Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the judge rules that this baby should be taken off measures that sustain her life "because there are currently no treatment options that would improve her condition", I don't think the State of Texas can refuse to assist others in suicide who are wishing to die because "there are currently no treatment options that would improve their condition".
You can't have it both ways. Refuse medical care to sustain the life of a child with serious health issues, and at the same time refuse to help end the lives of adults who are suffering with serious health issues.
It's been 6 weeks. I wonder if there's a health update - has Tinslee gotten better, worse, or remained virtually level in her health situation?
This is not comparable to suicide. It’s comparable to an adult refusing to be kept alive artificially indefinitely. It’s comparable to an adult saying enough is enough to chemo and choosing to go peacefully. It’s comparable to things adults are allowed to choose for themselves every day and comparable to decisions loving parents make every day. Would YOU choose to live indefinitely sedated and in pain, hooked up to machines with no hope of recovery? Adults already get to make that decision.
This is not comparable to suicide. It’s comparable to an adult refusing to be kept alive artificially indefinitely. It’s comparable to an adult saying enough is enough to chemo and choosing to go peacefully. It’s comparable to things adults are allowed to choose for themselves every day and comparable to decisions loving parents make every day. Would YOU choose to live indefinitely sedated and in pain, hooked up to machines with no hope of recovery? Adults already get to make that decision.
I agree with you that this situation happens and adults are allowed to choose for themselves if they want to be maintained with artificial support. This is why we have (or should have) advanced directives informing healthcare providers of our desires. In this situation however, the patient is an infant and her mother's choice is to medical support.
What you or I choose for ourselves or for our children is not the issue here because we are talking about choices. In this situation, the hospital (and now the state of Texas) is saying that there is no choice as they have made the decision for this baby.
I am not blind to the cost issues but the only thing more concerning than a hospital administration deciding when someone's quality of life doesn't warrant further medical care is thinking that they are making that decision based on how much they are getting reimbursed.
I agree with you that this situation happens and adults are allowed to choose for themselves if they want to be maintained with artificial support. This is why we have (or should have) advanced directives informing healthcare providers of our desires. In this situation however, the patient is an infant and her mother's choice is to medical support.
What you or I choose for ourselves or for our children is not the issue here because we are talking about choices. In this situation, the hospital (and now the state of Texas) is saying that there is no choice as they have made the decision for this baby.
I am not blind to the cost issues but the only thing more concerning than a hospital administration deciding when someone's quality of life doesn't warrant further medical care is thinking that they are making that decision based on how much they are getting reimbursed.
The hospital should not be required to continue care which has been determined to be futile. It is no different from stopping treatment for a child with cancer when it becomes evident that the treatment is ineffective. In Tinslee's case, that includes experts at multiple hospitals. Continuing current treatment is only going to delay her death, probably for a matter of months, most likely until she gets an infection that is untreatable and multiple organ failure. The people responsible for her care believe she is in pain. The mom is in denial. She wants her beautiful child to get better. That is not going to happen.
Like it or not, cost is a factor. How high a percentage of the hospital budget is one patient entitled to, when there is no hope of improvement? Daily costs may be in the ballpark of $2000 to $3000 per day for a patient requiring intensive care, and if the child is on Medicaid I doubt it is paying that much.
Heartbreaking, but this isn't what I would call a quality of life.
"Tinslee is suffering and she is in pain every single day. We know that this is very difficult for this family who had high hopes that she would get better. But the truth is that she is not going to get better," King told reporters on Thursday.
The baby girl consistently takes painkillers and sedatives, and she is paralyzed at all times. The hospital had said doctors had to sedate and paralyze the infant to keep her from pulling at the lines connected to her ventilator.
She is suffering from severe sepsis and appears that she's in pain when nurses change her diapers and turn her over to avoid bed sores, King said."
I have a feeling no one will take her because if they would, her mother would have had her moved already unless her mother can't relocate.
I didn't see St Jude on the list at your link. That's the 1st time I've seen so many hospitals listed
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.