Thread by markomalley.
On this, the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we stand at an extraordinary moment for our nation: For the first time, we have elected an African-American president in an election that inspired young and old, people of all races and faiths, men and women, rich and poor.
Many were moved by Barack Obama's call for a new conversation about race, a renewed commitment to our democracy and an agenda that aspires to reach a greater good for all. Today, we focus on the piece of that agenda that holds great promise for reproductive rights.
It is tempting to use this anniversary to recite a litany of policies we want our new administration to enact: from rescinding the global gag rule to restoring affordable birth control at college health centers to reversing the Bush administration's midnight rule allowing a broad range of health care providers to refuse basic reproductive health services...
Thread by me.
SHS's good friend, attorney Jerri Ward, is gearing up to fight a case in Texas that is eerily reminiscent of the Haleigh Poutre case. An attorney ad litem for a terribly abused baby named David Coronado Jr., wanted to stop all treatment because the baby is expected to remain profoundly cognitively disabled. From the story:
The fate of a brain-damaged 6-month-old Dallas boy is uncertain after his court-appointed attorney on Tuesday withdrew a motion to let doctors take the baby off life support...The baby's attorney ad litem, Holly Schreier, told a juvenile district court judge that doctors at Children's Medical Center Dallas had assessed a change in the baby's condition. She did not say what the change was, and she did not return a call for comment.A few points: First, the child was only injured last month. What's the rush? Second: It is wrong for a guardian to want her ward dead "in his best interests" because he is expected to be seriously disabled if he survives. The message of that decision is stark: his death is better than living with serious disabilities--which I don't think a guardian should be allowed by law to assume.
A doctor reported in December that he expected David to suffer severe disabilities if he survived. It is unclear if doctors now expect the baby to remain in a vegetative or minimally conscious state. Meanwhile, word of the possible hearing on withdrawing the child's life support had spread over the weekend among right-to-life and disabilities-rights groups, at least one of which readied attorneys to intervene Tuesday morning. "Brains are very resilient, and in a 6-month-old baby, to conclude that he's neurologically devastated and is going to stay permanently that way I think is irresponsible," said Jerri Lynn Ward, an attorney representing Not Dead Yet, a disabilities-rights group.