• 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

Ben K. said:
Sweet Jesus. I know she is dead. Try reading what someone is saying. In obstetrics, there are two patients. The life sustaining treatment is keeping the fetus alive.

Why do you think the law exists in the first place - because they view the fetus as patient.
Click to expand...

If a living pregnant woman goes into the hospital at 14 weeks gestation....only one patient is listed. The mother. The fetus is not a patient until he leaves the womb. Then you have a patient.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

That is apparently not how the hospital has seen it.

It has stated with confidence that it is following the law, and whatever the court decides, I am sure the hospital will continue to do so.

Perhaps state law will be clarified because of today's hearing; as I posted earlier (post #806), an SMU law prof who helped revise the most recent update of the Advanced Directive says that he doesn't recall any discussion of the law being applied to a brain-dead person.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Superfly said:
Good grief. 82 pages of "She's not dead!" and "Yes she is!"

:roll:
Click to expand...
I see only 21 pages; 828 posts at 40 posts per page. It's a bit easier to keep track of conversations this way.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Jerry said:
I see only 21 pages; 828 posts at 40 posts per page. It's a bit easier to keep track of conversations this way.
Click to expand...

I think mine is set for 8 threads per page, or maybe 10. Besides. It packs more of a punch when I complain about 82 pages as opposed to your 21 pages. ;)
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Ben K. said:
Sweet Jesus. I know she is dead. Try reading what someone is saying. In obstetrics, there are two patients. The life sustaining treatment is keeping the fetus alive.

Why do you think the law exists in the first place - because they view the fetus as patient.
Click to expand...

But the law is about applying life sustaining treatment to the pregnant woman.

Until born, there is one patient. Are you saying that the hospital will list two patients before birth?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

AGENT J said:
Court rules Friday in brain-dead pregnant woman lawsuit

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!

now i hope they sue the **** out of the hospital and this law is removed or at minimum made to not infringe on RvW and other rights
Click to expand...

Could you dance on the grave of that baby just a little more? Sheesh, dude. A baby is going to die here. Try to calm yourself just a bit.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

digsbe said:
How sad that a precious human life will soon be lost :( May they rest in peace.
Click to expand...

not sad at all, not in the least, the only sad thing is the torture that was forced on the family

i find it thrilling, satisfying and gracious and i rest easier knowing that the life will be spared and it can rest in piece with its maker
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

AGENT J said:
not sad at all, not in the least, the only sad thing is the torture that was forced on the family

i find it thrilling, satisfying and gracious and i rest easier knowing that the life will be spared and it can rest in piece with its maker
Click to expand...

This post is just sick and depraved.

It's highly disturbing that anyone would find it "thrilling, satisfying and gracious" to know that an unborn human life is going to end along with the life of a mother. The situation is sad, and one life that could have possibly been saved will now end. Even if someone is pro-choice and feels that a woman has the right to terminate an unborn human life it is still highly disturbing that the fact of that life dying is found to be "thrilling."
 
Last edited:
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Superfly said:
Could you dance on the grave of that baby just a little more? Sheesh, dude. A baby is going to die here. Try to calm yourself just a bit.
Click to expand...

LMAO wow thats some great hyperbole there

you mean the baby that will finally be put to rest and not made to suffer? the baby that will be spared and will go to meet its maker in the kingdom?

sorry i find HUGE comfort in that and im happy that the families suffering on this issue is over, they can move on and the baby can be put to rest.

Im excited that the court ruled properly and peace is coming
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

digsbe said:
1.)This post is just sick and depraved.

2.)It's highly disturbing that anyone would find it "thrilling, satisfying and gracious" to know that an unborn human life is going to end along with the life of a mother.

3.)The situation is sad

4.) and one life that could have possibly been saved will now end.
Click to expand...

1.) you are free to have that opinion but its meanignless to me
2.) good thing i didnt do that, lol thats not what i find thrilling and satisfying, nice try but posting a lie about what i side wont help

heres what i actually said "i find it thrilling, satisfying and gracious and i rest easier knowing that the life will be spared and it can rest in piece with its maker

and i mean that and double and triple down on it, the life will be spared and not made to suffer and will rest with its maker

secondly the life of the mother is already GONE

3.) the situation is sad and the hospital made it worse

4.) possible yes with major defect and suffering for sure IF it survived which is stat wise is unlikely.

The baby will be at piece and now so will the family, the current battle is over and its a victory in their war.

what you feel is sick and deprived i feel is happy and bistowing
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Here is the ruling.

Judges Order on Munoz Matter


The law was not applicable because she is dead.That always seemed obvious.

This should have been proclaimed 2 months earlier.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

digsbe said:
How sad that a precious human life will soon be lost :( May they rest in peace.
Click to expand...

The article that AGENT J posted says the fetus is not viable.

That fetus is dead and may have been dead since the woman died.

The meds the doctors used to startup the woman's heart again may very well have restarted the heart of fetus also.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

AGENT J said:
Court rules Friday in brain-dead pregnant woman lawsuit

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!

now i hope they sue the **** out of the hospital and this law is removed or at minimum made to not infringe on RvW and other rights
Click to expand...

I don't see how they have any legal standing against the hospital. It would be a useless lawsuit for nothing more than to make the State and People pay more for an issue that has been settled. A selfish and stupid act.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Ikari said:
I don't see how they have any legal standing against the hospital. It would be a useless lawsuit for nothing more than to make the State and People pay more for an issue that has been settled. A selfish and stupid act.
Click to expand...

Nope. It pushed the case along, didn't it?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

year2late said:
Nope. It pushed the case along, didn't it?
Click to expand...

*sigh*

He was talking lawsuit for money after the fact. What they pushed for was for the judge to rule on the law, not a lawsuit against the hospital.

Does anyone read anymore?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Ikari said:
I don't see how they have any legal standing against the hospital. It would be a useless lawsuit for nothing more than to make the State and People pay more for an issue that has been settled. A selfish and stupid act.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
The hospital should have to eat all the expenses since keeping her on the ventilator against her families wishes, and they should also have to pay court costs at the very least.

I also personally think they deserve compensation for pain and suffering, but that's my opinion and I will let the family choose if they wish to pursue that action.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

You'll LET them?!
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

minnie616 said:
I disagree.
The hospital should have to eat all the expenses since keeping her on the ventilator against her families wishes, and they should also have to pay court costs at the very least.

I also personally think they deserve compensation for pain and suffering, but that's my opinion and I will let the family choose if they wish to pursue that action.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think the true argument is who pays the bill here. I would say that if we were to have this sort of law, that the taxpayers would be liable for payment. But that's the end of the legitimate concern.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

minnie616 said:
I disagree.
The hospital should have to eat all the expenses since keeping her on the ventilator against her families wishes, and they should also have to pay court costs at the very least.

I also personally think they deserve compensation for pain and suffering, but that's my opinion and I will let the family choose if they wish to pursue that action.
Click to expand...

I have to wonder that since it was clear she met all the criteria for death, but the doctors had not pronounced her.....if they will use that to bill the insurance company. I would think that if they billed the insurance company and it was clear she was actually dead, that they could get into legal troubles for their actions.

No way is the insurance company paying for dead people. I will be interested to see any repercussions if they do bill the insurance company for any time after it was clear she was dead.
 
The hospital stated that it was confident it was following the law. A judge has now disagreed. No word yet whether the county DA's office will appeal the ruling, but I hope it won't. One of the lawyers, law prof Thomas Mayo, who helped write the most recent revision of the law says that they didn't discuss its application to someone who is brain-dead.

This was an extraordinary and unplanned-for legal circumstance. I am satisfied that the hospital was doing what it thought legally right, the court has disagreed, and in the event somewhere in this country of an exceedingly rare tragedy like this happening again, there will now a legal precedent that will provide some guidance.
 
Maenad said:
It was not an arbitrary decision. There was a law in that state that required they keep the woman on life support.

Q&A: Latest on pregnant Tarrant woman being kept on life support | Dallas Morning News
Click to expand...

The judge stated that the law was not applicable to Munoz since she is dead - so the "life support" was not legally required for dead people.

She should have been pronounced a few months ago, as she met all the criteria, but the hospital did not. Even though she has not been formally pronounced at this time, the judge acknowledged that she is indeed dead.
 
nota bene said:
The hospital stated that it was confident it was following the law. A judge has now disagreed. No word yet whether the county DA's office will appeal the ruling, but I hope it won't. One of the lawyers, law prof Thomas Mayo, who helped write the most recent revision of the law says that they didn't discuss its application to someone who is brain-dead.

This was an extraordinary and unplanned-for legal circumstance. I am satisfied that the hospital was doing what it thought legally right, the court has disagreed, and in the event somewhere in this country of an exceedingly rare tragedy like this happening again, there will now a legal precedent that will provide some guidance.
Click to expand...

If they were confident they were following the law, they would have pronounced her legally dead about two months ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom