  by tresdecu in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  derrick coleman fullback for seattle seahawks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2hd57z4f8e.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  LOL! My other daughter, who lives in San Diego, just posted this on facebook, along with pictures:

  Ladies and Gentleman, my biggest lucky charm has finally been pulled out of storage. This is my ticket and rally towel from the 2005 NFC Championship game where the Seahawks beat the Panthers and went to the Super Bowl. Along with the ticket, is ACTUAL confetti that rained down on the stadium after won. It was the most amazing experience of my life being at that game. Let's have an even better repeat tomorrow. ‪#‎ tappedin‬ ‪#‎ GoHawks‬ ‪#‎ 12s‬ ‪#‎ ibelieve‬ @seahawks
• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  I was wondering if JPS was possibly trying to force the husband to legally push the issue perhaps to highlight and publicize the craziness of the law, as the perfect test case?

  First, let me say I know next to nothing about Texas law. However, if that was JPS' goal, then as a hospital, with deeper pockets than the civil-servant husband, should have filed for a declaratory judgment.
• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  infliction of emotional distress on the husband and family, but showing 'intent' in court will be another matter, indeed, if the husband files that suit in the future

  I believe IIED is only an add on in Texas anyway. So, if there is another cause of action, they will not allow the IIED to go forward.

  Nevertheless, IIED is one of the intetional torts whose standard of proof is intentional OR reckless disregard. While the law is poorly worded and subject to multiple interpretations, the hospital's legal counsel could have just as easily used the prior case as legal justification not to fight the family's wishes. I would love to see the discoverable documents to see why the hospital chose to take this course when it appears that the only existing case law dictated that it take the opposite course. That might be enough to get them to 'reckless.'

  I just hope his lawyer will do the work at a greatly reduced price, or even pro pono, to get the win and the publicity. Hopefully, the case will get appealed all the way to the highest Texas court so that families and hospitals will have clear direction.

  Edited to add 'reckless disregard' stuff.
• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  There has to be more to this JT, or the hospital wouldn't put its self at risk in court.

  It happens all the time FHN. Hospitals are run by people who have personal feelings that cloud their judgment and sometimes even agendas that they seek to promote.

  In my area, Catholic hospitals have been particularly aggressive in promoting their pro-life agendas. A local hospital network entered into an agreement with the Catholics. I studied anti-trust in the health care setting from one of the nations premium healthcare anti-trust lawyers. He actually wrote this agreement and did so to ensure that the hospital would be able to continue to offer tubal ligations. In fact, they brought in accountants so that the money collected from the tubal ligations would not contaminate the Catholic's money in any way. Additionally, the agreement was approved by the local Bishop and Diocese.

  Nevertheless, once the agreement was signed, the Catholics issued a decree saying that any doctor who performed a tubal ligation would be fired. Women who had babies that day (and it still continues) were forced to go home, recover from the baby, find some other doctor to perform their tubal ligation, and go through more anesthesia (and a second surgery if they delivered their babies via C-section).

  Healthcare is a seething battleground for religious agendas right now.

  I'm glad the family filed suit. If they prevail, I hope they turn around and file tort claims against the hospital, including an IIED claim.
• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  FHN, I don't know how to explain it any more clearly than I did in my post.

  Perhaps some other poster can.

  You're clearly a kindhearted person, but if you can't understand why the Texas court said that the statute applies to a comatose, pregnant woman but not a brain-dead, pregnant woman, I can't really help you.
• 
  285

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

  by adamah in

  1. social
  2. current

  there's an interesting medicolegal issue arising out of tx, a pregnant women who suffered a pulmonary embolism in november and died (when she was 14 weeks pregnant).. however, the body has been kept on life-support all this time (against her and her husband's wishes), due to an ambiguous tx state law (tex hs.

  code ann.

  166.049) which actually blocks the ability of the patient and family to decide:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  law in Texas . . . which states that if a woman is pregnant, deceased, but her fetus is not deceased, the rights of the fetus over ride the rights of the deceased woman and probably in this case, the wishes of the spouse and family.

  All these many pages of dicussion and some people still do not even understand what the Texas statute says.

  The Texas Advance Directives Act, Section 166.049, provides that "a person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment under this subchapter from a pregnant patient."

  The Texas Advance Directives Act defines "life-sustaining treatment" as that which "sustains the life of a patient and without which the patient will die."

  The family's lawyer has a great argument that the statute doesn't even apply because:

  1) Munoz is dead, so there is no "life-sustaining treatment" to withdraw because there is no longer any life to sustain.

  2) Dead people are not "patients."

  And it appears the lawyers have Texas case law on their side:

  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. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/commentary/la-oe-caplan-pope-texas-pregnancy-life-support-20140116,0,3476520.story#ixzz2qi40khRU
• 
  7

  Inspiring Commercial - Go Seahawks!!

  by tresdecu in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  derrick coleman fullback for seattle seahawks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2hd57z4f8e.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Yeah...this commercial is a LOT more inspiring than Kapernick's nobody-likes-me-because-I'm-an-asshole-but-I-don't-care commercial.

  My oldest daughter is a season ticket holder. Last night, she used my printer to print her ticket for this Sunday's 49ers game...so jealous....

  Go Seahawks!!

  kah...kah!!!