Posted on 04/26/2006 9:19:18 PM PDT by ChessMan
Andrea Clark Is Not the Only One
Even experienced Right to Life attorneys find the case of Andrea Clark to be shocking. Your continued efforts on her behalf are much appreciated by Andrea's family.
However, Andrea is not the only person whose life is endanger. Jerri Lynn Ward (Texas Advanced Directives Blog) explains:
I represent Andrea Clark and the family. I came to represent the family because I signed up on the registry of health care providers and referral groups that have volunteered their readiness to consider assisting families in the situation where the present attending physician and hospital ethics committee decides to withdrawing life-sustaining treatment.
As soon as I signed up, I got TWO cases. One involves Andrea Clark. Andrea's case has been getting media attention. Ms. Yenlang Vo's case has not. I would like for you to know about Ms. Vo's case.
Ms. Vo is in her 60's. She is a patient at St. David's North Austin Medical Center here in Austin, Texas. She has been diagnosed with persistent vegetative state--but that is disputed by the family. Ms. Vo's daugher, Loann Trihn, is an emergency room doctor and she disputes the diagnosis. Such a diagnosis is very subjective and involves clinical assessments. Dr. Trihn and her father have both witnessed her mother being responsive.
The attending physician wishes to withdraw dialysis, That is not acceptable to the family--and it against the express wishes of the patient expressed before she became unable to communicate. Ms. Vo needs a new shunt surgically implanted for her dialysis. She is receiving it by a different means at the present. The physician, apparently, does not believe that her state of life justifies the surgery.
Withdrawal of dialysis with no further attempt at creating a surgical access port not only condemns Ms. Vo to a rapid and untimely death, but prevents any initiation of dialysis on an outpatient basis should her sepsis be successfully treated and maximum medical improvement be obtained. The family have all observed signs that the mother retains certain cognitive abilities which may well improve with continued treatment. Removing dialysis is a preemptive and premature act which deprives her of a more natural path toward a peaceful end of life and is contrary to her expressed wishes to fight with all her strength until her time has come. Dialysis is no longer an extreme procedure and is performed for many patients on a routine outpatient basis and can in some case be self administered. To deny such a service in a critically ill patient without family consent and access to judicial due process is ethically, morally and very possibly legally wrong. The care for this lady should continue according to the highest current medical standard.
A physician I retained to look at this opines regarding the surgical implantation of the shunt as follows:
Whether to perform surgery is always based on the risks of surgery versus its benefits in individual cases. When the risk of not performing surgery exceeds the risk of the surgical procedure, then surgery is indicated. In this case, as pointed out in the Continuation of Affadavit, the risk of death without the shunt surgery appears to be 100%, whereas the risk from surgery, while perhaps high, is unlikely to be 100%, based on the information provided. Therefore, using the risk-benefit analysis, this patient can only benefit from surgery. The fact that she is cognitively impaired should not be used as a reason to deny her surgery.
The Texas Futile Care Statute gives only the recourse of discharge from the facility within ten days after the letter from the ethics decision is given to the family. The facility has found only one facility that will take her--one in Illinois.
The family lives in Travis County and Illinois is too far--though it may end up to be the only choice. I am continuing to work on attempts to slow the process down to find more appropriate placement here in Texas.
Please help me save this lady. I need more time to help her find placement in Texas. Tomorrow, I may be in Court on this issue.
In the near future, we will post specific action items that can be undertaken to assist Ms. Vo. In the meantime, please join me in prayer and by making her plight known.
Previously:
Andrea Clark Trusted Her Doctors
Andrea Clark - Update
In Houston, 'Ethics' Kills (Andrea Clarke)
More On Andrea Clark - URGENT Action Needed!
Andrea Clarke's Struggle for Life
Euthanasia in Texas
Killing Andrea Clark - We are Protesting - Help Us
A Step Beyond the Terri Schiavo Case
Hospital to Terminate Texas Woman
Thanks for this new information.
Thank you! BTTT
Owned and operated by St. David's, which lists three more acute care hospitals, a rehabilitation hospital, and a psychiatric hospital.
Here's their phone directory.
This has become a cottage industry.
There are probably thousands of cases of wrongful deaths throughout the country. So many that we don't hear about.
indeed. Pretty sad. Maybe if those freaks at peta would shift their focus to humans instead of animals it might all get more press.
"...Maybe if those freaks at peta would shift their focus to humans instead of animals it might all get more press."
THAT would be refreshing.
Also, everytime the culture of death wins one, it strengthens their cause, which is why we pro-lifers need to be proactive, and of course, PRAY.
Thank you!
The trust factor is dead and gone.
http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2006_04_23.PHP#005600
(At top of page)
see 11
see 11
In Clarke's case, she has been at St. Luke's for four months. Her need now is for palliative care at a long-term facility. St. Luke's is an acute care facility, and likely needs the bed for an acute care patient.
In both cases, we are hearing only one side in each of these situations.
I would also be very surprised if this ten-day deadline was sprung, all of a sudden, on both of these families. They've known this was coming.
"The rude awakening is that every time this happens, decent people "trusted the doctor" or whomever. They usually find out too late that in today's Amerika, there are corporations behind those doctors."
It's our job to wake up as many people up as we can to the truth.
"The family learned of a facility in Illinois that is willing to accept Andrea and offer her the opportunity to live, an expensive move that would require Andrea to be far removed from her family.
However, placing corporate greed ahead of all patient interests and the interests and wishes of the family, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital has just notified the family that they are willing to pay the almost $17,000 to move Andrea to Illinois if they will immediately - that's TODAY, move Andrea out of St. Lukes to the Illinois facility. If the family waits until tomorrow to decide, St. Lukes will only pay half. And if the family can't make a decision by tomorrow, the hospital may consider to pay absolutely nothing. In other words, the hospital is attempting to force Andrea out of the hospital in order to stop the financial drain of the cost of her care."
Have you noticed that some people automatically advocate killing the patient, regardless of the circumstances? Usually they don't even bother finding out any of the facts before they come out in support of murder.
All: Please see Post 11.
Most disturbing from the post: Jerri Ward said, among other things: "..And, yes, they will pull the plug on the 10th day."
If they are concerned about a move to Illinois, there is an entire network of Terri bloggers in Illinois who would probably lend support to Andrea's family.
I wouldn't be hanging around Texas any longer than I had to if it were my relative.
From opening post re: Ms. Vo:
"That is not acceptable to the family--and it against the express wishes of the patient expressed before she became unable to communicate."
If the patient, Ms. Vo, expressed that it was against her wishes, then how come the law doesn't back her wishes up?
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.