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

[Cherry]

Finally this judge a voice of reason, a dead mother, and a non viable fetus. I wish her husband and family to Hv the burial they so need in this case. Fetus, is just that. It's not viable, I knew it wouldn't b considering her situ. I would sue that hospital and every dr that attempted to use her for their own vehicle of prolife. I'd sue until the cows came hm.

 

[jjenny]

There are descriptions that this baby is 'horribly deformed'. Legs are deformed and it has hydrocephalus. I want to see a report that says that that's all. Question: Is there one?? tia

No, the copy of the tests has not been released.

 

[spamelope]

What needs to be changed? The law that says an advanced directive is meaningless if a woman is pregnant. And yes, I realize Marlise didn't have a living will.

 

[Softail]

Is there a report with the results of the tests the hospital did that the baby is not 'viable' is being based on? I have looked but can't find one. Only the comments of their attorney. tia

There is no report that I have seen. Only news reports:

Fetus in Muñoz case is “distinctly abnormal,” attorneys say

“The fetus suffers from hydrocephalus [water on the brain]. It also appears that there are further abnormalities, including a possible heart problem, that cannot be specifically determined due to the immobile nature of Mrs. Muñoz’s deceased body,” the statement said.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/22/5506250/fetus-in-munoz-case-is-distinctly.html#storylink=cpy

Another report I can't find at the moment also said the lower extremities are so deformed, they cannot even tell the gender.

The hospital agreed.

Found it:

"[T]he fetus is distinctly abnormal," said Muñoz family attorneys Heather King and Jessica Janicek in the statement. "Even at this early stage, the lower extremities are deformed to the extent that the gender cannot be determined."

The attorneys say the fetus has hydrocephalus (water on the brain), and a possible heart problem, though details can't be determined "due to the immobile nature of Mrs. Muñoz's deceased body."

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

 

[jjenny]

Here's a definition from Miriam Webster. I believe in this case, the second definition is more appropriate since they agree the fetus is deformed.
vi·a·ble adjective \ˈvī-ə-bəl\
: capable of being done or used

: capable of succeeding

: capable of living or of developing into a living thing

Full Definition of VIABLE

1
: capable of living; especially : having attained such form and development as to be normally capable of surviving outside the mother's womb <a viable fetus>
2
: capable of growing or developing <viable seeds> <viable eggs>
3
a : capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately <viable alternatives>
b : capable of existence and development as an independent unit <the colony is now a viable state>
c (1) : having a reasonable chance of succeeding <a viable candidate> (2) : financially sustainable <a viable enterprise>
— vi·a·bil·i·ty noun

You shouldn't go by something from a dictionary. The term was used in court, where viable fetus is a legal consept as defined by Roe Vs. Wade.
Where it means capable of surviving outside the uterus.

"Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 case legalizing abortion, made fetal viability an important legal concept. The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot put the interests of a fetus ahead of the interests of the pregnant woman until the fetus is "viable." The court defined viable to mean capable of prolonged life outside the mother's womb."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_gist/1997/05/fetal_viability.html

 

[Elainera]

There are descriptions that this baby is 'horribly deformed'. Legs are deformed and it has hydrocephalus. I want to see a report that says that that's all. Question: Is there one?? tia

No it's not all. In fact the report said that there are other problem, including a possible heart defect. Sorry I don't have the link. It was posted a few pages back. But it listed the deformed legs and hydrocephalus plus other (plural) unspecified problems.

 

[jjenny]

Finally this judge a voice of reason, a dead mother, and a non viable fetus. I wish her husband and family to Hv the burial they so need in this case. Fetus, is just that. It's not viable, I knew it wouldn't b considering her situ. I would sue that hospital and every dr that attempted to use her for their own vehicle of prolife. I'd sue until the cows came hm.

Of course the fetus is not viable. Even if the fetus was perfecly develping it would not be viable at 22 weeks.
99.9 % of fetuses would not be viable at 22 weeks.
I have no idea why everyone is jumping on it as if it were some revelation.

 

[DeeMarie]

Since judge ruled law doesn't apply to the brain dead, nothing needs to be changed for this to not happen again. It shouldn't have been used to keep Mrs. Munoz on life support to begin with.

The judges ruling does not change the current law that is in place.

The law, first passed by the Texas Legislature in 1989 and amended in 1999, states that a person may not withdraw or withhold &#8220;life-sustaining treatment&#8221; from a pregnant patient.

There needs to be lobbying of the Texas legislator to push to change the law.

 

[jjenny]

The judges ruling does not change the current law that is in place.

The law, first passed by the Texas Legislature in 1989 and amended in 1999, states that a person may not withdraw or withhold &#8220;life-sustaining treatment&#8221; from a pregnant patient.

It has to be changed by the Texas Legislature.

But the law doesn't apply to the brain dead, per judge's ruling.
So it shouldn't have been applied to Mrs. Munoz. Judge ruled Mrs. Munoz, being dead, shouldn't be considered a pregnant patient.
So what needs to be changed? Should law include brain dead in it?

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Right, and I think the law needs to be changed so that this never happens again.

I think what happened was someone decided because of their beliefs they were not going to follow the law.

I think there should be consequences for what they did.

I would be curious to know, if every time a female was determined to be brain dead at that hospital, if the hospital performed a pregnancy test before withdrawal of the ventilator.

For some reason, IMO, someone chose to apply their own set of rules with this one.

I think they need to get to the source on how this was allowed to happen and continue for so long.

 

[DeeMarie]

I think what happened was someone decided because of their beliefs they were not going to follow the law.

I think there should be consequences for what they did.

I would be curious to know, if every time a female was determined to be brain dead at that hospital, if the hospital performed a pregnancy test before withdrawal of the ventilator.

For some reason, IMO, someone chose to apply their own set of rules with this one.

I think they need to get to the source on how this was allowed to happen and continue for so long.

Agree completely!

When someone or a group of individuals have the power to cause what happened to Mrs. Munoz then what else is possible?
Each person has the risk of becoming state property after they pass away with no say from their loved ones.

 

[jjenny]

No it's not all. In fact the report said that there are other problem, including a possible heart defect. Sorry I don't have the link. It was posted a few pages back. But it listed the deformed legs and hydrocephalus plus other (plural) unspecified problems.

Judge didn't consider state of the fetus in his ruling at all.
Even if it were perfectly normal, the ruling would have been the same, since Mrs. Munoz is legally dead. In another two weeks, it would have been a different story, since legally fetus would become viable.
The hospital, if it wants to, can appeal and will be easily able to drag it out until fetus becomes viable.
Of course this particular fetus is abnormal so it might never become viable.
But the hospital could decide to drag it out and will succeed in delivering it, if that is what it wants.

 

[Karmady]

If that was the case, if the hospital merely did it to have clarification, they would have no reason to appeal, right?

Are you referring to this case, or the McMath case?

 

[walkingdeadgirl]

Judge didn't consider state of the fetus in his ruling at all.
Even if it were perfectly normal, the ruling would have been the same, since Mrs. Munoz is legally dead. In another two weeks, it would have been a different story, since legally fetus would become viable.
The hospital, if it wants to, can appeal and will be easily able to drag it out until fetus becomes viable.
Of course this particular fetus is abnormal so it might never become viable.
But the hospital could decide to drag it out and will succeed in delivering it, if that is what it wants.

Which they never would have been able to do in the first place if the law had been followed. How frustrating and tragic for this gentleman.

 

[popsicle]

I hope this isn't appealed and the family finds peace. Thinking about how this fetus has suffered as well, is just too sad.

 

[gitana1]

Maybe it has to do with the ethical fate of the unborn child and how it will effect it if it is still alive. It really isn't just about the dead person is it. jmo

I would think so if the Advanced Directives Act was consistent in that regard. The state does not appear to care about life- just birth, which is a different thing. I say that because the act allows hospitals to pull the plug on people against their or their proxies' wishes, if a doctor determines that medical futility exists. Thus they stopped life support on a baby named Sun Hudson? because he had what they stated was a fatal form of dwarfism. Even though his mother fought against their wishes.

Even if it were viable, it would die if life support is removed from the mother.
Because it's stuck inside. Think if you leave an infant inside the locked box. Is it going to live? Of course not.
But it's not considered viable yet.

Yes. I know. But when it's viable you can do a C-section and take it from the body.

Is there a report with the results of the tests the hospital did that the baby is not 'viable' is being based on? I have looked but can't find one. Only the comments of their attorney. tia

If you follow my posts back you'll see where I quote a news report indicated the hospital admitted this in its court filings.

But the law doesn't apply to the brain dead, per judge's ruling.
So it shouldn't have been applied to Mrs. Munoz. Judge ruled Mrs. Munoz, being dead, shouldn't be considered a pregnant patient.
So what needs to be changed? Should law include brain dead in it?

Some of us do not believe it should apply to women who are not brain dead either. You stated earlier that you felt there was no difference between vegetative state and brain death, for example. But the law would force a woman in a vegetative state to continue on life support if pregnant.

I think what happened was someone decided because of their beliefs they were not going to follow the law.

I think there should be consequences for what they did.

I would be curious to know, if every time a female was determined to be brain dead at that hospital, if the hospital performed a pregnancy test before withdrawal of the ventilator.

For some reason, IMO, someone chose to apply their own set of rules with this one.

I think they need to get to the source on how this was allowed to happen and continue for so long.

I agree 100%. I have my personal, religious beliefs and others have theirs and I shouldn't be able to impose mine on others in contradiction with the law and vice versa.

There will be a fat lawsuit here against the hospital for medical bills. I hope the family wins.

Judge didn't consider state of the fetus in his ruling at all.
Even if it were perfectly normal, the ruling would have been the same, since Mrs. Munoz is legally dead. In another two weeks, it would have been a different story, since legally fetus would become viable.
The hospital, if it wants to, can appeal and will be easily able to drag it out until fetus becomes viable.
Of course this particular fetus is abnormal so it might never become viable.
But the hospital could decide to drag it out and will succeed in delivering it, if that is what it wants.

I don't think the hospital will be able to drag this out. I hope not. I have a feeling that an injunction would not be granted pending an appeal.

Are you referring to this case, or the McMath case?

This one!

 

[Karmady]

This one!

I had a couple of posts on the subject, but I think the one you're referring to was about McMath. I tend to agree, though, that if the hospital appeals in this case it would most likely evidence an agenda. The only reason I can think to take it up would to get the final word from the high court. But on an issue of simple statutory construction, probably not necessary, right? I haven't followed this case as closely or from as early on as the McMath case, so I'm not sure exactly why people seem to believe that the hospital itself has a strong agenda. I know the issue is a political hot potato in Tx, but I'm not sure that's the motivation of the hospital. jmo

 

[Amster]

So sorry little baby.....sorry your mommy isn't able to fight for your life. I believe she would if she could. Perfect or not, you deserve a chance to live. I'm so sad that so many have fought so hard to make sure you will never have that chance. So sad.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

I thought that hospital was going to make a statement other than the little blip about them discussing it with the DA.

Giatana, I agree that there should be a big lawsuit in this case. Mr. Munoz should not receive a bill for any of this. The lawsuit should prompt an investigation.

I can't imagine seeing a love one like that and being powerless over it. Knowing about the poor babies condition make it's even worse. I think the conditions of the fetus were most likely due to their choice to continue with this experiment. For goodness sake, these are medical professionals. They know the odds, but yet they continued on. They can't play ignorant to this. I'm pretty darn sure there is certain criteria to donate your body to science for experimental purposes. What went wrong here???

I want answers!

 

[BeginnersLuck]

So sorry little baby.....sorry your mommy isn't able to fight for your life. I believe she would if she could. Perfect or not, you deserve a chance to live. I'm so sad that so many have fought so hard to make sure you will never have that chance. So sad.

The fetus will not survive out of the womb. The hospital stated today that the fetus is not viable. There are multiple defects. Even a child born at 24 weeks has a low chance of survival. Add onto that many, many medical problems and deformities.

If the child survived a few days it would suffer tremendously. I can't stand the though of that baby suffering anymore than it already has.

I posted a article back in the thread that analyzed the very few births of brain dead mothers. It's very educational.