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.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,408,773 times
Reputation: 2394
This law has been on the books in all 50 states until recent history. It has been challenged and successfully defeated in many states. Hopefully this will be Texas' turn to throw this terrible law out.
This law has been on the books in all 50 states until recent history. It has been challenged and successfully defeated in many states. Hopefully this will be Texas' turn to throw this terrible law out.
I agree, it's a terrible law to have on the books.
I agree, it's a terrible law to have on the books.
This Munoz guy's wife was 4 1/2 months along when she stroked out. It looks like she can be sustained until the fetus is viable.
It must be terrible to have his wife on life support for another 2-3 months... But isn't it worth it? I mean, doesn't Munoz WANT the child??? Didn't his wife?
The article mentions advanced directives, but doesn't really say if Marissa had one or not. I'll take Munoz's word for it that his wife did not want extraordinary measures, but I wonder what she would say in this case, where there is a chance to save her baby?
I realize Texas law is compelling him in this situation, which sucks. With his wife incapacitated, it should be his choice. But jeez... tough one. Interesting ethical dilemma.
This Munoz guy's wife was 4 1/2 months along when she stroked out. It looks like she can be sustained until the fetus is viable.
It must be terrible to have his wife on life support for another 2-3 months... But isn't it worth it? I mean, doesn't Munoz WANT the child??? Didn't his wife?
The article mentions advanced directives, but doesn't really say if Marissa had one or not. I'll take Munoz's word for it that his wife did not want extraordinary measures, but I wonder what she would say in this case, where there is a chance to save her baby?
I realize Texas law is compelling him in this situation, which sucks. With his wife incapacitated, it should be his choice. But jeez... tough one. Interesting ethical dilemma.
I think her husband, more than anyone else, would know what she would have wanted. Whether it's "worth it" or not should be entirely up to him, not anonymous posters on a message board.
So I was hearing about this on the radio, and I thought, oh wow, that's a tough case. I can see both sides of the story. The law states that she cant be unplugged because of Texas state law (many other states also have a law similar to Texas) in order to protect the fetus. But at the same time, the wishes of the family and patient can not be executed. The other issue is, because the mother went with out oxygen for some time, there is a chance that the child will be born with certain defects that can effect quality of life, but it could also turn out to be completely healthy. So this is quite a tough conundrum
So I was hearing about this on the radio, and I thought, oh wow, that's a tough case. I can see both sides of the story. The law states that she cant be unplugged because of Texas state law (many other states also have a law similar to Texas) in order to protect the fetus. But at the same time, the wishes of the family and patient can not be executed. The other issue is, because the mother went with out oxygen for some time, there is a chance that the child will be born with certain defects that can effect quality of life, but it could also turn out to be completely healthy. So this is quite a tough conundrum
I think it is pretty disturbing that a state is willing to force medical treatment on somebody who doesn't want it because a bunch of morons in the state legislature know best.
I mean whats next keeping brain dead people alive against their wishes for organ harvesting because hey "its a life."
I think it is pretty disturbing that a state is willing to force medical treatment on somebody who doesn't want it because a bunch of morons in the state legislature know best.
I mean whats next keeping brain dead people alive against their wishes for organ harvesting because hey "its a life."
Who said anything about knowing what this brain dead woman wants, while she's brain dead and can't speak for herself?
Who said anything about knowing what this brain dead woman wants, while she's brain dead and can't speak for herself?
In the article it implies she made a living will. The only reason a person makes one of those is because they are contemplating this kind of situation and want to record their wishes, because they know if the time comes they won't be able to speak. Given that fact and the fact that her husband and parents all say the same thing I think its pretty clear what she wants.
Furthermore as far as the statute goes it is irrelevant. A person can spell out as much as they want that they don't want any life support in any form and the state will trump that if they are pregnant. So in essence Texas is saying we don't care what your wishes are if you go brain dead while pregnant, your body now belongs to the state so you have to be kept alive for as long as it takes to give birth.
Again. This is just 1 step away from allowing the brain dead to be used as organ storage, since the principle is basically the same.
Last edited by Egbert; 01-09-2014 at 11:20 PM..
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.