Posted on 01/27/2014 8:10:12 AM PST by Morgana
Wasn’t it the hospital that took the adversarial position to the husband and wanted to keep his wife on life support?
Given the above requirements, was the 'dead' mother able to function in those ways so that the alive unborn child can continue to build its own body/s[acesuit for life int he air world? Answering that question is to some degree subjective, wouldn't you agree?
longtermmemmory wrote: The only reason this is in court is due to the hospital trying to play games with the law because somebody at the hospital does not like the law.
I think we should just let the family mourn its loss(s).
Is this still in court? I thought the whole thing had been settled by the judge and the hospital already when they pulled the plug.
I was addressing the “THE BABY’S DEAD YAY!! IT WAS DEFORMED ANYWAY AND WAS SUFFERING AND IN A DEAD CORPSE MOMMY ZOMBIE STEW OH AND BY THE WAY I’M PRO-LIFE” crowd with my last posts.
Even with such evidence, there are those who will try to jump through hoops to isolate this case in Texas from the other rare cases. An agenda is being served, as I’m sure you realize, m’Lady.
Absolutely.
Where is that crowd here? You’re the only one making zombie jokes.
A question for you, where does the baby get oxygen? If the mother doesn’t get oxygen does it have an impact on the baby?
No. They thought they were obeying a state law
driftdiver wrote: By the way the concept that a dead body may not be able to properly support a baby is not hyperbole, whatever the insulting word games you want to play.
If she had been properly dead, you’d be right. Brain death is not the same as systemic, cellular death.
If they were the same, as you are somehow trying to advocate either via ignorance, stubbornness, or some combination thereof, then there’d be no such thing as “life support”, and thus no controversy at all about any brain-dead patients in any situation.
And I hadn’t started out by insulting you, but now I am because I’ve provided an authoritative source about the subject and you seem to have ignored it in order to act all offended.
That’s a familiar tactic. It usually doesn’t work for us conservatives, but hey, whatever floats your boat Chumlee.
I for one hope they removed the unborn baby and did an autopsy on it. I’d really like to know what it said.
_________________________________________
No for some strange reason the baby was never given a chance..
a Yahoo article said that the baby was not delivered..
“Munoz was removed from the machines shortly afterward and allowed to die. The fetus, which was at 23 weeks’ gestation, was not delivered.”
http://news.yahoo.com/brain-dead-texas-woman-taken-off-life-support-060336729.html
Go screw yourself sport. You are trying to claim moral ground by insulting others. Obviously you have a softspot for brain dead people because you are one.
Do they know if the baby was even viable? Was there a heartbeat?
U MAD BRO? CALL THE WAAAAAAAHMBULANCE!
troll
Yes there was a heartbeat..
not being viable just meant the baby wasn’t further along enough to be able to live outside the mother without being hooked up to machines himself for a while...
and that happens to lots of babies..even 40 weeks babies...
the baby was 23 weeks gestation..old enough to be born ..
Yes there was fetal heartbeat even as the woman was put on life support. When she was presented to medical personnel they immediately began treating TWO patients.
She wasn't "hurt," she had a pulmonary embolism. Not exactly something one person can easily inflict on another. Either he's the most brilliant murderer in history (in which case, why did he help rescuscitate her, instead of leaving her to die?), or it just tragically happened. Considering that pulmonary embolisms are one of the leading causes of death among pregnant women, I'm thinking the latter.
I don’t want the govt stepping in. In this case the father actually had a say in what happened to his baby and that is good thing.
Perhaps the doctors made the wrong decision but we’ll never know. This is a tragedy and if they made the wrong one for the wrong reasons they will face an accounting.
If the mother was brain dead I would be very surprised if the baby wasn’t also brain dead. I pray to God that I never have to make that decision.
So if they began treating two patients it seems logical they determined the baby was gone as well.
I am not in the business of retroactively reading the mind of medical personnel. The process of treating patients progresses from what is wrong to how to treat the malady. They kill patients when they start with preconceived notions, hence our medical science has developed many and very specific lab tests, usually beginning with broad spectrum results possible to less and less results possible, based upon eliminating the whats as they arise in the mind of the medical personnel, based upon their extensive experiences.
huh
Either you trust the healthcare providers to make the right decisions or you don’t. They started off making the right one.
Now just because we don’t like the answer it means they were incompetent or had evil intentions.
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.