Posted on 01/27/2014 8:10:12 AM PST by Morgana
So you prefer the feds messing in state courts.. They already have to much power.
On threads like these, such a vague attribution leads to misunderstandings and quickly to flame wars, especially when there are the occasional agenda driven posters working these threads. Thanx for the clarification.
Leftist lawyers obviously stay awake all night scouring the countryside for these rare, tragic cases to advance their agenda. Sick and sad.
Before anybody else makes any claims about how an unborn child can or can’t be supported by a brain-dead mother, let us consult some authoritative medical source (and no, I haven’t read the whole thing yet):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002294/
One life ends, another begins: Management of a brain-dead pregnant mother-A systematic review.
Abstract.
Background
An accident or a catastrophic disease may occasionally lead to brain death (BD) during pregnancy. Management of brain-dead pregnant patients needs to follow special strategies to support the mother in a way that she can deliver a viable and healthy child and, whenever possible, also be an organ donor. This review discusses the management of brain-dead mothers and gives an overview of recommendations concerning the organ supporting therapy. (SEE LINK FOR REST)
Well obviously all of us are better able to diagnose this woman and treat her then the doctors in that hospital where she was actually laying.
Thats the thing, the only solution to this is for the government to have full and total control and our families to have no input.
If you don’t trust your spouse to make the right decision perhaps you have other issues to deal with.
“Do you know how far developed a human brain is at 13 weeks? Do you know how long the brain continues to grow and organize during development? Your assertion assumes things which are not assumable.”
Do you know.....”Can a human body that has suffered severe brain damage sustain an unborn child from a nutritional standpoint? Can her body send the proper nutrients to the unborn child? Can artificial feeding of the brain-dead female suffice to ensure a healthy baby? I do not know and neither does anyone else.”
Also, I do not remember making an ‘assertion’. I remember only asking questions. ;-)
Reagan was Gov if you recall. Not of this state, but he was a gov.
If only we had 100 more Ronald Reagans. If only.
It was a Star Trek reference.
Really complex episode.
Good point, if the woman was brain dead because of the clot I’d say the chances of the baby being alive were pretty slim.
Hopefully the doctors took that into account.
The headlines stated “the baby was killed” and that is the truth. Cutting of the baby’s life support (his mother) killed him. A living child, who was not brain dead, was just killed. So what part of “THOU SHALL NOT KILL” do those of you who claim to be believers in God, not understand?
driftdiver wrote: Well obviously all of us are better able to diagnose this woman and treat her then the doctors in that hospital where she was actually laying.
Doctors use sources like the one I linked, i.e. studies from other doctors having used scientific methods to come up with treatment plans.
As far as I’ve read, no doctor involved in the case has made any public statements about how the baby was doing before life support was disconnected; they’re restricted by HIPAA. Everything quoted was from lawyers and family.
I posted the link mainly to address the “rotting corpse” hyperbole, which is just mindless parroting of some quotes attributed to the husband, and the unsupported statements that the unborn child was stewing in toxic dead-mommy slime, like in some zombie movie.
Instead of flailing around with mindless conjecture, we should look at non-interested, non-vested, professional sources. Don’t you agree?
“Instead of flailing around with mindless conjecture, we should look at non-interested, non-vested, professional sources. Don’t you agree?”
I see what you did there. good one ole chap
is there a family dispute here? husband and wife were still together, her parents are onboard with the husband.
The original author of the law says it does not apply in this case.
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).
The bottom line, in my honest opinion, is that the government is being positioned as the final arbiter for life and death as the obamacare fascism is being erected. There are much larger issues overshadowing the issues penetrated with this story.
Not of this state, but he was a gov.
************
You are correct and that’s the point, Reagan had no jurisdiction over the
appointment made in 2010. For that matter neither did Bush. It was a State of
Texas appointment for the sitting Gov.
I’m not sure what the solution is to a situation like this as there will always be
someone not in agreement. My preference is to keep the issue as close to home as
possible. But the laws must be followed or changed as prescribed.
Take care.
In this case, it was the government who mandated that she be kept on life support and the family who took issue with that. I am trying to understand who a woman who is dead can sustain the life of an unborn infant re: provide the nutrients the baby needs to grow and survive.
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.
we should be focusing on the womb transplants that just happened in sweeden (switzerland?). Imagine a father being able to sue for custody of a womb and fetus which is going to be aborted anyways.
THAT will have real change on the abortion debate.
This case was a undevelping fetus which was not going any further. Battles must be selected, we should not fall into unforced errors.
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.