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

[Karmady]

I don't think the law needs to be changed. If the baby heart is beating nobody has the right to stop it, I would not want my husband or family to make that decision. The baby should be treated has the patient. nobody has the right to end a pregnancy except for the mother. Since she can not make that decision. nobody else can. I don't believe she ever said pull the plug if I am pregnant and something happens to me. I am sorry but husband, boyfriends and family members have no right end a pregnancy even if anything is wrong with the baby. I am hoping the judge sees it that way too on friday.

I actually have some issues with the father not having any say in the situation. But the law is what it is and this is correct under the law.

 

[K_Z]

No one was ever overriding the wishes of the dead mother. We never knew what they were, for this given situation.

I will step up.

It's a tragic outcome and one I can't say I didn't see coming (thanks to the opinions of the posters here with medical knowledge.) I still don't think that changes the legal argument at all. Mr. Munoz does not have the right to terminate his wife's pregnancy. He didn't have that right before and he doesn't have that right now.

What does change, is the state's interest in the potential life of the fetus. The state now, through something like a court order from a judge, may choose, based upon the medical evidence from physicians to (what's the term? :banghead, not take any extraordinary measures.

It's now an evidentiary case. The judge can rule, based on the physicians' opinions and now known evidence, that the the fetus is "futile." In essence, that they will not be trying to save the fetus, but only prolong it's dying if continued care is given. That will really be up to the judge, the physicians and the medical evidence.

What it won't have anything to do with is Mr. Munoz's perceived 14th amendment right to an abortion, advance directive laws regarding power of attorney, nor the pregnancy clause in the Texas advance directive law. What ever the judge decides will not have any impact on those issues. This is now a evidentiary case as to whether the fetus will be ruled "futile" based upon the medical evidence.

ETA- I just wanted to say I don't know how this judge will rule. He could still very well say, "No, the fetus has to be "dead." However, there is some wiggle room now there if it can be shown that the fetus is futile. IMO, that will be left up to the physicians.

BBM.

I am very confused by these statements. Now that the fetus is known to be severely deformed, the State of Texas "now" has no further interest? What??

Now that it's an "evidentiary case", the State of Texas has no further interest?

The State of Texas created this situation. The State of Texas expressed that "they" had an interest and an obligation to this fetus, to keep it alive at any cost, under any circumstances, even in light of the expressed wishes of the previously alive person, and her husband and family's opposition to the maintenance of the brain dead mother to gestate a severely immature fetus. Even in light of the MANY medical, and ethics, and scientific specialists that expressed that this was a VERY unwise, and unethical thing to do. The State of Texas felt so strongly about this, that they removed end of life decision making from the previously alive citizen, and her husband. I take that very seriously.

But now that it isn't working out so well for the Pro Life agenda, it's okay to walk away? It's okay for the State to say, "well, we tried, and now it's futile, so, sorry about all that"?

Or worse yet, "we screwed up horribly, but we're going to be stubborn and force this fetus to be born to prove our authority"?

I am so confused by the verbal gymnastics. I just don't see a coherent, rational message anywhere from those who "support" what has been intentionally done to Marlise Munoz and her fetus, and her family. This is a travesty. And really frightening to ponder what else the State might want to do to its citizens, and "potential" citizens.

 

[Sulamith]

Trying to catch up...can someone confirm for me that the baby is proven to have deformities or something?

Here we are with another case to discuss with my husband. We are going to redo our wills soon and now we have to consider this too, goodness. I for one am willing to be hooked up to a machine to give my precious baby life. However, I need to ask my husband if he would want the baby NO MATTER WHAT and go from there I guess. I personally have never agreed with terminating a pregnancy just because of abnormalities but that is JUST ME.

BBM IMO, that is a good idea. My mother died when I was a day old. She hemorrhaged..to death..in the hospital. The nurses and doctors were not watching her well. My dad bailed. I do not have a great adoption story to tell. I wish my mother would have lived. It was terrible to grow up without a mother. She had a life and should have been able to live a long life. She was told not to have another baby after the twins were born dead. Then she got pg with me. Back then, there was no Pill and certainly no legal abortion.

IMO, Texas lawmakers are pro-fetus, not pro-life. It is all about control over a woman's body. This whole case makes me sick. The father's request should have been honored.

 

[K_Z]

I think they leaked for the public opinion. The lawyers already said condition of fetus is not relevant to their lawsuit.

BBM.

Yup. I think they did, too.

And it worked, because in less than 4 hours, it has hit the national news wires as a headline story.

http://news.msn.com/us/attorneys-brain-dead-womans-fetus-abnormal

 

[Karmady]

BBM IMO, that is a good idea. My mother died when I was a day old. She hemorrhaged..to death..in the hospital. The nurses and doctors were not watching her well. My dad bailed. I do not have a great adoption story to tell. I wish my mother would have lived. It was terrible to grow up without a mother. She had a life and should have been able to live a long life. She was told not to have another baby after the twins were born dead. Then she got pg with me. Back then, there was no Pill and certainly no legal abortion.

IMO, Texas lawmakers are pro-fetus, not pro-life. It is all about control over a woman's body. This whole case makes me sick. The father's request should have been honored.

but now there is the pill and abortion and a woman's unmitigated right to either one (or at least abortion up to 20 weeks). Imo, while it's very sad what happened to your mother, and you as a consequence, it's got nothing to do with this situation where the mother, as far as we know, had not lost a prior pregnancy or baby, was not counseled not to get pregnant again, had the option of using birth control or aborting the child, had the ability to confirm a pregnancy with a test almost immediately upon conception, etc. This woman had all of the choices in the world, and she didn't tell anyone, as far as we know, what her choice would have been under these circumstances. We can only infer that, since she knew she was pregnant and had not chosen to abort, that she wanted this baby to be born. jmo

 

[jjenny]

BBM.

I am very confused by these statements. Now that the fetus is known to be severely deformed, the State of Texas "now" has no further interest? What??

Now that it's an "evidentiary case", the State of Texas has no further interest?

The State of Texas created this situation. The State of Texas expressed that "they" had an interest and an obligation to this fetus, to keep it alive at any cost, under any circumstances, even in light of the expressed wishes of the previously alive person, and her husband and family's opposition to the maintenance of the brain dead mother to gestate a severely immature fetus. Even in light of the MANY medical, and ethics, and scientific specialists that expressed that this was a VERY unwise, and unethical thing to do. The State of Texas felt so strongly about this, that they removed end of life decision making from the previously alive citizen, and her husband. I take that very seriously.

But now that it isn't working out so well for the Pro Life agenda, it's okay to walk away? It's okay for the State to say, "well, we tried, and now it's futile, so, sorry about all that"?

Or worse yet, "we screwed up horribly, but we're going to be stubborn and force this fetus to be born to prove our authority"?

I am so confused by the verbal gymnastics. I just don't see a coherent, rational message anywhere from those who "support" what has been intentionally done to Marlise Munoz and her fetus, and her family. This is a travesty. And really frightening to ponder what else the State might want to do to its citizens, and "potential" citizens.

It's already is the law. If caring for someone is futile (no chance of recovery) TX can turn off life support without permission from the family (google baby Sun Hudson).
But I am not sure this fetus will classify as futile even with all the apparent deformities.

 

[jjenny]

but now there is the pill and abortion and a woman's unmitigated right to either one (or at least abortion up to 20 weeks). Imo, while it's very sad what happened to your mother, and you as a consequence, it's got nothing to do with this situation where the mother, as far as we know, had not lost a prior pregnancy or baby, was not counseled not to get pregnant again, had the option of using birth control or aborting the child, had the ability to confirm a pregnancy with a test almost immediately upon conception, etc. This woman had all of the choices in the world, and she didn't tell anyone, as far as we know, what her choice would have been under these circumstances. We can only infer that, since she knew she was pregnant and had not chosen to abort, that she wanted this baby to be born. jmo

I think it's clear she wanted the child, but a lot of women would abort even a wanted child if the fetus is shown to have severe deformities.

 

[jjenny]

My first question is in this post's title.

Are these cases reported in peer-reviewed medical periodicals?
If so, links please.

Thx in adv.:seeya:

Here is the latest one.

"There are increased reports in the medical literature of brain death during pregnancy. In these rare cases, the decision was either to consider discontinuing homeostatic support and mechanical ventilation with an understanding that the fetus then will also die, or to continue full support in an attempt to prolong pregnancy for the purpose of maintaining the fetus alive until maturity. We report the first case in the United Arab Emirates and in literature of somatic support that extended up to 110 days with the successful delivery of a viable fetus. A 35-year-old woman suffered intracranial hemorrhage during the 16(th) week of pregnancy that lead to brain death despite maximal surgical and medical management. Upon confirmation of this diagnosis, the patient received full ventilatory and homeostatic support required to prolong gestation and improve the survival prognosis of her fetus. The status of the patient was discussed in a multidisciplinary approach and with the full involvement of her family. Somatic support continued until the patient was 32 of weeks gestation. Obstetric complications of the patient were frequently assessed and managed. Lower segment cesarean section (LSCS) was then performed. A preterm male in breech presentation was delivered with an average weight of 750 gm, and an Apgar score of 6, 7, and 9 at 1, 5, and 10 minutes, respectively. Prolonging somatic support in a pregnant woman with brain death to allow fetal survival resulted in a successful outcome in terms of saving the life of the fetus. The results are consistent with previous published case reports in the literature on the appropriateness and safety of such a strategy that involved an intensive multidisciplinary approach. Despite being a tragedy, maternal death can represent an opportunity to save the life of the fetus and for organ donation. Consensus future recommendations that can guide the management of similar conditions may also be adapted, especially with the growing medical experience in this context. "
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24404463

 

[Karmady]

I think it's clear she wanted the child, but a lot of women would abort even a wanted child if the fetus is shown to have severe deformities.

agreed. But there's nothing in this case, afaik, to say whether this mother would have done it. Heck, I had a high level US due to "advanced maternal age." I could have sworn to you what I would have chosen until I got the results. Then, not so much.

 

[RJA00]

I think it's clear she wanted the child, but a lot of women would abort even a wanted child if the fetus is shown to have severe deformities.

yes, that would be her right but, nobody can make that decision for her.

 

[SophieRose]

It's already is the law. If caring for someone is futile (no chance of recovery) TX can turn off life support without permission from the family (google baby Sun Hudson).
But I am not sure this fetus will classify as futile even with all the apparent deformities.

I was just going to mention that. It's the Advance Directives Act, but it's not always carried out.

Advance Directives Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care by the treating medical team.

 

[jjenny]

yes, that would be her right but, nobody can make that decision for her.

Considering she is dead, I don't expect she will be making a decision any time soon.

 

[jjenny]

I was just going to mention that. It's the Advance Directives Act, but it's not always carried out.

Advance Directives Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, TX isn't going to insist someone stays on life support if there is no chance of recovery. But I don't think this fetus qualifies as futile. Apparrently the fetus isn't brain dead.
So this poor father could end up with bunch of medical bills and if fetus survives, very abnormal child requiring bunch of medical treatments.

 

[Sulamith]

Trying to catch up...can someone confirm for me that the baby is proven to have deformities or something?

Here we are with another case to discuss with my husband. We are going to redo our wills soon and now we have to consider this too, goodness. I for one am willing to be hooked up to a machine to give my precious baby life. However, I need to ask my husband if he would want the baby NO MATTER WHAT and go from there I guess. I personally have never agreed with terminating a pregnancy just because of abnormalities but that is JUST ME.

BBM IMO, that is a good idea. My mother died when I was a day old. She hemorrhaged..to death..in the hospital. The nurses and doctors were not watching her well. My dad bailed. I do not have a great adoption story to tell. I wish my mother would have lived. It was terrible to grow up without a mother. She had a life and should have been able to live a long life. She was told not to have another baby after the twins were born dead. Then she got pg with me. Back then, there was no Pill and certainly no legal abortion.

IMO, Texas lawmakers are pro-fetus, not pro-life. It is all about control over a woman's body. This whole case makes me sick. The father's request should have been honored.

but now there is the pill and abortion and a woman's unmitigated right to either one (or at least abortion up to 20 weeks). Imo, while it's very sad what happened to your mother, and you as a consequence, it's got nothing to do with this situation where the mother, as far as we know, had not lost a prior pregnancy or baby, was not counseled not to get pregnant again, had the option of using birth control or aborting the child, had the ability to confirm a pregnancy with a test almost immediately upon conception, etc. This woman had all of the choices in the world, and she didn't tell anyone, as far as we know, what her choice would have been under these circumstances. We can only infer that, since she knew she was pregnant and had not chosen to abort, that she wanted this baby to be born. jmo

I was replying to Lunar's post. See the part of her post BBM. I was just telling my story about growing up without a mother. IMO, it is all about unforeseen circumstances.

 

[Karmady]

Yes, TX isn't going to insist someone stays on life support if there is no chance of recovery. But I don't think this fetus qualifies as futile. Apparrently the fetus isn't brain dead.
So this poor father could end up with bunch of medical bills and if fetus survives, very abnormal child requiring bunch of medical treatments.

Just as he would be if she were alive and chose to carry their child to term knowing that it had significant defects. He would have had no say whatsoever and would be on the hook for all of the care and all of the bills, just because the mother said so. Here, the mother "said so" up to 14 weeks and then couldn't say otherwise. So everyone's stuck with her inability to say otherwise and the assumption that she wouldn't have.

jmo

 

[Karmady]

I was replying to Lunar's post. See the part of her post BBM. I was just telling my story about growing up without a mother. IMO, it is all about unforeseen circumstances.

ok, sorry Sula. I didn't think you were talking only about a dad bailing. My dad bailed, too, fwiw.

 

[K_Z]

What does change, is the state's interest in the potential life of the fetus. The state now, through something like a court order from a judge, may choose, based upon the medical evidence from physicians to (what's the term? :banghead, not take any extraordinary measures.

BBM, and snipped for focus.

Wait a minute! Are we to understand that what has happened thus far, over more than 8 weeks of supporting a brain dead mother, with a 14 week fetus, who sustained a hypoxic/ anoxic insult, and multiple cardiac arrests over more than an hour, is NOT defined as "extraordinary measures"???

What exactly WOULD constitute "extraordinary measures"??

Because if that's true, I need some space on the bricks next to you to bang my head, too. :banghead:

 

[jjenny]

Just as he would be if she were alive and chose to carry their child to term knowing that it had significant defects. He would have had no say whatsoever and would be on the hook for all of the care and all of the bills, just because the mother said so. Here, the mother "said so" up to 14 weeks and then couldn't say otherwise. So everyone's stuck with her inability to say otherwise and the assumption that she wouldn't have.

jmo

But then she would be raising the child. She is gone, so it's up to him to raise the child with signficant birth defects. Maybe he can give the child to the state of TX to raise.

 

[Linda7NJ]

BBM.



I am very confused by these statements. Now that the fetus is known to be severely deformed, the State of Texas "now" has no further interest? What??



Now that it's an "evidentiary case", the State of Texas has no further interest?



The State of Texas created this situation. The State of Texas expressed that "they" had an interest and an obligation to this fetus, to keep it alive at any cost, under any circumstances, even in light of the expressed wishes of the previously alive person, and her husband and family's opposition to the maintenance of the brain dead mother to gestate a severely immature fetus. Even in light of the MANY medical, and ethics, and scientific specialists that expressed that this was a VERY unwise, and unethical thing to do. The State of Texas felt so strongly about this, that they removed end of life decision making from the previously alive citizen, and her husband. I take that very seriously.



But now that it isn't working out so well for the Pro Life agenda, it's okay to walk away? It's okay for the State to say, "well, we tried, and now it's futile, so, sorry about all that"?



Or worse yet, "we screwed up horribly, but we're going to be stubborn and force this fetus to be born to prove our authority"?



I am so confused by the verbal gymnastics. I just don't see a coherent, rational message anywhere from those who "support" what has been intentionally done to Marlise Munoz and her fetus, and her family. This is a travesty. And really frightening to ponder what else the State might want to do to its citizens, and "potential" citizens.

Thank you. I agree with every word! The button wasn't enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Karmady]

But then she would be raising the child. She is gone, so it's up to him to raise the child with signficant birth defects. Maybe he can give the child to the state of TX to raise.

Not necessarily. She could get hit by a bus leaving the hospital. Or maybe, as here, die of a pulmonary embolism within a year or two of bringing the baby home. Dad would be on the hook regardless.

jmo