• 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

I heard about this the other day. I think the government requiring a dead person to remain on a ventilator is really creepy and disturbing. The choice to remove support should be made by her family if she doesn't have an advanced directive. My question is: who the heck is paying for this?? It is incredibly expensive to keep her on this kind of support. The family shouldn't be made to pay for this if it's against their wishes. I kind of doubt insurance will cover keeping a dead person ventilated. As a tax payer, I don't want to pay for this. :shrug:
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Unitedwestand13 said:
If the mother is dead then why not respect the wish's of the dead and allow her to rest in peace. putting her body on life support may keep the baby alive but is only extending the mothers tortured existence.
Click to expand...

If she's dead then they aren't extending anything as far as she's concerned.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

rocket88 said:
If the child were developed enough to survive outside the womb, then I could see taking it out and letting the mother die. If not, then I really don't see the point in keeping both alive artificially.
Click to expand...

But in the case of a woman 8 months pregnant and dead, you'd have to keep the woman on life support until such time as the child could be birthed, likely having to stabilize the mother in most cases before operating.

In "nature" there'd be no diffence between the 5 month old fetus and the 8 month old fetus - they'd both die. But in the case of humans, timing is your issue - 3 or 4 months on life support, while the fetus develops, is too much an imposition whereas a few hours or days is okay.

I don't get it.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Unitedwestand13 said:
If the mother is dead then why not respect the wish's of the dead and allow her to rest in peace. putting her body on life support may keep the baby alive but is only extending the mothers tortured existence.
Click to expand...

She's dead. She doesn't even have a tortured existence. Again, sorry to sound so callous, but it's true. No need to kill a baby to keep from hurting the feelings of someone who will never realize what you've done. I value human life much more than that.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Lutherf said:
If she's dead then they aren't extending anything as far as she's concerned.
Click to expand...

does she have the right to die? if so she is being deinied that right.

this case reminds me of the terri schiavo case.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

,
rocket88 said:
How do you know the kid's perspective?
Click to expand...

Uhh?

I'm guessing you're reading something into my statement that isn't there...

We know what we know about the kid's situation from the news.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

rocket88 said:
What if she did? Would that change your mind?
Click to expand...

I do not support any state regulation banning or supporting abortion, and I do not support any state regulation banning or supporting the monetary caregiver withdrawing their desire to not pay for the medical care of another.

If she wanted to be taken off life support, while pregnant, the husband should either claim as much, show documentation, or shut up.

rocket88 said:
How? Nobody's aborting anything.
Click to expand...

She is pregnant.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Unitedwestand13 said:
does she have the right to die? if so she is being deinied that right.

this case reminds me of the terri schiavo case.
Click to expand...

It's nothing like Terri Schiavo. Terri Schiavo wasn't carrying a baby. The only reason this women is being kept on life support is for the baby. No baby? No life support.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

CanadaJohn said:
But in the case of a woman 8 months pregnant and dead, you'd have to keep the woman on life support until such time as the child could be birthed, likely having to stabilize the mother in most cases before operating.

In "nature" there'd be no diffence between the 5 month old fetus and the 8 month old fetus - they'd both die. But in the case of humans, timing is your issue - 3 or 4 months on life support, while the fetus develops, is too much an imposition whereas a few hours or days is okay.

I don't get it.
Click to expand...

Exactly, in nature, they'd both die.

It's also kind of my views on life support - a couple of hours so I can recover is fine. If I'm not going to recover, then why keep me going for months?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Superfly said:
She's dead. She doesn't even have a tortured existence. Again, sorry to sound so callous, but it's true. No need to kill a baby to keep from hurting the feelings of someone who will never realize what you've done. I value human life much more than that.
Click to expand...

if you value life you must recognize the value of the opposite side of the coin. if the woman is dead, pull life support and let her expire naturally.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Unitedwestand13 said:
if the mother is brain dead i think some of her bodies functions would stop working.
Click to expand...

Ariel Sharon, as an example, had been brain dead and on life support since 2007 and only died this month. The body's functions can easily be maintained for the 3 or 4 months necessary to give this child a chance at life.
 
Last edited:
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

JayDubya said:
,

Uhh?

I'm guessing you're reading something into my statement that isn't there...

We know what we know about the kid's situation from the news.
Click to expand...

The situation yes, but his views on artificial life support not really.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Superfly said:
It's nothing like Terri Schiavo. Terri Schiavo wasn't carrying a baby. The only reason this women is being kept on life support is for the baby. No baby? No life support.
Click to expand...

but i think both cases show that there is such a thing as a right to die. and a lot of people went out of their way to keep terri schivo alive even though that life was nothing but a life of agony.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Unitedwestand13 said:
if you value life you must recognize the value of the opposite side of the coin. if the woman is dead, pull life support and let her expire naturally.
Click to expand...
And I would do so once the baby is born. Yes, all life has value, but the mother is dead. It's not going to hurt her at all to leave her on life support for a couple of months to help the baby. She won't even know it's happening.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

CanadaJohn said:
Ariel Sharon, as an example, had been brain dead and on life support since 2007 and only died this month. The bodies functions can easily be maintained for the 3 or 4 months necessary to give this child a chance at life.
Click to expand...

Did he die naturally, or only after they pulled the plug? If the latter, I can't figure why they kept him alive for 7 years....like they didn't know after one? Actually, I think he was in a "permanent vegetative state," which isn't really brain dead.

If the mother stayed alive naturally, then fine. But I don't think that's the case here.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

rocket88 said:
Exactly, in nature, they'd both die.

It's also kind of my views on life support - a couple of hours so I can recover is fine. If I'm not going to recover, then why keep me going for months?
Click to expand...

You don't think that a mother would do anything in her power to keep her child alive? I don't know any woman who'd abandon hope for their child.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

rocket88 said:
No, it doesn't. This isn't about abortion.

I don't think you know what "ad hom" means.
Click to expand...

Not directly, no, but it involves many of the same principles of bioethics.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

CanadaJohn said:
Ariel Sharon, as an example, had been brain dead and on life support since 2007 and only died this month. The bodies functions can easily be maintained for the 3 or 4 months necessary to give this child a chance at life.
Click to expand...

if the mother dies no amount of life support can keep the baby alive once the mothers body starts to go into rigor mortis. or is that the reason why the life support is there in the first place? to prevent the mother's death to affect the health of the baby still attached by its umbilical cord to its dead mother?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

scatt said:
I do not support any state regulation banning or supporting abortion, and I do not support any state regulation banning or supporting the monetary caregiver withdrawing their desire to not pay for the medical care of another.

If she wanted to be taken off life support, while pregnant, the husband should either claim as much, show documentation, or shut up.



She is pregnant.
Click to expand...

So if she didn't specify pregnancy, then we should just assume?
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

Unitedwestand13 said:
but i think both cases show that there is such a thing as a right to die. and a lot of people went out of their way to keep terri schivo alive even though that life was nothing but a life of agony.
Click to expand...

Terri Schiavo's case was different. According to her husband, Schiavo wanted to die. Her husband wanted her to die. Her family did not. This really has nothing at all to do with saving the life of a baby. It was simply an argument of, "My wife wants to die!" against, "My daughter doesn't want to die!" Schiavo was alive. The mother of this baby is not. She has no life. Nothing. So nothing that happens will harm her, mentally or physically - ever again.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

rocket88 said:
So if she didn't specify pregnancy, then we should just assume?
Click to expand...

Again, if the husband knows, he should claim as much, show documentation, or shut up. He can even lie, nobody would know.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

rocket88 said:
Did he die naturally, or only after they pulled the plug? If the latter, I can't figure why they kept him alive for 7 years....like they didn't know after one? Actually, I think he was in a "permanent vegetative state," which isn't really brain dead.

If the mother stayed alive naturally, then fine. But I don't think that's the case here.
Click to expand...

I don't know what the effective difference is between "brain dead" and "permanent vegetative state" - he was on life support for 6 plus years following a stroke and coma from which he never woke up.
 
Re: Texas Hospital keeping pregnant dead lady on life support

CanadaJohn said:
You don't think that a mother would do anything in her power to keep her child alive? I don't know any woman who'd abandon hope for their child.
Click to expand...

Parents have to allow their children to die sometimes. It happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom