Posted on 03/21/2005 12:23:45 AM PST by ambrose
Life support battle winds down, patient transferred to San Antonio hospital
06:37 PM CST on Sunday, March 20, 2005
By Amy Tortolani / 11 News
A man who had been on a respirator at St. Luke's Hospital arrived at a new facility Sunday in San Antonio. While the life support battle appears to be winding down, this situation could eventually involve lawmakers.
Watching the ambulance pull away from St. Luke's Hospital with Spiro Nikolouzos in it was not only a victory for his family, but another chance at life.
"I am so happy that this happened that he is out of here," said Janette Nikolouzos, patient's wife.
Spiro Nikolouzos has been an invalid since 2001 and complications last month left him unable to breathe on his own.
St. Luke' Hospital had planned to take the 68-year-old man off life support.
"This has never been an issue about St. Luke's or anyone that works at St. Luke's wanting to take this man off life support," said Dr. David Pate, St. Luke's. "It's been about what's best for him and should we be forced to continue providing care to someone that we think is futile and we think may be hurting them and ultimately, will make no impact on the quality of life."
Mrs. Nikolouzos fought to keep her husband alive and took St. Luke's to court.
After many extensions and stays, but before a final decision was ever reached, the family found a facility in San Antonio to care for their loved one.
"Free at last free at last. You didn't get to kill him," said Janette Nikolouzos.
But it's not the end of this life support case. Mrs. Nikolouzos is ready to take on Texas lawmakers who have given hospitals the right to remove patients from life support after giving 10 days notice, unless there is clear evidence another facility can provide care.
"They are out of control to make a law like this, it's shameful," said Janette Nikolouzos. "The way I feel for them giving so much power to the doctors and the hospitals they should bury their heads in the sand like an ostrich. It's disgraceful for this state.
Family members said while they won this battle, they admit the father and husband they knew will never fully recover. But at least now, they say, there's a chance.
There is supposed to be another court hearing on Wednesday, but the family's attorney said there is a conference call scheduled with the judge Monday.
BTT ambrose. Thank you. I have been wondering the exact same thing.
She won't have far to look; 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
I heard that it was then Governor Bush that signed that bill into law. I head it in the floor debates and on Larry Kings show tonight.
Ventilator and feeding tube are entirely different to me. I think each case is different and should be dealt with individually. Coma and brain-dead are different too.
Exactly right GOP. Having to run a persons autonomic functions for them counts as "heroic means" - we really are not morally bound to carry out heroic means for people who are not getting any better (who are not expected to ever regain use of their autonomic functions.
In the Schiavo case autonomic functions are not the issue. Someone is denying her food and water.
Nothing new here, folks...Move along please...
Delay? Delay? Where are you Mr. Delay? Your services are needed! /s
The "slippery slope" they've been worried about is Michael Schiavo, his lawyer, and the judge. They aint worried about anything else.
Put the White House phone number on the speed dial button labeled "Ambulance"
"To think in my life time I have seen the Democrat Party brought to the brink of obsolescence, and since nature abhors a vacuum seen the Religious Right of the Republican Party turned into Democrats, forcing legislative action to do what the state judiciary would not.
Disgusting."
Yes those hayseed hick Christians mucking it up for the moderate nobles.
Exactly. He's not getting any nourishment with a ventilator tube down his throat.
You're putting your eggs all in one basket and your faith entirely on a Liberal judge? Strange.
I am very pro-Terri's right to live. She is in no obvious pain and may be able to feel pleasure.
This man is simply dying slowly, and, with those ulcers to the bone, very painfully. He should be allowed to go peacefully.
Modern medicine can keep a body alive long past the time there is a person in there.
His family says "no." Why shouldn't they get the same consideration that the Schindlers got?
Yes, the doctor should be able to decide whether he wants to treat someone or not. Doctors aren't slaves, at least not yet.
Even if the family is paying he is using a hospital bed and facilities, so it is not an argument whether it is the family or insurance putting out the dollars.
The great national debate on the appropriate use of certain medical technology has now begun. At what point is it wrong to keep a body alive? What level of brain function? What levels of intractable pain in a deteriorating body? What levels of use of public funds?
It's not going t be pretty.
This is also WHY the paper chose to print this.
They obviously prefer death.
If people want artificial life support at enormous cost, set up a private foundation and pay for it with private money.
There are enormous costs involved, and many belief systems think artificial life support is immoral.
"You're putting your eggs all in one basket and your faith entirely on a Liberal judge? Strange."
Huh? Was this directed to me? If so, I can't see how you come to this conclusion at all.
Qwinn
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.