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

[ceecee30]

My opinion always was that fetus should be checked for abnormalities and given a chance if normal. Since it has multiple abnormalities it seems it might be best to terminate life support. But then again, it's TX so its probably going to be born no matter what.

I am with you, I was an extremely avid supporter of the baby being given a chance after being checked for abnormalities, after the leaking of the baby's condition, it breaks me to agree that the baby unfortunately wouldn't have a very nice quality of life, I don't believe the state of Texas should be able to decide if they continue the pregnancy, now being aware of the severe abnormalities I also think the family should be able to make the decision on the life support.

Bringing a severely disabled child into the world comes with great costs to keep the child comfortable and with a good quality of life, a newly single father would have trouble financing that, working and raising a toddler.

 

[gramcracker]

jeez, Texas, give this family a break! you are prolonging the anguish of a family beset by tragedy and heartbreak. you are a low-tax low-service state so long term assistance would be minimal yet you want to enforce legalistic issues to prove a point? which is ... ?

what's next? implanting embryos in brain dead females of child-bearing age? just think of all those wombs going to waste. tsk tsk

 

[hambirg]

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?? No. The state of Texas has always had an interest in then potential life of the fetus. What has changed is that they now, potentially, have evidence that the potential life may be "futile."

Now that it's an "evidentiary case", the State of Texas has no further interest? No. It is now a case whose outcome is based on evidentiary value, as opposed to a constitutional issue, or a case who's argument is about definitions.

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. The State of Texas still has those interests. That has not changed. The law has to base a decision on evidence specific to that case. They can not base a decision on opinions, assumptions and statistics alone. In this case they have to have the medical evidence regarding THIS fetus. Now that they have that, I don't know how the judge will rule. BUT the argument can be made that the fetus is futile, that it will not survive regardless of what the physicians will do. If this judge so chooses, he can decide, if he feels the evidence is compelling, that any further care is just prolonging the dying of the fetus.

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"? I'm not sure what you are getting at. The Supreme Court has ruled that the State has an interest in potential life. It is spelled out quite clear in precedent cases. I think it's quite obvious that their interest is greater in a born child than a fetus, in a potentially viable fetus than in a futile fetus, in a futile fetus than in a dead fetus.

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.

I am sorry you are confused. Read the applicable court cases. The issues themselves can be quite complicated for sure, but the information and precedents are out there. I'm afraid that people don't really understand what their rights are or aren't. Better to be informed than to assume, IMHO.

 

[hambirg]

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:

The point is, they needed to know the condition of the fetus. Which is what I said waaaay up thread about them waiting for testing. They can't decide for Marlise if the fetus is not dead or dying.

Of course it's still a crap shoot as to what the judge will decide regarding futile vs dead. It's a legal gray area. But it's not different than say, needing the medical evidence that shows Marlise is brain dead. The physicians couldn't just say based on their opinion, they assume she is. They have to be able to prove it with medical testing. It's the same issue. Physicians saying that they think the prognosis for the fetus is likely not good is not the same as proving it with medical evidence. . .and even then. . crap shoot.

 

[RT51]

I've followed this thread, but have not yet posted until now.

My question is: If the pregnancy is continued, and the child is born with severe disabilities, will the State of Texas continue to help this father? Also, being a single father of a previous child, how much will this child be emotionally neglected due to the disabilities of the new child. (I'm not saying the child would be neglected, but a disabled child does require more care and attention than a healthy child.)

The father is an EMT. While his job is one of caring, they are one of the most underpaid jobs for what they do. Who is going to help him take care of the previous child and the disabled child while he struggles to provide for them?

I don't want to sound cold, but all children do not survive. My older brother was still born, my youngest sister passed at 24 hours, and she lost one due to miscarriage at the age of this fetus, all because my mother was a type I diabetic. Compared to this mother's issues, my mother's was simple, and still lost children.

I will be honest, in my younger days I was pro-choice. I ended up having an abortion 35 years ago, and because of that, I became pro-life. But, there are always extenuating circumstances, and at this time, I am standing by the families choice. MOO

 

[Elley Mae]

Erick Muñoz may have been told his wife was brain-dead, Winslade said, but “she’s not dead legally until she has been declared dead.”

Brain-death is pronounced after a series of neurological tests, such as those that determine if the patient has a gag reflex or if their eyes are fixed.

“Those tests should all be in the medical record,” Winslade said.

Marlise Muñoz could be brain-dead, Winslade said, but “the hospital is stalling because they don’t want to make the declaration of death — because then the body would become property of the family.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metr...man-off-life-support-goes-to-judge-friday.ece

 

[SeekingJana]

I've followed this thread, but have not yet posted until now.

My question is: If the pregnancy is continued, and the child is born with severe disabilities, will the State of Texas continue to help this father? Also, being a single father of a previous child, how much will this child be emotionally neglected due to the disabilities of the new child. (I'm not saying the child would be neglected, but a disabled child does require more care and attention than a healthy child.)

The father is an EMT. While his job is one of caring, they are one of the most underpaid jobs for what they do. Who is going to help him take care of the previous child and the disabled child while he struggles to provide for them?

I don't want to sound cold, but all children do not survive. My older brother was still born, my youngest sister passed at 24 hours, and she lost one due to miscarriage at the age of this fetus, all because my mother was a type I diabetic. Compared to this mother's issues, my mother's was simple, and still lost children.

I will be honest, in my younger days I was pro-choice. I ended up having an abortion 35 years ago, and because of that, I became pro-life. But, there are always extenuating circumstances, and at this time, I am standing by the families choice. MOO

IMO, if the fetus is shown through multiple ultrasonography over a period of weeks to absolutely have abnormalities inconsistent with any quality of life, then the father should have the option of making the child a ward of the state if it is delivered alive ( via C section, of course).
He should not feel guilty nor made to suffer any public humiliation or even have this made public. The father has done everything in his power as an informed paramedic to have life support removed from his brain dead wife and the non-viable age fetus she happened to be carrying at the time of her death.

I believe the state of Texas, of which I am a resident, owes this man and this family a great debt for the misuse of power and the abuse of a law which was never meant to apply to a situation such as this one. They also deserve their privacy back!!!!

 

[Elley Mae]

I've followed this thread, but have not yet posted until now.

My question is: If the pregnancy is continued, and the child is born with severe disabilities, will the State of Texas continue to help this father? Also, being a single father of a previous child, how much will this child be emotionally neglected due to the disabilities of the new child. (I'm not saying the child would be neglected, but a disabled child does require more care and attention than a healthy child.)

The father is an EMT. While his job is one of caring, they are one of the most underpaid jobs for what they do. Who is going to help him take care of the previous child and the disabled child while he struggles to provide for them?

I don't want to sound cold, but all children do not survive. My older brother was still born, my youngest sister passed at 24 hours, and she lost one due to miscarriage at the age of this fetus, all because my mother was a type I diabetic. Compared to this mother's issues, my mother's was simple, and still lost children.

I will be honest, in my younger days I was pro-choice. I ended up having an abortion 35 years ago, and because of that, I became pro-life. But, there are always extenuating circumstances, and at this time, I am standing by the families choice. MOO

I also wondered about medical bills that the father would now have. Even with insurance there are co pays that must be met, and with it being a life time of disabilities then it's a life time of co pays.

I believe every person should have the right to make decisions about their body. I believe that after she was declared brain dead (if she was) it should have been her husband decision what happened next.

 

[Softail]

Attorneys: Fetus of pregnant, brain-dead mom is "distinctly abnormal"


http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/...n-dead-mom-is-distinctly-abnormal/?hpt=ac_bn6

 

[faw720]

Erick Muñoz may have been told his wife was brain-dead, Winslade said, but “she’s not dead legally until she has been declared dead.”

Brain-death is pronounced after a series of neurological tests, such as those that determine if the patient has a gag reflex or if their eyes are fixed.

“Those tests should all be in the medical record,” Winslade said.

Marlise Muñoz could be brain-dead, Winslade said, but “the hospital is stalling because they don’t want to make the declaration of death — because then the body would become property of the family.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metr...man-off-life-support-goes-to-judge-friday.ece

Thanks for this link, Elley Mae.

According to this article, we may NOT know a decision on Friday. The judge evidently still has some wiggle room & can delay his decision. Apparently politics COULD prolong the suffering of the fetus/baby & the Munoz family indefinitely. We're getting ready to find out if anyone involved in Texas politics has even an ounce of humanity.

 

[Elainera]

Hearing about the poor fetus' condition I now hope that the mother's heart will stop before they attempt to deliver the baby.

She has been brain dead for 2 months, her heart could stop any time. I think it would be the best solution for the baby. I don't believe it would survive anyway if they delivered it.

jmo

 

[jjenny]

Hearing about the poor fetus' condition I now hope that the mother's heart will stop before they attempt to deliver the baby.

She has been brain dead for 2 months, her heart could stop any time. I think it would be the best solution for the baby. I don't believe it would survive anyway if they delivered it.

jmo

There is only 2 weeks before fetus is considered viable. She lasted 8 weeks already. I think unless judge rules that life support can be turned off, this fetus is going to be born.
All his conditions are not necessarily fatal either. The fetus could very well survive despite multiple deformities. Most likely the child will need multiple surgeries to treat the conditions.

 

[DeeMarie]

Erick Muñoz may have been told his wife was brain-dead, Winslade said, but “she’s not dead legally until she has been declared dead.”

Brain-death is pronounced after a series of neurological tests, such as those that determine if the patient has a gag reflex or if their eyes are fixed.

“Those tests should all be in the medical record,” Winslade said.

Marlise Muñoz could be brain-dead, Winslade said, but “the hospital is stalling because they don’t want to make the declaration of death — because then the body would become property of the family.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metr...man-off-life-support-goes-to-judge-friday.ece

Thank-you. This is what I thought all along.

Marlise Munoz is being viewed as the 'property' of the state of Texas.

The Hospital refuses to declare Marlise Munoz as deceased because then she would become property of the family.

This is extremely scary and upsetting to me..

 

[Cherry]

I would sue those Drs and that Hospital until all the cows come home. Her husband doesn't want this fetus. He want's to bury he DECEASED WIFE this is a travesty.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

I completely agree with Mark Geragos in the video discussion at the link.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/...n-dead-mom-is-distinctly-abnormal/?hpt=ac_bn6

The statute reads:

Section 166.049:
Pregnant Patients
A person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment under this subchapter from a pregnant patient.

http://www.weblaws.org/texas/laws/tex._health_and_safety_code_section_166.049_pregnant_patients

The pregnant patient is deceased, therefore there is no life to sustain. The statute applies to the "pregnant patient" not the fetus. The fetus is not pregnant.

This is assuming it has been determined she is legally brain dead.

That's how I would interpret the statute.

 

[faw720]

http://www.wfaa.com/news/health/Munoz-lawyers-statement-241550881.html

If this is true, this child has little to no chance of survival. I guess the experimental gestation didn't go as well as many had hoped. Truly a tragedy, at every level.

Except for the extremist pro life movement. This will be lauded as a success, IMO.

IMO something else we should consider is contained in the last 2 paragraphs of this story.

Trent Loftin, a Fort Worth attorney not connected to this case, says he believes this case will be moved to an appeals court & eventually to the Texas Supreme Court. IMO, he reached this conclusion based on the knowledge of what he hears as a member of the legal community in Fort Worth.

 

[Donjeta]

Erick Muñoz may have been told his wife was brain-dead, Winslade said, but “she’s not dead legally until she has been declared dead.”

Brain-death is pronounced after a series of neurological tests, such as those that determine if the patient has a gag reflex or if their eyes are fixed.

“Those tests should all be in the medical record,” Winslade said.

Marlise Muñoz could be brain-dead, Winslade said, but “the hospital is stalling because they don’t want to make the declaration of death — because then the body would become property of the family.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metr...man-off-life-support-goes-to-judge-friday.ece

I'm wondering if they have done the apnea test that is part of the guidelines in determining brain death. Maybe not since it requires taking her off the ventilator for a while, and they consider it to be against the law?

 

[jjenny]

I'm wondering if they have done the apnea test that is part of the guidelines in determining brain death. Maybe not since it requires taking her off the ventilator for a while, and they consider it to be against the law?

You might be onto something.
I just read about a case where the hospital didn't do an apnea test on a pregnant patient while the patient was still pregnant. After baby was delivered they did an apnea test (twice), and death was pronounced. That pregnancy was successful and baby didn't have major abnormalities.

"Upon physical examination, the patients had a GCS of 3 with no gag or cough reflexes, while the pupils were 5 mm dilated in size and fixed. Consequently, sedation was stopped on the ninth day. Apnea test was not done due to a viable fetus and the use of vasopressors, whereas EEG was not done because of the local scalp and skull conditions as the brain tissue was visible."
http://www.ijciis.org/article.asp?i...ume=3;issue=3;spage=220;epage=224;aulast=Said

 

[Elley Mae]

I found this a good read

http://verdict.justia.com/2014/01/22/excluding-pregnant-women-right-terminate-life-support

Similarly, if a pregnant woman with cancer decides to undergo chemotherapy to lengthen her own life, but the chemotherapy foreseeably results in the death of her fetus, the chemotherapy does not thereby become the ethical equivalent of an abortion.

 

[Elley Mae]

I have to ask because every state is different and I don't know lots of stuff. Is the hospital following a law or is the state compelling the hospital to keep her on support? To me it is either the hospital or the state, not both. jmo idk