Posted on 04/14/2005 3:32:36 PM PDT by FR_addict
It appears there will be a happy ending to the story of Ora Mae Magouirk, the 81-year-old Georgia widow whose family has been at loggerheads over her medical care, visitation privileges and whether she should be "allowed to die" but now is reaching agreements on key issues.
Today, attorneys on both sides agreed Magouirk's brother and sister, A.B. McLeod, 64, of Anniston, Ala., and Lonnie Ruth Mullinax, 74, of Birmingham, will be allowed to visit their sister during regular visiting hours at the University of Alabama-Birmingham Medical Center in Birmingham, where she is receiving treatment for an aortic dissection.
Moreover, Jack Kirby, attorney for McLeod and Mullinax, told WorldNetDaily that under terms of the agreement, his clients will be allowed to talk directly to Magouirk's doctors about her condition, as opposed to having such information "filtered through third parties."
As reported by WND, when Magouirk was airlifted and admitted to UAB Medical Center on Saturday, her granddaughter and legal guardian, Beth Gaddy, 36, of LaGrange, Ga., left an oral order barring Magouirk's siblings and her nephew, Ken Mullinax, 45, of Birmingham, from visiting the patient in the critical care unit.
Ruth Mullinax has been a patient at UAB for the same condition, brought on, says her son, by the stress she's suffered worrying about her sister.
Kirby said he talked to Ruth Mullinax yesterday, and "she's doing very well." He did not comment on her sister's condition.
However, relatives say it appears Magouirk is pulling through, despite her aortic dissection and the starvation and dehydration she endured from March 28 to April 6 at Hospice La-Grange, where she was placed by her granddaughter.
McLeod told WND the two women visited yesterday in Magouirk's room, and "Ora Mae recognized [Ruth Mullinax} and they laughed and chatted briefly together. etc..."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Greer.
Couldn't someone in the family, maybe grandma, sue Gaddy for atttempted murder?
Moral Absolutes Ping.
This poor old lady had to starve and thirst for 7 or 8 days before they "allowed" her nutrition. I can't imagine the suffering she (as well as Terri) underwent.
I hope the publicity this case seems to be getting will help other helpless people who may be in danger of being killed mercilessly.
Let me know if you want on/off this pinglist.
He was very wise to continue speaking out. Secrecy is what allows ghouls to keep killing vulnerable people. Secrecy, and lies.
You know, I was wondering about that too, and am surprised no one has thought of it
I'm not certain exactly how it works, but have speculated that the scenario, or justification, is based on the doctor or family making a "quality of life" judgement. Gaddy was reported to have said that what with glacoma, and now this heart problem, it's time for Mae to go to Jesus. Gaddy concluded that dying was in Mae's best interests. That decision is used to bootstrap a death by dehydration. That is, decision is to stop feeding and watering, therefore the patient will die in 6 months. SInce the patient will die within 6 months, the patient is eligible for hospice.
Counsel for hospice will not be making any public statements. Count on it. And while I'd love to see a VERY public civil trial or criminal prosecution, I doubt either is in the cards.
Glad that Mae was reunited with her brother and sister!
Here's the original thread. It's a humdinger. Schmelvin, eeevil conservative, bik'r bayb and expatinfrance were key players in an organized effort to get the word out.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1379016/posts
Murder, attempted nurder, etc. are criminal. Criminal charges may be brought ONLY by an authorized official, e.g. District Attorney.
Mae, or members of her family, may have civil (money damages) causes of action against any number of players. Hospital, doctor, hospice, Gaddy all contributed. Damages might be tough to calculate. And Gaddy (and all the rest) may be found not liable, on the rationale that they acted in good faith and on belief.
First things first. Get Mae better, correct the Living Will and adjust the Last Will, terminate Gaddy's financial Power of Attorney.
Then, look into charges of "wasting" (Gaddy has a fiduciary obligation to Mae on the POA); and any other available cause.
Thank God someone seems to have come to there senses.
That neice really sounds deranged to me.
It wasn't a judge that ruled in her favor. It was an attorney subbing in for the judge.
That made the whole thing seem so curious.
Mrs. Ladybug
Given the propensity for the court system to override a living will, I'd recommend adding a clause to your regular will stating that "if the terms of my living will are not followed to the letter, regardless of reason, then every damn penny of my estate goes to the moonies" or something to that effect. With fond memories of WKRP.
Thanks. I'll ping them.
Ping
"Here's the original thread. It's a humdinger. Schmelvin, eeevil conservative, bik'r bayb and expatinfrance were key players in an organized effort to get the word out.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1379016/posts "
You're absolutely right about some important key freepers and bloggers who can pat themselves on the back on helping with this case. There were a few more threads on Mae at FreeRepublic, so I pinged them too.
Also Sarah Foster at WorldNetDaily deserves our thanks for her great coverage on this story.
I am so happy to hear this news! Saw Kenneth on Hannity etc. last night, glad he did not chose to keep silent.
It is great that the sisters and brother can now see each other and talk.
The case is now going to the state level...
I hope it gets done in Atlanta!!!
My impression is that Gaddy is losing her will about keeping family, or even Ken, away from Mae and her doctors. A recent WND article notes counsel "for Mae" is willing to hold the filing of certain motions, provided there is a court order that memorializes a family agreement giving full access to Mae and her doctors.
Of course, that order will come from a court, but the order may be uncontested.
However, it doesn't seem as if the "ruling" has been changed. And how in heck can an attorney "sub" for a judge? It should go to another judge... (Not that that would necessarily help) This is truly despicable.
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.