TX - pregnant wife unresponsive on life support, husband hopes to fulfill her wishes

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
This just hit the news. The family filed a lawsuit against the hospital this morning.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Fa...Lawsuit-to-Remove-Life-Support-240121591.html

No date for a hearing has been set. IMO, from this point forward, I imagine the outcome will depend on which judge hears the case. As always, politics will be involved.

I hope they are successful. How horrific to think your views would mean nothing and others would take over your brain dead body. And then use your body your dead body as a vessel for a "viable fetus"....
My father was brain dead a whole week before organ failure and pneumonia set in; to take him. My mother refused to unplug. It was heartless...This woman is being used as a vessel and the father has made it very clear: He doesn't want this child. It could mean a lifetime of hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical care, does the hospital and state want to provide all that care for free if the "child" is also brain dead or not viable? Or only half way viable to a not very functionable life?
It's horrific because her SPOUSE has made it clear as EMTs they knew each others wishes just as much as my spouse knows mine and I he. :banghead:

This is happening because of others who are pro life and they have no business butting into any one elses life. Esp if they are MALE. We have rights. And we will continue to advance those rights no matter what freaking state we live in~
 
Curious about this situation, hypothetically modified a bit.

If similar situation w brain dead preg wife (first trimester) BUT
w written advance medical directive and Pwr/Atty, appting husband, w AMD stating that if she were BD and preg up to specified gestation wk or other time (assuming her doc language, execution, etc. comported w. TX law (or other state w. similar law, and situation occuring in that state)
and AMD specified she wanted no 'life sustaining' or 'death prolonging' treatments, after being declared brain dead, even if preg ...

I wonder what outcome or response would be --
-- from treating doc,
-- from hosp ethics committee,
-- et al.

Basically wondering ---hosp in TX or similar law
if a written signed, etc AMD specifically addressing the preg and BD situation were in place, and if husband requested dr, hosp etc. complied w. her wishes and he did not oppose it--

Question 1(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 1 (b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 1(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?


Modifying hypo again
Preg pt & same as above, but written AMD, directing if BD for hosp to withhold all L/S or D/P measures,silent on preg possibility, but still meeting st. reqmts, and husb still requesting disconnection,

Question 2(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 2(b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 2(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?

Thx in adv. :seeya:
 
Personally, I do not believe in abortion as another form of birth control. On the other hand, I cannot understand bringing a child into the world who will only know pain & suffering. Having worked for many years entities who contracted for rehabilitation services with Child Protective Services, I know that some people only breed in order to have a child to torture. It is much like breeding pit bulls for fighting purposes. I cannot describe the shock I felt when I became aware that some people cook their children in ovens, stab & cut them, sexually abuse even infants, beat, starve, scald & otherwise torture their own flesh & blood. In instances like this, abortion would have been a blessing.

I also do not believe in artificially sustaining life in adults when an they have only pain & suffering in their future. When an individual dies I believe they should be allowed to pass away with dignity. Life just for the sake of life is actually no life at all. JMO
 
I hope they are successful. How horrific to think your views would mean nothing and others would take over your brain dead body. And then use your body your dead body as a vessel for a "viable fetus"....
My father was brain dead a whole week before organ failure and pneumonia set in; to take him. My mother refused to unplug. It was heartless...This woman is being used as a vessel and the father has made it very clear: He doesn't want this child.

I'm pro-choice and have no issues with removing "life" support from a brain dead patient but I have mixed feelings about this case because as a mother, I would want to my child to have the possibility of survival. IMO, the father's opinion isn't relative. It doesn't matter if he doesn't want the child. Giving a father the option of essentially aborting a potentially disabled child because he/she will be an inconvenience is a dangerous precedent to set.

My own person experience change my opinions on this one. I don't agree with gov't enforcing religious views on anyone but as a mom, I like this law. I had complications with my first pregnancy and I told my doctor in no uncertain terms that if it came down to me or the baby, I choose the baby. My bf and parents did not agree with me but it wasn't their choice- it was mine.

I guess I don't see this case being as much about end of life issues as it is about who gets to decide when a pregnancy is terminated. Mothers and their families can have very different opinions but it's the mother's choice is the only one whose counts. Unless Munoz's doctors know exactly what she would have wanted in this situation, they shouldn't be able to terminate her pregnancy by removing her from life support. That's her child. The father should be able to abort it because he/she could be disabled.
 
Curious about this situation, hypothetically modified a bit.

If similar situation w brain dead preg wife (first trimester) BUT
w written advance medical directive and Pwr/Atty, appting husband, w AMD stating that if she were BD and preg up to specified gestation wk or other time (assuming her doc language, execution, etc. comported w. TX law (or other state w. similar law, and situation occuring in that state)
and AMD specified she wanted no 'life sustaining' or 'death prolonging' treatments, after being declared brain dead, even if preg ...

I wonder what outcome or response would be --
-- from treating doc,
-- from hosp ethics committee,
-- et al.

Basically wondering ---hosp in TX or similar law
if a written signed, etc AMD specifically addressing the preg and BD situation were in place, and if husband requested dr, hosp etc. complied w. her wishes and he did not oppose it--

Question 1(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 1 (b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 1(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?


Modifying hypo again
Preg pt & same as above, but written AMD, directing if BD for hosp to withhold all L/S or D/P measures,silent on preg possibility, but still meeting st. reqmts, and husb still requesting disconnection,

Question 2(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 2(b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 2(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?

Thx in adv. :seeya:

My Opinion Only:
1 (a) No.
1 (b) Yes
1 (c) No
 
I'm pro-choice and have no issues with removing "life" support from a brain dead patient but I have mixed feelings about this case because as a mother, I would want to my child to have the possibility of survival. IMO, the father's opinion isn't relative. It doesn't matter if he doesn't want the child. Giving a father the option of essentially aborting a potentially disabled child because he/she will be an inconvenience is a dangerous precedent to set.

My own person experience change my opinions on this one. I don't agree with gov't enforcing religious views on anyone but as a mom, I like this law. I had complications with my first pregnancy and I told my doctor in no uncertain terms that if it came down to me or the baby, I choose the baby. My bf and parents did not agree with me but it wasn't their choice- it was mine.

I guess I don't see this case being as much about end of life issues as it is about who gets to decide when a pregnancy is terminated. Mothers and their families can have very different opinions but it's the mother's choice is the only one whose counts. Unless Munoz's doctors know exactly what she would have wanted in this situation, they shouldn't be able to terminate her pregnancy by removing her from life support. That's her child. The father should be able to abort it because he/she could be disabled.

Again, this case is about how "exactly what she wanted" means nothing. Even had her specific - even written - directive been to remove life support under these exact circumstances, the state of Texas would not allow it.

This is not a pro-choice or pro-life matter. And while I am, in real life, very pro-choice, I would like to point out that the fetus at the center of this case does also belong TO THE FATHER and I do believe he should have rights in this decision, particularly since he is the only parent left. Truthfully, it's pure speculation to believe he actually wants to end the pregnancy. He is trying his best to fulfill the wishes of his beloved wife. Period.
 
I'm pro-choice and have no issues with removing "life" support from a brain dead patient but I have mixed feelings about this case because as a mother, I would want to my child to have the possibility of survival. IMO, the father's opinion isn't relative. It doesn't matter if he doesn't want the child. Giving a father the option of essentially aborting a potentially disabled child because he/she will be an inconvenience is a dangerous precedent to set.

My own person experience change my opinions on this one. I don't agree with gov't enforcing religious views on anyone but as a mom, I like this law. I had complications with my first pregnancy and I told my doctor in no uncertain terms that if it came down to me or the baby, I choose the baby. My bf and parents did not agree with me but it wasn't their choice- it was mine.

I guess I don't see this case being as much about end of life issues as it is about who gets to decide when a pregnancy is terminated. Mothers and their families can have very different opinions but it's the mother's choice is the only one whose counts. Unless Munoz's doctors know exactly what she would have wanted in this situation, they shouldn't be able to terminate her pregnancy by removing her from life support. That's her child. The father should be able to abort it because he/she could be disabled.

Absolutely! This is exactly my thoughts! She DID NOT leave a written directive. If she did I would feel differently. Her husband, her parents, and even her doctors CANNOT make that choice for her. If we want to start arguing that they can, then NO woman has the right to an abortion anymore. The law is pretty friggin clear on that. . .and I agree. She is the ONLY person that could have chosen to terminate this pregnancy. .and she is not here to do that anymore. NO ONE gets to make that choice for her. IF those were her wishes. . .she should have put it in friggin writing. To late. .. to bad. :(

Again, this case is about how "exactly what she wanted" means nothing. Even had her specific - even written - directive been to remove life support under these exact circumstances, the state of Texas would not allow it.

This is not a pro-choice or pro-life matter. And while I am, in real life, very pro-choice, I would like to point out that the fetus at the center of this case does also belong TO THE FATHER and I do believe he should have rights in this decision, particularly since he is the only parent left. Truthfully, it's pure speculation to believe he actually wants to end the pregnancy. He is trying his best to fulfill the wishes of his beloved wife. Period.

NO ONE knows what she wanted because she didn't bother to put that in writing!!! Her husband and her family saying what they THINK she wanted may not be true AT ALL! I agree that we can argue about IF a woman would have left that directive. There is a legal issue there. BUT it does NOT apply here. It's a hypothetical situation. She DID NOT leave a written directive. That point is mute. . .it doesn't apply to THIS case.

Fathers have NO say in a woman's right to choose. I have known more than a few men, where the pregnant woman chose to have an abortion against their wishes. It sucks, but the entire legal foundation that supports a woman's right to choose, is based upon her right to privacy. Abortion being legal is BASED SOLELY on a woman's right to control her own body. If we start messing with that. . .and start arguing that fathers have a right to a say what a woman does during her pregnancy. . .then we undermine the entire legal foundation that legal abortion is based upon! Women will no longer have a right to choose.

I just don't know how to say that more clearly. Abortion is LEGAL because a pregnant woman has the right to privacy. . .and determine what happens to her body. NO ONE else can say that for her. In this case, she did not leave a written directive saying what her wishes were. NO ONE gets to say what her intentions were with regards to her unborn child. If she really wished to be unplugged and have her pregnancy terminated. . .then she should have left a written directive spelling that out! !!! She didn't! The state cannot assume chit! Her husband, her parents and the entire state of California cannot say what they "think" her wishes were. This wouldn't be the first family in history that has had to deal with someone dying unexpectedly before they had a chance to express their dying wishes. Chit happens. It is what it is. This is now where they find themselves. A word to the wise. . .finish those wills and advance care directives!
 
What some of us have been trying to convey here is this: Even if she had a written advance directive stating her wishes, witnessed by the entire Supreme Court and Jesus himself, the state would ignore it. The family's lawsuit is to change the law, letting women be in control of their own bodies.
 
What some of us have been trying to convey here is this: Even if she had a written advance directive stating her wishes, witnessed by the entire Supreme Court and Jesus himself, the state would ignore it. The family's lawsuit is to change the law, letting women be in control of their own bodies.

And my point, again, is that is NOT the case here. What you are arguing is a hypothetical situation. THIS woman did NOT leave an advance directive. That hypothetical legal challenge is best left up to a case where the woman actually DID leave a directive. It is in NO WAY the situation here. It doesn't apply AT ALL anyway. Why press that issue if it doesn't even apply in this case? They can argue that the state of Texas should honor a woman's written directive dealing with this issue until they are blue in the face, it STILL WON"T apply here.. . .because THIS woman didn't leave an advance directive!
 
My mother didn't leave a written directive either and yet we were able to honor what she made clear were her wishes. As this family should be able to do for their wife and daughter.
 
A disclaimer: I am not an ultrasound tech, or a perinatologist. I have experience as an OB nurse way back when (before I was a flight nurse, and before graduate anesthesia school program), in addition to PICU and adult ICU, and a smattering of other areas. I have taught OB anesthesia to CRNA students in the classroom and clinical area for about 13 years. (OB anesthesia is not the only topic I teach or practice.)

So, having said that, here is some information that might be interesting to some readers, and is (IMO), more interesting than arguing about pro life/ pro choice, and whether or not the Munoz situation is a potential “elective termination” of pregnancy.

The Munoz fetus is 20-21 weeks gestation as of this week (Jan 13-19), per media reports.

What the doctors (and Erick Munoz, I hope) most definitely know about the Munoz fetus (and this is just a small list of everything the docs know-they know much, much more about this fetus):

• Whether the heart rate has reassuring variability beat to beat, or an abnormal pattern that indicates significant central nervous system insult (“flat” beat to beat variability)
• How active the fetus is, or is not. Whether or not it is flexing and moving all limbs.
• Whether the fetus demonstrates normal sleep cycles, indicating hormonal systems in the fetal brain are intact (or not) Usually apparent at 22-24 weeks
• Whether the fetus is demonstrating normal activity that indicates an intact nervous system, such as sucking and swallowing movements, breathing movements, and startle reflex. Usually apparent at 22-24 weeks.
• Head size, whether there is excess fluid around the brain, appearance of ventricles of the brain
• Gender
• Whether the fetus is small for gestational age (SGA), or appropriate for gestational age, or large for gestational age (LGA)
• Whether the heart has 4 chambers, blood flow thru the heart, valve function
• Whether there are any neural tube defects (which would have occurred before 14 weeks gestation)
• Whether there are any gross abnormalities of the abdomen, such as omphalocele
• Whether there is any gross abnormalities of the head, limbs, and body
• Whether the placenta is appropriately sized, and where it is implanted in the uterus
• Whether the amount of amniotic fluid is appropriate
• Whether the umbilical cord has the appropriate configuration of blood vessels (2 arteries, 1 vein)

Biophysical profile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of the amazing things about the internet is this thing called Youtube, lol! You can find pretty much ANYthing on YT. I often use it for teaching —lots of procedures are loaded up as teaching tools. And proud parents like to upload lots of ultrasounds, and leave them set to public, which can be a learning tool for us. Here are a few 20 week ultrasounds, all of them healthy singletons (single pregnancy). Pay close attention to how active these fetuses are, and how they respond to things like the US tech “nudging” them to move a hand or foot out of the way, to get a better view. I looked for a startle reflex video, but couldn’t find one quickly. They can use a buzzer/ vibrator device on the outside of the mother’s abdomen to induce the fetus to respond to a stimuli.

20 Week Ultrasound Highlights - YouTube

Rachel's 20 week Pregnancy Ultrasound (with Sound) - It's a ..... - YouTube

[video=youtube;vs-MGe97PCw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs-MGe97PCw[/video]

As we all marvel at the technology that allows us to peer inside the womb, I am also reminded that very few people upload prenatal ultrasounds with catastrophic news to youtube. The Munoz fetus suffered an incredible hypoxic insult. A fetus has some protective mechanisms to ward off catastrophe from brief episodes of stress, such as brief periods of hypoxia. A fetus in its normal state is slightly more acidotic than the mother, which favors fetal hemoglobin binding oxygen more readily, but the hemoglobin is more reluctant to “let go” of the oxygen at the tissue level. (Refer to the oxyhemoglobin dissociation curve.)

Oxygen–haemoglobin dissociation curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.ccmtutorials.com/rs/oxygen/page06.htm (this one is a little easier to understand, and you can search for more explanations if you want)

Fetal hemoglobin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As acidosis increases in the mother (from cardiac arrest and profound hypoxia), the fetus ALSO becomes more acidotic. Acidosis significantly impairs oxygen binding and release, that is the take home message. Add to that, a ventilation/ perfusion mismatch in the mother, from the pulmonary embolism, and the problem is magnified, EVEN with large percentages of oxygen delivered to the mother after she was discovered, and adequate expansion of the lungs with positive pressure. Factor in at least one hour of “down time” per the husband, and it becomes even more stunning that Marlise Munoz could achieve any degree of cardiac resuscitation, and that the fetus would also have a heartbeat. BUT—that does not mean that EITHER Marlise, OR her fetus are “ok” now. They both suffered a staggering hypoxic insult. Marlise is brain dead. The fetus “noticed” that, physiologically.

It is my opinion that the prognosis for the fetus is very likely grim, as of this week. The reason I think that, is because there has been no efforts that we know of by Erick Munoz to have a court rule to remove the ventilator, since November. I believe that there is a push now to do this before 24 weeks, before “viability”, because before 19 or so weeks, it was less sure what they were facing. I may be entirely wrong, but I think the timing of this lawsuit action is related to very grim news about the fetus, that has been revealed little by little over the past several weeks.
 
A disclaimer: I am not an ultrasound tech, or a perinatologist. I have experience as an OB nurse way back when (before I was a flight nurse, and before graduate anesthesia school program), in addition to PICU and adult ICU, and a smattering of other areas. I have taught OB anesthesia to CRNA students in the classroom and clinical area for about 13 years. (OB anesthesia is not the only topic I teach or practice.)

So, having said that, here is some information that might be interesting to some readers, and is (IMO), more interesting than arguing about pro life/ pro choice, and whether or not the Munoz situation is a potential “elective termination” of pregnancy.

The Munoz fetus is 20-21 weeks gestation as of this week (Jan 13-19), per media reports.

What the doctors (and Erick Munoz, I hope) most definitely know about the Munoz fetus (and this is just a small list of everything the docs know-they know much, much more about this fetus):

•Whether the heart rate has reassuring variability beat to beat, or an abnormal pattern that indicates significant central nervous system insult (“flat” beat to beat variability)
•How active the fetus is, or is not. Whether or not it is flexing and moving all limbs.
•Whether the fetus demonstrates normal sleep cycles, indicating hormonal systems in the fetal brain are intact (or not) Usually apparent at 22-24 weeks
•Whether the fetus is demonstrating normal activity that indicates an intact nervous system, such as sucking and swallowing movements, breathing movements, and startle reflex. Usually apparent at 22-24 weeks.
•Head size, whether there is excess fluid around the brain, appearance of ventricles of the brain
•Gender
•Whether the fetus is small for gestational age (SGA), or appropriate for gestational age, or large for gestational age (LGA)
•Whether the heart has 4 chambers, blood flow thru the heart, valve function
•Whether there are any neural tube defects (which would have occurred before 14 weeks gestation)
•Whether there are any gross abnormalities of the abdomen, such as omphalocele
•Whether there is any gross abnormalities of the head, limbs, and body
•Whether the placenta is appropriately sized, and where it is implanted in the uterus
•Whether the amount of amniotic fluid is appropriate
•Whether the umbilical cord has the appropriate configuration of blood vessels (2 arteries, 1 vein)

Biophysical profile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of the amazing things about the internet is this thing called Youtube, lol! You can find pretty much ANYthing on YT. I often use it for teaching —lots of procedures are loaded up as teaching tools. And proud parents like to upload lots of ultrasounds, and leave them set to public, which can be a learning tool for us. Here are a few 20 week ultrasounds, all of them healthy singletons (single pregnancy). Pay close attention to how active these fetuses are, and how they respond to things like the US tech “nudging” them to move a hand or foot out of the way, to get a better view. I looked for a startle reflex video, but couldn’t find one quickly. They can use a buzzer/ vibrator device on the outside of the mother’s abdomen to induce the fetus to respond to a stimuli.

20 Week Ultrasound Highlights - YouTube

Rachel's 20 week Pregnancy Ultrasound (with Sound) - It's a ..... - YouTube

4D Ultrasound 20 Weeks finding out gender - YouTube

As we all marvel at the technology that allows us to peer inside the womb, I am also reminded that very few people upload prenatal ultrasounds with catastrophic news to youtube. The Munoz fetus suffered an incredible hypoxic insult. A fetus has some protective mechanisms to ward off catastrophe from brief episodes of stress, such as brief periods of hypoxia. A fetus in its normal state is slightly more acidotic than the mother, which favors fetal hemoglobin binding oxygen more readily, but the hemoglobin is more reluctant to “let go” of the oxygen at the tissue level. (Refer to the oxyhemoglobin dissociation curve.)

Oxygen–haemoglobin dissociation curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.ccmtutorials.com/rs/oxygen/page06.htm (this one is a little easier to understand, and you can search for more explanations if you want)

Fetal hemoglobin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As acidosis increases in the mother (from cardiac arrest and profound hypoxia), the fetus ALSO becomes more acidotic. Acidosis significantly impairs oxygen binding and release, that is the take home message. Add to that, a ventilation/ perfusion mismatch in the mother, from the pulmonary embolism, and the problem is magnified, EVEN with large percentages of oxygen delivered to the mother after she was discovered, and adequate expansion of the lungs with positive pressure. Factor in at least one hour of “down time” per the husband, and it becomes even more stunning that Marlise Munoz could achieve any degree of cardiac resuscitation, and that the fetus would also have a heartbeat. BUT—that does not mean that EITHER Marlise, OR her fetus are “ok” now. They both suffered a staggering hypoxic insult. Marlise is brain dead. The fetus “noticed” that, physiologically.

It is my opinion that the prognosis for the fetus is very likely grim, as of this week. The reason I think that, is because there has been no efforts that we know of by Erick Munoz to have a court rule to remove the ventilator, since November. I believe that there is a push now to do this before 24 weeks, before “viability”, because before 19 or so weeks, it was less sure what they were facing. I may be entirely wrong, but I think the timing of this lawsuit action is related to very grim news about the fetus, that has been revealed little by little over the past several weeks.

Now you have me wondering!
If the mother were experiencing pre-term labor, cervix dilation or contractions would they try and stop them at this point? -as in treat her like any other healthy woman.
Would they do a cerclage and give terbutaline/brethine (do they even still use that?) or mag -sulfate?

Do you think if she began to go into labor they would just allow the baby to be delivered IF things were looking grim irregardless of the gestation of the baby?

I had a friend with an anencephalic baby boy and she was allowed to terminate at 20 weeks. *after many battles...

just curious and
jmo
ETA: I see Tubutaline is not recommended anymore.
Geez, I had a cerclage at 15 weeks I took oral tubutaline from 20- 28 weeks and via sub-q pump from 28-36 weeks, with a mag wash in between. *that alone might kill the mother. :eek:
poor baby !
Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2
 
gngr~snap-- I have no idea, but I can speculate! This case breaks new ground in a lot of areas, both legal and medical.

Since they have acted "aggressively" medically since November, I suppose they would continue to do so now. Otherwise, why would Erick Munoz have to go to court to get an order to remove Marlise's body from the vent?

Then again, if things are truly grim, as I think they might be, it could be that the docs actually WANT Mr. Munoz to get a court order now, before 24 weeks. The hospital is painted into a corner. They can't just remove the ventilator "now", just because EM asks them to. They really do need a court order, I think. I think nothing short of fetal cardiac arrest would allow them to remove the ventilator without a court order.

ETA: A 20 week+ cerclage is not indicated (it would be contraindicated). That's a first trimester intervention, with specific indications.

Cervical cerclage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
gngr~snap-- I have no idea, but I can speculate! This case breaks new ground in a lot of areas, both legal and medical.

Since they have acted "aggressively" medically since November, I suppose they would continue to do so now. Otherwise, why would Erick Munoz have to go to court to get an order to remove Marlise's body from the vent?

Then again, if things are truly grim, as I think they might be, it could be that the docs actually WANT Mr. Munoz to get a court order now, before 24 weeks. The hospital is painted into a corner. They can't just remove the ventilator "now", just because EM asks them to. They really do need a court order, I think. I think nothing short of fetal cardiac arrest would allow them to remove the ventilator without a court order.

ETA: A 20 week+ cerclage is not indicated (it would be contraindicated). That's a first trimester intervention, with specific indications.

Cervical cerclage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

got ya! I was thinking perhaps it might have been done as a precaution once mom was admitted.moo

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2
 
Curious about this situation, hypothetically modified a bit.

If similar situation w brain dead preg wife (first trimester) BUT
w written advance medical directive and Pwr/Atty, appting husband, w AMD stating that if she were BD and preg up to specified gestation wk or other time (assuming her doc language, execution, etc. comported w. TX law (or other state w. similar law, and situation occuring in that state)
and AMD specified she wanted no 'life sustaining' or 'death prolonging' treatments, after being declared brain dead, even if preg ...

I wonder what outcome or response would be --
-- from treating doc,
-- from hosp ethics committee,
-- et al.

Basically wondering ---hosp in TX or similar law
if a written signed, etc AMD specifically addressing the preg and BD situation were in place, and if husband requested dr, hosp etc. complied w. her wishes and he did not oppose it--

Question 1(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 1 (b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 1(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?


Modifying hypo again
Preg pt & same as above, but written AMD, directing if BD for hosp to withhold all L/S or D/P measures,silent on preg possibility, but still meeting st. reqmts, and husb still requesting disconnection,

Question 2(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 2(b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 2(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?

Thx in adv. :seeya:

1a: In Texas, no.
1b: In Texas, yes.
1c: In Texas, no. (In most every state, with an adult or emacipated patient, the spouse takes precedence as decision maker over the patient's parents, unless he or she is unmarried.)

2a: In Texas, no.
2b: In Texas, yes.
2c: In Texas, no.
 
Curious about this situation, hypothetically modified a bit.

If similar situation w brain dead preg wife (first trimester) BUT
w written advance medical directive and Pwr/Atty, appting husband, w AMD stating that if she were BD and preg up to specified gestation wk or other time (assuming her doc language, execution, etc. comported w. TX law (or other state w. similar law, and situation occuring in that state)
and AMD specified she wanted no 'life sustaining' or 'death prolonging' treatments, after being declared brain dead, even if preg ...

I wonder what outcome or response would be --
-- from treating doc,
-- from hosp ethics committee,
-- et al.

Basically wondering ---hosp in TX or similar law
if a written signed, etc AMD specifically addressing the preg and BD situation were in place, and if husband requested dr, hosp etc. complied w. her wishes and he did not oppose it--

Question 1(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 1 (b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 1(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?


Modifying hypo again
Preg pt & same as above, but written AMD, directing if BD for hosp to withhold all L/S or D/P measures,silent on preg possibility, but still meeting st. reqmts, and husb still requesting disconnection,

Question 2(a)
Do you think hosp would comply w. pt & husb's wishes???
(of course, w. whatever doc's the hosp wants husb to sign)

Question 2(b)
Or do you think husb would still be forced to seek judicial relief to
disconnect?

Question 2(c)
Would agreement by pt's parents (or other relatives such as adult children) hold any force w. hosp decision process?

Thx in adv. :seeya:

If I was a doctor faced with such a situation I think I wouldn't want do any decisions without consulting a bunch of lawyers. I'm sure they meant well when they drafted the laws but it seems to leave a lot of gray area (at least if you're not a legal eagle). What does it mean that the hospital can't deny life sustaining treatments? Does it mean they must offer the family all treatments they desire? Does it mean they must force unwanted treatments on the patient? Does it mean they can't stop existing treatments and must maintain the status quo or that they must actively think up new heroic measures to try? Which treatments are considered life-sustaining and which ones aren't? Does it mean life-sustaining for the woman, or life-sustaining for the fetus? Does it make a difference if the woman is alert, comatose, or brain dead? Can anything be life-sustaining for the woman if she is already deceased? Do advance directives play any role here? If the woman's opinion is not known, does the family opinion matter? What if the family members differ? Does the prognosis of the woman or the fetus matter? Are the doctors required to try only treatments that have a realistic chance of succeeding or do they need to take all the billion to one chances they can think of, no matter how desperate and futile it seems? Is the family going to be hit with the bills if the state compels a woman to have heroic, hopeless and expensive treatments they have no right to refuse?
 
My mother didn't leave a written directive either and yet we were able to honor what she made clear were her wishes. As this family should be able to do for their wife and daughter.

Was she pregnant and her wishes included terminating her pregnancy?
 
A disclaimer: I am not an ultrasound tech, or a perinatologist. I have experience as an OB nurse way back when (before I was a flight nurse, and before graduate anesthesia school program), in addition to PICU and adult ICU, and a smattering of other areas. I have taught OB anesthesia to CRNA students in the classroom and clinical area for about 13 years. (OB anesthesia is not the only topic I teach or practice.)

So, having said that, here is some information that might be interesting to some readers, and is (IMO), more interesting than arguing about pro life/ pro choice, and whether or not the Munoz situation is a potential “elective termination” of pregnancy.

The Munoz fetus is 20-21 weeks gestation as of this week (Jan 13-19), per media reports.

What the doctors (and Erick Munoz, I hope) most definitely know about the Munoz fetus (and this is just a small list of everything the docs know-they know much, much more about this fetus):

• Whether the heart rate has reassuring variability beat to beat, or an abnormal pattern that indicates significant central nervous system insult (“flat” beat to beat variability)
• How active the fetus is, or is not. Whether or not it is flexing and moving all limbs.
• Whether the fetus demonstrates normal sleep cycles, indicating hormonal systems in the fetal brain are intact (or not) Usually apparent at 22-24 weeks
• Whether the fetus is demonstrating normal activity that indicates an intact nervous system, such as sucking and swallowing movements, breathing movements, and startle reflex. Usually apparent at 22-24 weeks.
• Head size, whether there is excess fluid around the brain, appearance of ventricles of the brain
• Gender
• Whether the fetus is small for gestational age (SGA), or appropriate for gestational age, or large for gestational age (LGA)
• Whether the heart has 4 chambers, blood flow thru the heart, valve function
• Whether there are any neural tube defects (which would have occurred before 14 weeks gestation)
• Whether there are any gross abnormalities of the abdomen, such as omphalocele
• Whether there is any gross abnormalities of the head, limbs, and body
• Whether the placenta is appropriately sized, and where it is implanted in the uterus
• Whether the amount of amniotic fluid is appropriate
• Whether the umbilical cord has the appropriate configuration of blood vessels (2 arteries, 1 vein)

Biophysical profile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of the amazing things about the internet is this thing called Youtube, lol! You can find pretty much ANYthing on YT. I often use it for teaching —lots of procedures are loaded up as teaching tools. And proud parents like to upload lots of ultrasounds, and leave them set to public, which can be a learning tool for us. Here are a few 20 week ultrasounds, all of them healthy singletons (single pregnancy). Pay close attention to how active these fetuses are, and how they respond to things like the US tech “nudging” them to move a hand or foot out of the way, to get a better view. I looked for a startle reflex video, but couldn’t find one quickly. They can use a buzzer/ vibrator device on the outside of the mother’s abdomen to induce the fetus to respond to a stimuli.

20 Week Ultrasound Highlights - YouTube

Rachel's 20 week Pregnancy Ultrasound (with Sound) - It's a ..... - YouTube

4D Ultrasound 20 Weeks finding out gender - YouTube

As we all marvel at the technology that allows us to peer inside the womb, I am also reminded that very few people upload prenatal ultrasounds with catastrophic news to youtube. The Munoz fetus suffered an incredible hypoxic insult. A fetus has some protective mechanisms to ward off catastrophe from brief episodes of stress, such as brief periods of hypoxia. A fetus in its normal state is slightly more acidotic than the mother, which favors fetal hemoglobin binding oxygen more readily, but the hemoglobin is more reluctant to “let go” of the oxygen at the tissue level. (Refer to the oxyhemoglobin dissociation curve.)

Oxygen–haemoglobin dissociation curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.ccmtutorials.com/rs/oxygen/page06.htm (this one is a little easier to understand, and you can search for more explanations if you want)

Fetal hemoglobin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As acidosis increases in the mother (from cardiac arrest and profound hypoxia), the fetus ALSO becomes more acidotic. Acidosis significantly impairs oxygen binding and release, that is the take home message. Add to that, a ventilation/ perfusion mismatch in the mother, from the pulmonary embolism, and the problem is magnified, EVEN with large percentages of oxygen delivered to the mother after she was discovered, and adequate expansion of the lungs with positive pressure. Factor in at least one hour of “down time” per the husband, and it becomes even more stunning that Marlise Munoz could achieve any degree of cardiac resuscitation, and that the fetus would also have a heartbeat. BUT—that does not mean that EITHER Marlise, OR her fetus are “ok” now. They both suffered a staggering hypoxic insult. Marlise is brain dead. The fetus “noticed” that, physiologically.

It is my opinion that the prognosis for the fetus is very likely grim, as of this week. The reason I think that, is because there has been no efforts that we know of by Erick Munoz to have a court rule to remove the ventilator, since November. I believe that there is a push now to do this before 24 weeks, before “viability”, because before 19 or so weeks, it was less sure what they were facing. I may be entirely wrong, but I think the timing of this lawsuit action is related to very grim news about the fetus, that has been revealed little by little over the past several weeks.

Thank you so much for this medical information!!

I think that a lot of people that oppose taking Marlise off life support can only envision the baby as healthy & thriving just because it continues to have a heartbeat. When the state of Texas enacted the current law, I believe they were thinking much along the same lines. The majority of state lawmakers were, after all, a bunch of men with NO medical expertise at all.

As for your theory about the timing of the lawsuit, that may very well be the case. However, I have seen articles quoting Erick as saying "he is largely being kept in the dark". It's almost as if the hospital has basically 'kidnapped' Marlise. At least, the lawsuit should result in full disclosure of facts to the family. I wonder how long it will be before the court hears the case. Then I have concerns that its decision could possibly be based on politics. Texas is NOT an ideal place for a situation like this.
 
Was she pregnant and her wishes included terminating her pregnancy?

Why must we assume that the woman, being a woman, would not have taken this into consideration when she expressed her wishes? She apparently didnt say "I never want to be kept alive artificially like that - unless I'm pregnant."
 
A 2010 article in the journal BMC Medicine found 30 cases of brain-dead pregnant women over about 30 years. Of 19 reported results, the journal found 12 in which a viable child was born and had post-birth data for two years on only six of them — all of whom developed normally, according to the journal.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/01/14/husband-pregnant-brain-dead-texas-woman-sues-hospital/

The article said a fetus has about a 20 to 30 percent chance of survival at 24 weeks of gestation — a milestone believed to be about three weeks away — but a much higher chance, 80 percent, at 28 weeks, and a 98 percent chance at 32 weeks.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
204
Guests online
1,285
Total visitors
1,489

Forum statistics

Threads
599,510
Messages
18,095,941
Members
230,868
Latest member
Maylon
Back
Top