If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Three months, multiple court dates, and nationwide outrage later, TX judge orders hospital to remove brain-dead woman from life support   (usnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 147
    More: Obvious, Texas, pregnancy, court date  
•       •       •

5419 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jan 2014 at 6:28 PM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



147 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-24 05:38:58 PM
Sad for the family at this time of loss.  :(

Also sad that it took this much effort and expense to simply follow the instructions of the patient and her spouse.
 
2014-01-24 05:43:52 PM
Michelle Bachman is on life support in Texas?
 
2014-01-24 05:51:27 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: Michelle Bachman is on life support in Texas?


Good news - an aisle seat in first class opened up just now!  XD

/lol
 
2014-01-24 05:51:49 PM
Extremely sad for her husband, other child and family.  But at least now they can move on with the grieving process and continue their lives.

The hospital had argued as recently as Thursday that even though Munoz has been brain dead since Nov. 28, withdrawing her from life support "would cause the death of the unborn child."
But in a joint affidavit stipulating the facts of the case filed shortly before Friday's hearing, it said that "at the time of this hearing, the fetus gestating inside Mrs. Munoz is not viable."


Impressive, the hospital admitted that the child, was not viable.  Of course if it's not viable now, it wasn't viable when she died.  Yet they kept her body around for eight weeks.

I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died.  We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case?  They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.
 
2014-01-24 06:05:36 PM

BizarreMan: I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died. We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case? They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.


AAHHH HA HA HA HA HA!!! Good one, man....

Oh! Oh. You're serious.

Let's just say I hope they have excellent insurance, otherwise he has a bankruptcy in his near future.
 
2014-01-24 06:07:36 PM

BizarreMan: Impressive, the hospital admitted that the child, was not viable. Of course if it's not viable now, it wasn't viable when she died. Yet they kept her body around for eight weeks.


There "point," such as it was, was that it was necessary to keep the woman on "life support" so that it could be brought to term, that is, until it was viable. Only problem is, the unborn don't tend to do particularly well inside of brain-dead mothers.

If these assholes file for an injunction or try to appeal this ruling, it's going to be torches-and-pitchforks time.
 
2014-01-24 06:09:26 PM

BizarreMan: I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died.  We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case?  They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.


After this fark up?  The hospital will have their checkbook open before the trial lawyers even get through the front lobby.  They'll all but guaranteed to buy their way out of this.
 
2014-01-24 06:26:02 PM
Can he sue the State for..I don't know? Pain and suffering? Cruel and unusual punishment? Something like that?
 
2014-01-24 06:30:08 PM
I'm super enthusiastic about the future of this country.
 
2014-01-24 06:30:54 PM

JohnBigBootay: I'm super enthusiastic about the future of this country.


Considering that a judge in Texas has shown some common sense? Me too.
 
2014-01-24 06:32:14 PM
This is why we need the death panels.
 
2014-01-24 06:33:55 PM

BizarreMan: Impressive, the hospital admitted that the child, was not viable.  Of course if it's not viable now, it wasn't viable when she died.  Yet they kept her body around for eight weeks.


Giving some benefit of the doubt, it may not have been able to be verified as being unviable at the time.  Whether or not it took all eight of those weeks for the fetus to show signs of not being viable is certainly a question, but it is at least somewhat conceivable that they wouldn't have been able to know at that time.
 
2014-01-24 06:33:58 PM

Earpj: Can he sue the State for..I don't know? Pain and suffering? Cruel and unusual punishment? Something like that?


Unlawful interference with a corpse?
 
2014-01-24 06:34:40 PM
Activist judge!! Death panel advocate!!
 
2014-01-24 06:35:44 PM
I'm 51 and just old enough to remember Roe v Wade and I honestly never thought it would come to this. These people ought to be ashamed if themselves, but they appear to lack any capability for even that level of self awareness.
 
2014-01-24 06:36:21 PM

Earpj: Can he sue the State for..I don't know? Pain and suffering? Cruel and unusual punishment? Something like that?


The state, I'd say unlikely. As I understood it, this whole situation was caused by the hospital's rabidly pro-life legal counsel.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-24 06:38:05 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Sin_City_Superhero: Michelle Bachman is on life support in Texas?

Good news - an aisle seat in first class opened up just now!  XD

/lol


Don't be stupid, she has no brain.
 
2014-01-24 06:39:32 PM
Do brain dead people come back as zombies?
 
2014-01-24 06:40:37 PM
Thank goodness.

As with the last thread about this, I'll point out this one in bold.

This was not following the law of the state of Texas.  In Texas, a brain dead person is legally dead and the rules regarding preserving the life of a comatose mother so her fetus can come to term does not apply.  Indeed, her body was a decaying corpse.  The hospital chose this ghoulish course of action as a crusade by a zealous anti-abortion man who is the General Counsel of the hospital.

Last week the judge drawing the case out recused herself when it became known that her campaign treasurer was the same man.
 
2014-01-24 06:40:56 PM
www.webinapage.com
 
2014-01-24 06:41:17 PM
So I guess the husband will get a bill from the hospital in a week or two.
 
2014-01-24 06:42:49 PM
This sets a rather scary precedent, seeing there are so many other brain-dead people in Texas.
 
2014-01-24 06:42:57 PM
At least we now know that a human corpse can not be used as an incubator.

/hooray for science, i guess...
 
2014-01-24 06:43:20 PM

Earpj: Can he sue the State for..I don't know? Pain and suffering? Cruel and unusual punishment? Something like that?


Arachnophobe: Earpj: Can he sue the State for..I don't know? Pain and suffering? Cruel and unusual punishment? Something like that?

The state, I'd say unlikely. As I understood it, this whole situation was caused by the hospital's rabidly pro-life legal counsel.



In Texas?  Yea good luck with that.  Texas is a very very bad place to try to sue anybody especially a corp or the government.

Plugs not pulled yet, be amazed if this goes through.  The political football to be played with this whole circus is just too big for the state officials to let it go.  Then again with the technically dead fetus in a technically dead woman the future PR ramifications may be bad enough for the handlers to know that backing off is the best option.  Still amazing they got a judge to go this far though and let the plug get pulled

But its not pulled yet is it?
 
2014-01-24 06:43:44 PM
If the whole world hadn't been watching, the corpse would still be on life support. It wasn't wrong to do what the state did; it was inconvenient for the state to be seen doing it. Next time, who knows.
 
2014-01-24 06:44:10 PM

gilgigamesh: BizarreMan: I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died. We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case? They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.

AAHHH HA HA HA HA HA!!! Good one, man....

Oh! Oh. You're serious.

Let's just say I hope they have excellent insurance, otherwise he has a bankruptcy in his near future.


The insurance company will say her insurance coverage ended when she died in November, therefor he's liable for all the costs.
 
2014-01-24 06:44:52 PM
this is Texas,  suing a hospital is limited to $250.000  'tort refom'
this is Amurika,  since he is not a corporation he cannot declare bankrupsy.

he needs to wait until after dark, claim the hospital robbed him, pursue it and shoot it.

'cause that IS legal in Texas.
 
2014-01-24 06:45:32 PM

BizarreMan: Extremely sad for her husband, other child and family.  But at least now they can move on with the grieving process and continue their lives.

The hospital had argued as recently as Thursday that even though Munoz has been brain dead since Nov. 28, withdrawing her from life support "would cause the death of the unborn child."
But in a joint affidavit stipulating the facts of the case filed shortly before Friday's hearing, it said that "at the time of this hearing, the fetus gestating inside Mrs. Munoz is not viable."

Impressive, the hospital admitted that the child, was not viable.  Of course if it's not viable now, it wasn't viable when she died.  Yet they kept her body around for eight weeks.

I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died.  We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case?  They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.


As someone who works for a large hospital, that husband better have good insurance. The hospital will pad this bill without giving it a second thought. The husband will be selling sperm, blood and his dead wife's eggs to pay off this bill. Hospital administrators are generally scumbags. The Mafia is a much more reasonable organization.
/we need a single-payer system
//with a national fee schedule
///sorry to switch subjects
 
2014-01-24 06:46:09 PM
orclover:
But its not pulled yet is it?

The fetus isn't viable. If it were, I'd bet this would have a different outcome. 
Of course, gestating inside a corpse isn't the ideal for a good development.
 
2014-01-24 06:47:34 PM
They went about this whole thing the wrong way. If they'd simply stated that the person being kept alive was guilty of a crime the enthusiasm for the death penalty would have kicked in and people would have been clamoring to pull the plug and connect her to an electric chair.
 
2014-01-24 06:47:34 PM

gja: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Sin_City_Superhero: Michelle Bachman is on life support in Texas?

Good news - an aisle seat in first class opened up just now!  XD

/lol

Don't be stupid, she has no brain.


Nor is Marcus capable of getting her pregnant.
 
2014-01-24 06:47:44 PM

JuggleGeek: So I guess the husband will get a bill from the hospital in a week or two.


Nah. 
Takes about a month.
 
2014-01-24 06:48:18 PM
Next question. Is the deformed  fetus viable? If, so the court should order a C-section stat!

basementrejects.com
Not a candidate or breastfeeding.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-24 06:49:28 PM

Earpj: JuggleGeek: So I guess the husband will get a bill from the hospital in a week or two.

Nah. 
Takes about a month.


Yeah, it can be really tiring keying in all the zeros.
/muthafarkers
 
2014-01-24 06:49:37 PM
I think there's a basic misunderstanding here. The hospital didn't seem to necessarily disagree with the husband according to the articles I've read. Instead, they were concerned that taking the mother off life support would place them in severe jeopardy of getting fined into the dirt by state regulators.

Hopefully they will now do the right thing and comply with the judge's order.
 
2014-01-24 06:51:40 PM

thecactusman17: I think there's a basic misunderstanding here. The hospital didn't seem to necessarily disagree with the husband according to the articles I've read. Instead, they were concerned that taking the mother off life support would place them in severe jeopardy of getting fined into the dirt by state regulators.

Hopefully they will now do the right thing and comply with the judge's order.


God help the hospital if it performs abortions. I wouldn't put it past someone who wants to shut a hospital down for doing one thing to sue the hospital out of business for doing another thing.
 
2014-01-24 06:52:13 PM

KierzanDax: gilgigamesh: BizarreMan: I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died. We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case? They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.

AAHHH HA HA HA HA HA!!! Good one, man....

Oh! Oh. You're serious.

Let's just say I hope they have excellent insurance, otherwise he has a bankruptcy in his near future.

The insurance company will say her insurance coverage ended when she died in November, therefor he's liable for all the costs.


at first, absolutely...because the paper monkey won't know the details and will go by documents and dates affixed to such documents.     Once his attorney gets involved, he shouldn't have to eat the bills.
 
2014-01-24 06:52:22 PM

NkThrasher: BizarreMan: Impressive, the hospital admitted that the child, was not viable.  Of course if it's not viable now, it wasn't viable when she died.  Yet they kept her body around for eight weeks.

Giving some benefit of the doubt, it may not have been able to be verified as being unviable at the time.  Whether or not it took all eight of those weeks for the fetus to show signs of not being viable is certainly a question, but it is at least somewhat conceivable that they wouldn't have been able to know at that time.


14 weeks at the time, about 21? weeks now. There's a huge amount of growth and development during that time -- there's a reason the usual pregnancy ultrasound to check for problems is at 20 weeks and not that much earlier. If the fetus had been perfectly healthy, the question would be a lot thornier -- there have been cases of normal babies being delivered from brain-dead women who were kept on ventilators, but AFAIK none of them had been deprived of oxygen for so long after their mothers collapsed.

From (my particular) pro-life perspective, what they're asking to do in this case is not to kill or abort the baby directly, they're asking for the mother's dead body to be taken off a ventilator. The baby, not being viable, will die when it's taken off life support -- that is, either when it's delivered and can't depend on its mother's system anymore, or when its mother's body stops functioning and can't support it anymore. All things being equal, there's no reason here not to let the baby go with the mother.

I will say that I can understand the hospital being cautious at first -- it sounds like there's a lot of confusion about the law (the husband's argument was not that the law was wrong but that it didn't apply to her, since she was not in a coma or vegetative state but actually dead) and they were probably worried about possible legal fallout if they decided "Nope, law doesn't apply here," and then later on someone disagreed.
 
2014-01-24 06:52:26 PM
Good, those Bible thumpers should be burn in hell for going against God's will by keeping this women past the time He tried to call her and her unborn child home.
 
2014-01-24 06:52:59 PM
How could they tell when the Texan stopped and the brain dead started?

/Ducks
 
2014-01-24 06:53:01 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Sin_City_Superhero: Michelle Bachman is on life support in Texas?

Good news - an aisle seat in first class opened up just now!  XD

/lol


Is the window seat still available? My first guess was Nancy Grace getting cancelled.
 
2014-01-24 06:55:26 PM

TheDirtyNacho: Thank goodness.

As with the last thread about this, I'll point out this one in bold.

This was not following the law of the state of Texas.  In Texas, a brain dead person is legally dead and the rules regarding preserving the life of a comatose mother so her fetus can come to term does not apply.  Indeed, her body was a decaying corpse.  The hospital chose this ghoulish course of action as a crusade by a zealous anti-abortion man who is the General Counsel of the hospital.

Last week the judge drawing the case out recused herself when it became known that her campaign treasurer was the same man.


I agree that the course the hospital chose was pretty ghoulish, but I was under the impression that as long as someone was kept on life support, with machines doing the breathing, circulating the blood, and administering fluids and nutrients and fluids via IV that the body was technically 'alive'.

Apparently brain activity makes a difference in both how someone's body holds up and on the development of a fetus inside of it. That's sort of interesting in a macabre way.
 
2014-01-24 06:55:49 PM
everything about this story is sad
 
2014-01-24 06:59:21 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Apparently brain activity makes a difference in both how someone's body holds up and on the development of a fetus inside of it.


But enough about the Palins.
 
2014-01-24 07:00:03 PM

TheDirtyNacho: Thank goodness.

As with the last thread about this, I'll point out this one in bold.

This was not following the law of the state of Texas.  In Texas, a brain dead person is legally dead and the rules regarding preserving the life of a comatose mother so her fetus can come to term does not apply.  Indeed, her body was a decaying corpse.  The hospital chose this ghoulish course of action as a crusade by a zealous anti-abortion man who is the General Counsel of the hospital.

Last week the judge drawing the case out recused herself when it became known that her campaign treasurer was the same man.


This is the first time I've seen this claimed, and several sources claimed it was a Texas state law that caused this. Do you have any citations to support your claims?

Now, there is a difference between 'it's not Texas law' and 'Texas law was interpreted one way and this judge interpreted it another.' One way there is no law involved, the other there is. This article points things towards the latter.
 
2014-01-24 07:01:41 PM

TheDirtyNacho: Thank goodness.

As with the last thread about this, I'll point out this one in bold.

This was not following the law of the state of Texas.  In Texas, a brain dead person is legally dead and the rules regarding preserving the life of a comatose mother so her fetus can come to term does not apply.  Indeed, her body was a decaying corpse.  The hospital chose this ghoulish course of action as a crusade by a zealous anti-abortion man who is the General Counsel of the hospital.

Last week the judge drawing the case out recused herself when it became known that her campaign treasurer was the same man.


So political posturing by the usual suspects?

I'm Jack's complete lack of surprise.
 
2014-01-24 07:05:08 PM
NkThrasher: Giving some benefit of the doubt, it may not have been able to be verified as being unviable at the time.

'Unviable' does not = degree of birth defects.

'Unviable' in medicine = fetal gestational age.

'Unviable' in medicine = chance of fetus surviving preterm delivery.

Mother died at 14 weeks' gestation.  Fetus was unviable at that time because even the most aggressive intensive medical intervention we have today cannot save a fetus born at 14 weeks, even if no neurologic, developmental or genetic birth defects exist.

Fifty-percent odds of survival in chart below occur only with massive NICU intervention to perform bodily functions on behalf of undeveloped organs.  Notice use of word 'viability' underneath 7-month box.


img.fark.net
 
2014-01-24 07:05:27 PM

gilgigamesh: BizarreMan: I'm now curious what's going to happen to the medical bills that have been run up since she died. We talk about healthcare costs in this country and how hospitals have to raise prices to cover un-insured patients. What about this case? They need to eat the costs, and they need to pay pain and suffering damages to the father.

AAHHH HA HA HA HA HA!!! Good one, man....

Oh! Oh. You're serious.

Let's just say I hope they have excellent insurance, otherwise he has a bankruptcy in his near future.


Yes, I'm sure the ensuing malpractice suit against the hospital will be thrown out as frivolous...
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-24 07:06:15 PM

EdgeRunner: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Sin_City_Superhero: Michelle Bachman is on life support in Texas?

Good news - an aisle seat in first class opened up just now!  XD

/lol

Is the window seat still available? My first guess was Nancy Grace getting cancelled.


Why would that beast be in  hospital? She's just a snake with a good hairdo.
 
2014-01-24 07:09:18 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: If the whole world hadn't been watching, the corpse would still be on life support. It wasn't wrong to do what the state did; it was inconvenient for the state to be seen doing it. Next time, who knows.


...and again, the state didn't do shiat. Even Texas was saying "you're doing it wrong" at the end.
 
Displayed 50 of 147 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report