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

[jjenny]

Well, I'm sorry but they should have. What exactly did they anticipate if not women in a very bad shape being kept on life support for the fetus? Life support is very seldom needed for someone who is in top form.

"We did not think about it" is no excuse imo. If you're drafting laws that affect people's lives and deaths it's your duty to think about what's going to happen, what kind of cases could come along, how the law is going to be interpreted and how it could be misinterpreted.

ITA. Clearly that is what they were going for, even if they din't consider brain dead women. Their intent obviously was to protect the fetus despite condition of the mother or wishes of the family.

 

[DeeMarie]

Just read that on Thursday, Erick Munoz filed an affidavit supporting amended motion regarding his wife.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/tarr...e-of-brain-dead-pregnant-woman-241750531.html

JMO......From everything I've read, the district attorney, who represents the hospital, is going to fight like a tiger to keep life support going. Tragically, I don't think this issue is going to resolved today. It is going to drag on forever. Welcome to Texas, the land of Frankenstein.:tantrum:

Lest someone misinterpret my last sentence, the land of Frankenstein I am referring to is any place that would demand that a dead woman's body to be used as an incubator.

Oh no this is awful! Lets hope the Judge puts an end to this madness today!

 

[jjenny]

Another theory on how fetus ended up with multiple abnormalities reported. Possibly abnormalities were alredy present before mother collapsed as a result of a genetic defect? I personally don't think it's likely but some MDs seem to think so.

“The majority of organ development occurs in the first trimester, but from 14 weeks on, a lack of oxygen to the developing fetus is obviously a significant problem,” said Ashton, who has not treated Munoz but has treated pregnant patients on life support. “But the severity of these physical anomalies suggest the possibility of an underlying chromosomal abnormality in addition. It is very possible that if this is the case, the two factors taken together could result in a situation that is incompatible with survival.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/texas-fetus-abnormalities-mother-brain-dead/story?id=21639616

 

[K_Z]

Another theory on how fetus ended up with multiple abnormalities reported. Possibly abnormalities were alredy present before mother collapsed as a result of a genetic defect? I personally don't think it's likely but some MDs seem to think so.

“The majority of organ development occurs in the first trimester, but from 14 weeks on, a lack of oxygen to the developing fetus is obviously a significant problem,” said Ashton, who has not treated Munoz but has treated pregnant patients on life support. “But the severity of these physical anomalies suggest the possibility of an underlying chromosomal abnormality in addition. It is very possible that if this is the case, the two factors taken together could result in a situation that is incompatible with survival.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/texas-fetus-abnormalities-mother-brain-dead/story?id=21639616

I fully expect this to be argued by the attorneys for the hospital, in a very self-righteous manner. They will find a way to blame the victim, or blame the clinic doc who didn't do "enough" prenatal diagnosis before 14 weeks. IMO.

Hospital attorney: "It's not OUR fault the fetus was possibly chromosomally abnormal. WE did the best WE could to save its life and give it every chance." Picture the attorney wailing and beating his chest for emphasis and pity.

 

[jjenny]

I fully expect this to be argued by the attorneys for the hospital, in a very self-righteous manner. They will find a way to blame the victim, or blame the clinic doc who didn't do "enough" prenatal diagnosis before 14 weeks. IMO.

Hospital attorney: "It's not OUR fault the fetus was possibly chromosomally abnormal. WE did the best WE could to save its life and give it every chance." Picture the attorney wailing and beating his chest for emphasis and pity.

It doesn't sound like the condition of the fetus will enter into the legal discussion.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

The hospital might have acknowledged it. It doesn't mean she was legally pronounced brain dead. They need to take specific steps to do so.
Lets say only one physician examined her instead of two independent ones. Well, she isn't legally dead then.

Only one physician examination is required for adults to determine brain death. If it's reflected in her medical records that she is brain dead. Then time of death should be recorded. Otherwise, the medical record needs to state "we think she is brain dead".

In otherwords to document in her medical record she is brain dead then they would have had to perform the necessary tests to determine that.

http://www.utmb.edu/policies_and_pr.../IHOP - 09.15.09 - Determination of Death.pdf

 

[faw720]

For anyone wanting to stay on top of today's court hearing scheduled for 3:15 pm CST, here are 3 links that you might want to follow.

http://www.star-telegram.com

http://www.wfaa.com

http://www.nbcdfw.com

Our first evening newscast is at 4pm CST. There is another newscast at 5 pm CST & I will be listening to both. I will report anything I hear as soon as I hear it. Very often we hear the news on TV before a link is ever posted, but I will also provide the links as they become available.

 

[DeeMarie]

Only one physician examination is required for adults to determine brain death. If it's reflected in her medical records that she is brain dead. Then time of death should be recorded. Otherwise, the medical record needs to state "we think she is brain dead".

In otherwords to document in her medical record she is brain dead then they would have had to perform the necessary tests to determine that.

http://www.utmb.edu/policies_and_pr.../IHOP - 09.15.09 - Determination of Death.pdf

Just to share info on why she is not being declared brain dead...:

"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

 

[DeeMarie]

Another theory on how fetus ended up with multiple abnormalities reported. Possibly abnormalities were alredy present before mother collapsed as a result of a genetic defect? I personally don't think it's likely but some MDs seem to think so.

“The majority of organ development occurs in the first trimester, but from 14 weeks on, a lack of oxygen to the developing fetus is obviously a significant problem,” said Ashton, who has not treated Munoz but has treated pregnant patients on life support. “But the severity of these physical anomalies suggest the possibility of an underlying chromosomal abnormality in addition. It is very possible that if this is the case, the two factors taken together could result in a situation that is incompatible with survival.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/texas-fetus-abnormalities-mother-brain-dead/story?id=21639616

So this opens the question (and it may sound over the top but this situation is beyond belief anyways)

Since Texas is forcing the growth of a severely deformed fetus to birth, and it may be due to genetic birth defect, is next step is for the state of Texas is to stop or hinder all prenatal screenings for birth defects?

All pregnancies would therefore be enforced even though there is no chance for survival.


This may sound far fetch but doesn’t this fall into the same idea?

 

[oh_gal]

I wonder if he'd be so keen to push for her (and the child's) life to be terminated if he could be assured, 100%, that the child would be born healthy? (ie: he doesn't want to raise a handicapped child).

Maybe he's even said this, I don't know.

 

[alwaysonmymind]

Just to share info on why she is not being declared brain dead...:

"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 wanted to add, insurance benefits end with a declaration of death.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NevadaMom]

I wonder if he'd be so keen to push for her (and the child's) life to be terminated if he could be assured, 100%, that the child would be born healthy? (ie: he doesn't want to raise a handicapped child).

Maybe he's even said this, I don't know.

But that is clearly not the case. He has medical training, and he understood quite well the ramifications of hypoxia on the fetus. From my own personal experiences those who work in the medical field generally understand the gravity of medical situations without having to be told. I think holding out false hope - not unlike in the Jahi McMath case - is far more detrimental to the mental health of the family.

:moo:

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Just to share info on why she is not being declared brain dead...:

"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

This is Winslade speculating though. He doesn't have the medical records.

It remains to be seen what is in her medical records. But according to the father and his attorneys, the hospital has acknowledged that she is brain dead. If it is documented in her records that she is brain dead then the tests had to be performed to determine this. If brain death has been determined and they did not record her date of death, then there's a problem for failing to follow protocol.

 

[Karmady]

It doesn't sound like the condition of the fetus will enter into the legal discussion.

Sounds like it will be brought up, if at all, by the family's attorney, not the hospital -- except to the extent they need to address it in response. jmo

 

[BeginnersLuck]

In the below linked article on brain death pregnancies, there were two cases of Oligohydramnios. Oligohydramnios can result in birth defects. It also appears only one infant survived at such a young gestational age.

Oligohydramnios - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I recommend everyone read the below article, including the attached tables. It's pretty clear IMO that this is experimental and this hospital has made the decision they are going to experiment with this woman's body and the fetus.

If I wasn't sickened enough by this, after reading through the article I clearly am now. They have absolutely no right to do this, unless it is discussed and agreed upon with the family.

IMO, someone/s heads need to role.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002294/

 

[alwaysonmymind]

Here's a link for the Advanced Directive regarding end of life decisions.

The provision for pregnant individuals is in there.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/HS/htm/HS.166.htm





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jjenny]

I wonder if he'd be so keen to push for her (and the child's) life to be terminated if he could be assured, 100%, that the child would be born healthy? (ie: he doesn't want to raise a handicapped child).

Maybe he's even said this, I don't know.

Even if he is, he isn't alone.
Not everybody wants to raise a handicapped child.
If mother were alive, she'd have an option of terminating pregnancy after finding out about severe deformities.
Even after 20 weeks gestation.

 

[jjenny]

So this opens the question (and it may sound over the top but this situation is beyond belief anyways)

Since Texas is forcing the growth of a severely deformed fetus to birth, and it may be due to genetic birth defect, is next step is for the state of Texas is to stop or hinder all prenuptial screenings for birth defects?

All pregnancies would therefore be enforced even though there is no chance for survival.


This may sound far fetch but doesn’t this fall into the same idea?

TX does allow abortions. Although republicans certainly do want to impose more and more restrictions.

 

[gitana1]

She questions the hospital's motives. "If the hospital's true intent was to obtain a judicial determination [about the law], they could have gone into court months ago to seek an opinion. Their failure to do so suggests an intent on their part to delay the process to allow the fetus to reach 24 or 26 weeks to bolster their claim that the fetus has some kinds of rights.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justic...-pregnant-Texas-woman-takes-complicating-turn

The law actually mandates that the patient be kept on life support until fetal viability. So per the law, the fetus already has rights and actually, if the mother is considered a patient, the hospital has little choice.

I believe that Steven Hawking was diagnosed with ALS when he was a young adult in college and began to display symptoms, so I don't think the two situations are comparable.

I understand your point, but this is not a case of just having a limb deformity. This unborn baby has several issues (brain, heart, etc.) and faces further complications from a likely premature birth. There are a lot more things to consider than the limbs. JMHO.

But the law as written doesn't care whether the baby is deformed or catastrophically ill, etc. The law mandates that the fetus be brought to viability, no exceptions.

They can say whatever they want. I think the intent of the law was obviously to protect the fetus regardless of what condition the mother was in.
There is really very little difference between someone, lets say in a coma, and someone who is brain dead.
Neither person can do anything but lie there. I am not sure why some residual brain activity should make all the difference.

It doesn't unless death means she is no longer a "patient". If so, the law does not apply to her.

By the way, my understanding is a patient could be writhing in pain with some fatal disease and the hospital could not let her go if she was pregnant.

The hospital might have acknowledged it. It doesn't mean she was legally pronounced brain dead. They need to take specific steps to do so.
Lets say only one physician examined her instead of two independent ones. Well, she isn't legally dead then.

Not true. Nothing in the Texas code states that a person has to be "legally pronounced dead" by a physician or hospital to be legally dead. The doctors, however, do have to find or report the conditions for clinical death. Once they do so, a person is legally dead. Even if there is no official "declaration" from a physician.

The physicians do not have the power to come to legal conclusions. The codes and courts do that. They only have the power to report criteria that allows courts to make such a determination or for the code to be applied.

It doesn't sound like the condition of the fetus will enter into the legal discussion.

Oh, yeah it will. The condition of the fetus will come into play when discussing how the Act contradicts itself, and is thus void, when discussing whether ornot the Act constitutes an impermissble violation of a mother's right to privacy ( to an abortion), and later, when the hospiutal is sued for medical bills and care of the child, if the baby survives.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Here's a link for the Advanced Directive regarding end of life decisions.

The provision for pregnant individuals is in there.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/HS/htm/HS.166.htm





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Advanced directives don't apply when someone is brain dead. Texas law says they are legally dead. If someone is on a vent and they are brain dead, then the vent is removed. The family is not asked if the vent can be removed. The persons advanced directives don't apply in brain death or make a difference in the removal of support in someone that is brain dead.