...yet restricts it frequently because Jesus.
LOL. Can't really argue with ya.
By the way my reason for agreeing with JPS has to do with my support for live babies and nothing to do with any Sky-Daddy.
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:.
...yet restricts it frequently because Jesus.
LOL. Can't really argue with ya.
By the way my reason for agreeing with JPS has to do with my support for live babies and nothing to do with any Sky-Daddy.
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:.
Yes I haven't been on here much lately. Glad I could make your heart race a little today Rip
It's great! It lets you know as soon as idiots or friends send you messages! It's the bee's knees!
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:.
Justitia I read the paper you claim to have written. Very interesting stuff. I especially like how you (I'll just assume you're telling the truth) and your colleagues point out that...
"Obedience to the DDR has induced policymakers to include
andmaintain irreversible loss of brain function as a legal criterion
for declaring death despite controversies and some
evidence that these individuals do not fulfil any definition
of death."
"We believe that justifying the procurement of vital
organs from severely injured patients on an explicit moral
basis, instead of supporting it on the pseudo-objective
claim that “they are really dead,” is an honest way to
acknowledge the unavoidable uncertainty of the vital
status of so-called “brain-dead” and “circulatory-dead”
donors."
Rodriguez-Arias, D & Smith, M. J. & Lazar, N. M. (2011) Donation After Circulatory Death: Burying the Dead Donor Rule. The American Journal of Bioethics, 11(8), 36-43. DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2011.583319
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:.
And where did this concept of the fetus deserving a right to live come from, anyway? It SURE isn't found in the Bible....
As far as Erick keeping his dick out of his wife while trying to conceive another child with his wife (!), I'm sure JPS also refuses to treat skiers who broke their legs on the slopes, or car accident victims, telling them "you knew the dangers of skiing or automobiles, you knew the risk!" They'd probably refuse to treat them, if not for that pesky Hippocratic Oath and the State forcing them to treat sinners!
Since YES, I can see why Xians would believe it's entirely reasonable to tell married people to forego sex, just in case the unforeseen pulmonary embolism occurred, since after all, doesn't Jesus advise Xians that some people are better off as sexless eunechs since not everyone is cut out for marriage, since they should "put Kingdom interests first"?
This is easily one of the most idiotic fucking things I've read on this website in the several years that I've been coming here. You really should be embarrassed for simply being too stupid to form a cogent thought. You make me want to shake my head. Oh well, I guess abortion wasn't your mother's thing. Pity.
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:.
Ruby, here's the actual section of the RPOT platform (which took me about 60 seconds to find). Some parts of the RPOT platform are deplorable by the way, others not so much.
"We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority. "
Take what you want from the above quote from the party platform but know that the issue in the case of Ms. Munoz isn't about religion, it's about quite possibly saving the life of a human being. Maybe the child will die and maybe he or she will be born with debilitating birth defects but the child deserves a chance. Also, if Mr. Munoz doesn't want to be burdened with a disabled child, as some have posited, then he should have kept his dick out of *Ms. Munoz.
(You may notice that I'm writing Ms. instead of Mrs. This is because "...till death do us part" and she's dead right? )
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:.
Whatever Adam. Stay where you're at and worry about your own insignificant issues.
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:.
In addition I would like to add to all those that say that they're glad they don't live in Texas; we're glad you don't live here either.
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:.
Today I spent 10 hours at JPS on one of the Med-Surg floors during nursing clinicals. I've been coming to JPS for 5 months now in Med-Surg and Labor and Delivery and have gotten very familiar with the nurses and other staff as well the patient population and I've been very impressed by the care provided by this organization.
If the mother's braindead (which isn't DEAD by the way) and the child still has the possibility of a viable birth then I say keep her on life support.
Another point I would like to make is to correct what's been said about mother's and baby's blood. The cardiovascular systems of the mother and baby are separate and do not mix. Also, the fetus has quite a reserve capacity of oxygen compared to the mother.
I know next to nothing about Texas law The first smart thing you said in this thread.