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.
I still have a lot to learn about this case. I am troubled the amount of time this lady was down is unknown. From this article it appears no MFM have assessed (or maybe they haven't released the consult, IDK) the fetus.
I wonder if this weren't a County Hospital with County attorneys representing the facility, if the process would be different?
It sounds like the husband is now suing the hospital to have his wife taken off the ventilator. I was wondering when legal action would be taken by the family. I wonder if having her transferred to a hospital in a state that recognizes the advance directive of a pregnant patient is an option?
"Even at this early stage, the lower extremities are deformed to the extent that the gender cannot be determined. The fetus suffers from hydrocephalus. It also appears that there are further abnormalities, including a possible heart problem, that cannot be specifically determined due to the immobile nature of Mrs. Munoz's deceased body."
I wonder if this will have any effect on the hospital providing further sustenance of her body?
What I'm wondering if this is true and if she gives birth and the baby has defect (sorry if I offend anyone), could the hospital be in the hook for future medical payments/expenses/etc..
Um, no one is being forced to stay alive because the woman has been declared dead. The Constitution does not provide for the rights of dead people.
There are no rights of the next of kin to make a decision to abort a pregnancy. Those in favor of allowing the next of kin to abort the pregnancy had better consider what they advocate. Once that door is opened, it will be open forever and the consequences are far reaching and not thought out.
Women have gone to great lengths to demand through law that the woman is the sole decision maker when it comes to abortion. Now we hear all that doesn't matter and that authority is within the domain of others in certain circumstances.
Please explain where in Roe VS Wade does any law provide for someone else to decide if a woman alive or dead can have an abortion? There is no such thing.
If somehow, the next of kin are allowed to decide to have an abortion performed, then do the next of kin also get to decide if organs can be removed and donated if the person didn't authorize it prior to their death?
How convenient an abortion becomes. Pro-abortion rights people had better get their act together on this one or the right to abortion will be set back decades.
Now a family can decide if an abortion is performed? How fast the faces of pro-choice people change when convenience comes into play. Better hope you don't get what you ask for because you'll get a lot more than you expected.
Um, no one is being forced to stay alive because the woman has been declared dead. The Constitution does not provide for the rights of dead people.
There are no rights of the next of kin to make a decision to abort a pregnancy. Those in favor of allowing the next of kin to abort the pregnancy had better consider what they advocate. Once that door is opened, it will be open forever and the consequences are far reaching and not thought out.
Women have gone to great lengths to demand through law that the woman is the sole decision maker when it comes to abortion. Now we hear all that doesn't matter and that authority is within the domain of others in certain circumstances.
Please explain where in Roe VS Wade does any law provide for someone else to decide if a woman alive or dead can have an abortion? There is no such thing.
If somehow, the next of kin are allowed to decide to have an abortion performed, then do the next of kin also get to decide if organs can be removed and donated if the person didn't authorize it prior to their death?
How convenient an abortion becomes. Pro-abortion rights people had better get their act together on this one or the right to abortion will be set back decades.
Now a family can decide if an abortion is performed? How fast the faces of pro-choice people change when convenience comes into play. Better hope you don't get what you ask for because you'll get a lot more than you expected.
The next of kin can consent to medical care for a patient.
How would you feel if the abortion was needed to save the mother's life? Do you think her husband should not be allowed to consent under those circumstances?
Yes, family can authorize organ donation in the absence of an advance directive from the patient. Parents do it for children, for example.
In this case, the issue is not about abortion. It is about keeping a person on a ventilator who had expressly made it clear that she did not want it to be done in the context of an event that had significant risk of harming the fetus, too. Now we know that fear was justified. The fetus has brain damage and other abnormalities. The ethical course would have been to take the mother off the ventilator when brain death was confirmed and let nature take its course. The probability of getting a healthy baby was virtually nil.
the next of kin can consent to medical care for a patient.
How would you feel if the abortion was needed to save the mother's life? Do you think her husband should not be allowed to consent under those circumstances?
Yes, family can authorize organ donation in the absence of an advance directive from the patient. Parents do it for children, for example.
In this case, the issue is not about abortion. It is about keeping a person on a ventilator who had expressly made it clear that she did not want it to be done in the context of an event that had significant risk of harming the fetus, too. Now we know that fear was justified. The fetus has brain damage and other abnormalities. The ethical course would have been to take the mother off the ventilator when brain death was confirmed and let nature take its course. The probability of getting a healthy baby was virtually nil.
Let that poor woman go. Let nature/god determine her fate and her body not be kept ARTIFICALLY alive by machines soley to be used as an incubator. Nobody is talking abourt ABORTION here. If her body cannot be kept alive, then she will die. Fact of life. Anyone remember Karen Quinlin? She lived even after machines were turned off for years. If this woman then lives long enough for fetal viability, then the fetus may live. If not? Well, then perhaps that is what is meant to be.
Years ago none of this would have been an issue. She, and the fetus, would have been long dead. Nature, or god if that is what one believes.
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.
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.
