Posted on 01/14/2014 12:21:36 PM PST by Morgana
DALLAS (AP) — The husband of a brain-dead, pregnant Texas woman on Tuesday sued the hospital keeping her on life support, saying doctors are doing so against her and her family's wishes.
The lawsuit filed in state district court asks a judge to order John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth to remove life support for Marlise Munoz, a North Texas woman who was 14 weeks pregnant when her husband found her unconscious on Nov. 26. Her family says the exact cause of her condition isn't known, though a blood clot is a possibility.
The hospital has said a state law prohibits life-saving treatment from being denied to pregnant patients.
(Excerpt) Read more at bigstory.ap.org ...
Oh heavens, what a quandary. Fourteen weeks doesn’t sound good for that baby. Praying that all will turn out as the good lord intends.
If the baby is still viable then the father is being cruel to want it dead.
Wonder if the baby is his??? So disturbing.
IF the mother is fed, oxygenated, and kept warm, the child will continue to builds its body for life int he air world. At around thrity or thirty four weeks the child can be birthed and thrive. THAT is not what this father wants, apparently. And there is always the miniscule possibility that the woman will ‘awaken’ and the husband may be responsible for her comatose state.
Contrary to what some of the “experts” are quoted as saying, this woman is NOT “dead.” “Brain-death” is an extremely misleading term, invented by the usual suspects for there anti-life convenience.
Possibly the woman will not recover, but she is not “dead” if all her systems are working.
As for the condition of the baby, it is evidently still alive as well, although unclear in what condition. It would be wrong to kill mother and child for the husband’s convenience, although it is unknown on the evidence given whether or not either of them will survive.
God’s will be done. Prayers for them.
“Wonder if the baby is his???”
Who cares? He can go on Muary and prove it’s not then get out of paying child support.
He can leave the baby at the hospital under “Save Haven” laws even if it is his and still not have to pay if that is what he’s worried about.
Either way he does not have to freaking kill the baby! Plus in the time it takes the baby to grow/develop/deliver that gives the mom a snowballs chance in hell to maybe recover. I said “maybe”. She may or maynot but at least she might. Give her at least that much time.
Yes, the physical conditions can be taken care of. I wonder, though, about that maternal heartbeat, the other more subtle qualities of mothering that are transmitted into the baby in utero. Like love. Poor little one needs our prayers.
Erik and family will probably get millions for this to cover medical bills for the wife and lifelong problems of the baby.
14 weeks on November 26 so it is around 21 weeks now.
approaching 22 weeks
That baby could be delivered with good chances if mama makes it another 6 weeks, as ANY mother would want in this situation
Family talking abut her “not wanting to be kept on life support”- balderdash
That is different than talking about “what if you were pregnant and the baby had a chance to be born ....before we let you go”
Family does NOT deserve that child, for sure
I’m very curious as to why the hospital hasn’t complied with the husband’s desires. They don’t appear to be a religious hospital.
Is it really about their interpretation of the law or is there disagreement about the woman’s actual status as dead?
The hospital and staff can’t speak so their side of the story is not available.
If she was 14 weeks on November 26th, then the baby is 22 weeks now - just a few more weeks and a healthy baby can be born. Why do they want to kill it? I think someone should look closely at the husband with regard to what happened to the wife...
in this case mom is dead. She meets the medical and legal criteria. She is gone. The fact that she can be supported with a vent and pressors does not make her any less death. In the exact same way that organs may be kept alive for organ transplant.
In this case as the argument is made to try to keep the organs alive I think it is morally correct and in fact imperative to try to keep baby alive. However the odds are overwhelming against. The moms body will deteriorate just as the poor innocent young woman deteriorated even while her corpse was being ventilated and artificially augmented.
Finally, viability is at or about 24 weeks. Getting baby to 27 weeks would be impressive and 30 weeks a miracle. If it came to pass once fetal lung maturity were confirmed c section should occur. There is no medically responsible way to even consider trying to get to 40 weeks.
Just to be clear as I have no doubt some will try to twist my words: mom is dead, it is morally consistent with modern medical practice to attempt to get baby to viability. In my opinion the abortion right activists who are pushing for something else are totally ignorant as to the medical science.
“but she is not “dead” if all her systems are working.”
All her systems are not working.
I personally think it should be the Dad’s choice, and eitther decision is ok.
I can’t imagine this is good for the baby. I don’t know why the hospital is making the call.
It’s tragic.
I am sure you have your check in the mail to pay the $1 miillion dollar tab?
Sure is. Thanks for setting me straight about the length of pregnancy. Good on the hospital for keeping the mother alive.
This is an interesting case, to be sure. Apparently, Texas law prohibits the removal of life support from a pregnant woman. Yet doctors have declared her brain dead so she isn't really on life support but rather being used as an incubator for her baby. Fighting against this are both the woman's husband and her family. Munoz also argues that his wife, a former paramedic, had clear end-of-life instructions that stated she would not have wanted to remain on life support.
Are you privy to some inside knowledge you're not sharing with us or are you just pulling this speculation out of your ass?
Yes, the doctors can argue that she will never recover, but that’s a difficult argument to make, since there have been numerous cases where such patients have, after many months, recovered.
And it is simply a LIE to say that she is “dead.” Her heart is still beating, her blood is circulating, her lungs are deriving oxygen from the air (whether or not she can breathe without assistance). That’s not dead. Dead is when all life ceases, and the cells begin to decay. To claim otherwise is to use Orwellian duckspeak.
So, whether or not the mother is capable of coming back, I don’t know. But it remains possible. And it also remains possible that she can be kept ALIVE until her baby is old enough to exit the womb, by C-section if necessary.
The article states that MAYBE the baby was deprived of oxygen while the mother had what might have been a stroke. But they don’t seem to know that. The baby is still alive, and may be capable of living a normal life, given a chance. So, we want to kill it because it MIGHT not be entirely normal? Without even trying to find out?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.