• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support[W:315]

Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

That's fair - but when the individual is incapable of expressing their views/decisions - in this case, the fetus - I'm prepared to let the medical community do what they feel is in the best interest of that individual and not those who appear to have interests other than those of the individual.

So in every other case the next of kin or DPOA has the ability to give and withdraw consent. Just not in this one?

Do you not find that wrong?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

So in every other case the next of kin or DPOA has the ability to give and withdraw consent. Just not in this one?

Do you not find that wrong?

35 states.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

End of life counseling is not assisted suicide!!!!!!!!!!

What gave you that idea!!!!
I never said it was. Palin said it was. Is Palin involved with this woman's body being kept on life support? You brought it up, you're the one who thinks Palin's 5-year-old comment is relevant to this thread. I think it has nothing to do with this thread. So "what about death panels" you ask? Nothing. That's what about them. Nothing. The person who would have needed end of life counseling is already dead, she didn't know in advance that she was going to die, nor did she kill herself. So either way it's completely irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

That's fair - but when the individual is incapable of expressing their views/decisions - in this case, the fetus - I'm prepared to let the medical community do what they feel is in the best interest of that individual and not those who appear to have interests other than those of the individual.
Be careful calling a fetus an 'individual' around here, or presuming a fetus can make 'views/decisions' even-though it can't express them.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

I never said it was. Palin said it was. Is Palin involved with this woman's body being kept on life support? You brought it up, you're the one who thinks Palin's 5-year-old comment is relevant to this thread. I think it has nothing to do with this thread. So "what about death panels" you ask? Nothing. That's what about them. Nothing. The person who would have needed end of life counseling is already dead, she didn't know in advance that she was going to die, nor did she kill herself. So either way it's completely irrelevant.

My apologies. I was responding to your implication that the left would use the child as a pawn. I was trying to show that your comment was an extreme change from earlier proclamations that any health care reform would mean "death panels" - by the way Palin may have started that - but it was oft repeated on the right.


Again, my apologies. But I guarantee if the child is born alive and disabled, he will not use the child as a poster child for Obamacare. If the child was going to be used politically - don't you think it would be more likely by Pro-Life groups? Look how they used SChiavo in her vegetative state.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

35 states.

Has any other state demanded to keep a DEAD woman on mechanical ventilation (etc) to maintain a pregnancy?

DEAD, not vegetative or comatose.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Has any other state demanded to keep a DEAD woman on life support to maintain a pregnancy.

DEAD, not vegetative or comatose.

35, by law.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

It doesn't counter that. The organs provided were the heart, liver, pancreas and two kidneys - not organs I mentioned as likely to first degrade due to brain death.

Also from translating the original Hungarian source, even those organs being harvested is apparently unprecedented.



Egészség: Agyhalott asszony szült Debrecenben - HVG.hu

Noted - however, I simply posted the article to counter the argument that the woman would "decay and rot" if left on life support because that's what her dead body would do, regardless of life support. The "brain dead" woman in the article I posted was on life support for 12 plus weeks while her unborn child developed from 15 wks to 27wks at which time a c-section was performed to birth the child. Those facts, such as they are, are totally relevant to the 14 wks old fetus in this case and the attempt to have it develop to the 25 plus wks status where it may be birthed.

Doesn't guarantee that this child will be "perfect" or fully healthy - simply points out that similar has happened in the past, with great success. I'm siding with hopeful - you, as is your right, can choose whatever side you'd like.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

So in every other case the next of kin or DPOA has the ability to give and withdraw consent. Just not in this one?

Do you not find that wrong?

No, I don't - quite simply because this is not every other case.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

35, by law.

Point to the cases in those states where dead women are kept on mechanical ventilation to maintain pregnancy.

Show me the part of the law that states dead women should be maintained on life support.

Way back, I posted text that indicated they were speaking to a LIVING patient.

Show me something to contradict that. Post from the law.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

No, I don't - quite simply because this is not every other case.

No case is every other case. They are all individual.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

I have a question. If the baby is delivered as a "superpremie" with complex catastrophic medical issues...and the father wanted care withdrawn(option given to him by MD), would you support his decision?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

I have a question. If the baby is delivered as a "superpremie" with complex catastrophic medical issues...and the father wanted care withdrawn(option given to him by MD), would you support his decision?

Well one valid question at that point would be why was the kid delivered so early when he or she is fine where he or she is for right now?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

I don't know who came up with the 35 state figure as the number of states that automatically invalidate a pregnant woman's advance health care directive. but this atrticle says Texas is one 12 states.
Texas is one of 12 states across a wide political spectrum that automatically invalidate a pregnant woman's advance health care directive.
The others are: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, South Carolina, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin, according to a 2012 report by the Center for Women Policy Studies, an advocacy group that supports abortion rights.

Pregnant, brain-dead woman's husband sues hospital - San Jose Mercury News

The same article points out that :Experts say it does not apply in this case.



The Texas Advance Directives Act reads in part that, "A person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment under this subchapter from a pregnant patient."

But experts say the hospital is incorrectly applying the statute because Munoz is brain-dead and beyond any chance of recovery.

"This patient is neither terminally nor irreversibly ill," said Dr. Robert Fine, clinical director of the office of clinical ethics and palliative care for Baylor Health Care System, in an interview earlier this month. "Under Texas law,
this patient is legally dead."
 
Last edited:
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

I don't know who came up with the 35 state figure as the number of states that automatically invalidate a pregnant woman's advance health care directive. but this atrticle says Texas is one 12 states.

Proud as I am that we are one of the good guys on this issue, scan back through the thread, it was already posted if you care.

What I recall from the link was that a lot of states don't even have legal policy for this situation.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

UPDATE:

A hearing is scheduled for this Friday.

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) - A different judge will consider a North Texas man’s request to remove his pregnant, brain-dead wife from life support at a hospital.

A hearing has been scheduled Friday before state District Judge R.H. Wallace in Fort Worth in the case of Marlise Munoz (moon-YOHZ’).



Read more: Hearing set in TX brain-dead, pregnant woman case - Washington Times
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Point to the cases in those states where dead women are kept on mechanical ventilation to maintain pregnancy.

Why would I need to do that? The law refers to DNRs not being relevant to pregnant women.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Why would I need to do that? The law refers to DNRs not being relevant to pregnant women.

because they two dont match hence your statement is a complete failure like it has been for pages. This obvious fact wont change especially when it spurred from the statement that suggested that THIS state is using the law and twisting it for THIS situation. so the other states dont matter unless they did the exact same thing lol:shrug:

youll have to show ever single other state you mention doing the same thing and then discuss the characteristics of that case vs. this one, at least thats how honest conversation worthy or merit takes places.

once again facts defeat your post
 
Last edited:
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Why would I need to do that? The law refers to DNRs not being relevant to pregnant women.
Forgive my ignorance but if DNR stands for Do Not Resuscitate, wouldn't one have to be legally dead in order for resuscitation to be appropriate, for a DNR to then be relevant? I mean, I see some folks making a stink about "she's dead" and I can't help but think "well dumbass you have to be in a coma or dead for a DNR to apply, and this lady is not in a coma, so thanks for stating the obvious I guess".

It's like people don't know what the word "resuscitate" actually means.

And on top of it, she's NOT legally dead, she's brain dead. She won't be legally dead until a physician pronounces her dead. Until that point, she's legally alive. If she had a living will for organ/tissue donation it would be in-force at this moment because she's still legally alive.
 
Last edited:
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

youll have to show ever single other state you mention doing the same thing and then discuss the characteristics of that case vs. this one, at least thats how honest conversation worthy or merit takes places.
If this this were The Loft, you would be correct, but it's not. No such in-depth discussions are expected or required in the open forum. Never have been, never will.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Why would I need to do that? The law refers to DNRs not being relevant to pregnant women.

She is not being resuscitated. SHE IS DEAD!!

What do you not get about dead?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

She is not being resuscitated. SHE IS DEAD!!

What do you not get about dead?
Brain dead is not legally dead. Her pulse and respiration have to stop, and then a doc can pronounce her dead, and then she's legally dead.
 
Back
Top Bottom