Do you have adblock enabled?
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  
•       •       •

5432 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jan 2014 at 6:28 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



147 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
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
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
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
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.
 
2014-01-24 07:12:33 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: 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.



There is a checklist (appendix 3) that determines brain death.  Machinery can circulate fluids for a long time, but the body still decays as the lower order brain ceases to regulate its cellular function.  Sometimes the heart continues to beat after brain death because the heart beating mechanism is highly autonomous - this is why some people have difficulty accepting brain death as death.

But, pretty much every rational legal and ethical guideline considers brain death to be death.
 
2014-01-24 07:13:10 PM  

OooShiny: 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 image 799x123]


Saying that a fetus is not viable can mean a couple of different things. If it's before 24 weeks or so it means that it can't survive outside the womb because it's too immature -- this has no implications for how the baby will do after 24 weeks. However, if the baby has defects which mean it cannot survive once it's detached from its mother, or not for very long (anencephaly for example), I've seen that described as non-viable also. I don't know if that's the technical term for it (I've also seen "incompatible with life") but it does get used that way a lot. So while it wasn't viable at 14 weeks in the "too immature" sense, it now appears that it's not viable in the second sense.
 
2014-01-24 07:13:33 PM  

DrBenway: 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.


Guillotines.  There are no words for how sick this is.
 
2014-01-24 07:13:41 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. That's sort of interesting in a macabre way.


Not terribly surprising, though.  Given that we can clone most of the tissues and organs involved, if it was even remotely workable to run the process to term off of machines we'd have given up on natural child-birth and gone full Cyteen half a decade ago.

// The brain regulates a hell of a lot more than breathing and heartbeat, I would imagine the most relevant things it does in this case is manage metabolic chemistry.
 
2014-01-24 07:14:05 PM  
Hopefully they'll remove that brain-dead judge from the bench.
 
2014-01-24 07:14:46 PM  

SMB2811: 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.


From yesterday:

 http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/09/5473242/family-of-pregnant-b r a in-dead.html

The hospital's outside counsel is Neal Adams, who led the drive to end abortions at JPS in 1988 and is on the advisory board of the Northeast Tarrant Right-to-Life Educational Association, based in Euless.

Dr. Robert Fine, clinical director of the office of clinical ethics and palliative care for Baylor Health Care System, told the AP that if a patient is brain-dead, the patient is legally dead. "This patient is neither terminally nor irreversibly ill," he said.



http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg na nt-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-mun oz/

Quoting a separate section of the Texas Health and Safety Code, the filing argues that because Marlise has no brain function, she is legally dead under Texas law and not subject to the subchapter about pregnancy.
 
2014-01-24 07:18:29 PM  
Seems the copy/paste put some spaces in the URL's, sorry.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/09/5473242/family-of-pregnant-b rain-dead.html

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg nant-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-m unoz/

There was another article (you can google it) that notes that the General Counsel is Neal Adams, who was the treasurer for the original case judge that recused herself in a 1 paragraph statement.
 
2014-01-24 07:18:37 PM  

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


You can't sue states. You can only sue individual people. And trying to get money damages from an officer of the state acting in their official capacity in extraordinarily hard - you basically need to prove bad faith/malice. It's really hard.
 
2014-01-24 07:19:12 PM  
Weird, the comment box here keeps messing with the formatting.  You can figure it out :)
 
2014-01-24 07:21:36 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.


Holy shiat, you're right. How was this not published from the rooftops?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22330010-texas-judge-recu se s-herself-from-lawsuit-over-brain-dead-pregnant-woman?lite
 
2014-01-24 07:24:15 PM  

TheDirtyNacho: Seems the copy/paste put some spaces in the URL's, sorry.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/09/5473242/family-of-pregnant-b rain-dead.html

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg nant-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-m unoz/

There was another article (you can google it) that notes that the General Counsel is Neal Adams, who was the treasurer for the original case judge that recused herself in a 1 paragraph statement.


http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/09/5473242/family-of-pregnant-b ra in-dead.html

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg na nt-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-mun oz/

It's because the programmers at Fark don't know how to handle link spam or long lines of text.
 
2014-01-24 07:25:51 PM  
TheDirtyNacho:

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg na nt-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-mun oz/

Quoting a separate section of the Texas Health and Safety Code, the filing argues that because Marlise has no brain function, she is legally dead under Texas law and not subject to the subchapter about pregnancy.


Can we bring back tar and feathering for the the idiot general counsel? And possibly the stocks? You're job is to not implement law as you see fit, dumba$$!
 
2014-01-24 07:28:04 PM  

dennysgod: 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.


This woman's been in purgatory the whole time she's been dead, if you believed in such things. How do they justify that?
 
2014-01-24 07:31:02 PM  

Heamer: Hopefully they'll remove that brain-dead judge from the bench.


You think this was the wrong decision, to allow her to be disconnected from life support? From a legal perspective or from a moral perspective?
 
2014-01-24 07:32:10 PM  

cold_weather_tex: TheDirtyNacho:

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg na nt-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-mun oz/

Quoting a separate section of the Texas Health and Safety Code, the filing argues that because Marlise has no brain function, she is legally dead under Texas law and not subject to the subchapter about pregnancy.

Can we bring back tar and feathering for the the idiot general counsel? And possibly the stocks? You're job is to not implement law as you see fit, dumba$$!



Personally I think they were hoping to draw this out so as to get to 24 weeks, if I've been reading things correctly, is the minimum 'viable' stage that a fetus can possibly survive outside the womb.

I don't know that's ever been attempted when the previous 8 weeks were spent gestating in a corpse. A ghoulish experiment.
 
2014-01-24 07:37:47 PM  

FarkingHateFark: 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.

Holy shiat, you're right. How was this not published from the rooftops?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22330010-texas-judge-recu se s-herself-from-lawsuit-over-brain-dead-pregnant-woman?lite


This is one of the most horrific stories I've read in a long time and finding out about the Judge's financial ties was the icing on this stinking, goddamn festering urinal cake of a situation.
That man has been tortured and those heartless cocksuckers will most likely try to bankrupt him to pay for this.
The entire situation is barbaric.
 
2014-01-24 07:40:18 PM  

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

You can't sue states. You can only sue individual people. And trying to get money damages from an officer of the state acting in their official capacity in extraordinarily hard - you basically need to prove bad faith/malice. It's really hard.


Actually, given that the hospital director very personally caused this and has a long and storied history of opposition to the spirit of this law, I don't think proving he intentionally violated the law here to at least the extent necessary for civil penalties would actually be all that difficult.

If you're actually executing your duties or trying to then the law shields you from liability.  This guy very intentionally wasn't executing his duties.
 
2014-01-24 07:40:19 PM  
I wonder if at any point any of these idjits thought about what would happen if their fondest dream came true, and the fetus developed into a normal child. If he grew up and wanted to learn about the circumstances of his birth, would they be the ones to sit down and explain that he spent the first nine months of existence inside a corpse, and the corpse was his mom?
I don't understand how these people get their righteous fervor to such fever pitch that no one gives any thought to all the consequences. There's no god that would want this.
Hope the family is able to find closure, and peace, and to make a good life for the little one who lost his mom.
 
2014-01-24 07:41:22 PM  
$387,147.00
please make check payable...
and that would be as far i might get until i was in the hospital.


/not getting anything funny with this one
//and i am a big fan of dark humor
 
2014-01-24 07:42:46 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.


What are the odds that a fetus would come out fine when the mother was braindead from being starved of oxygen? I'm tossing my hat in with greedy hospital citing dynastic murder law.
 
2014-01-24 07:43:42 PM  

IlGreven: 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.


It was a state thing or even a fundie hospital thing. This was a case of a hospital not knowing how to interpret a law so they waited for a judge to interpret the law. It's just sad it took so long.

Typical bureaucratic nonsense and no one willing to take responsibility.
 
2014-01-24 07:45:26 PM  

Jim_Callahan: 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. That's sort of interesting in a macabre way.

Not terribly surprising, though.  Given that we can clone most of the tissues and organs involved, if it was even remotely workable to run the process to term off of machines we'd have given up on natural child-birth and gone full Cyteen half a decade ago.

// The brain regulates a hell of a lot more than breathing and heartbeat, I would imagine the most relevant things it does in this case is manage metabolic chemistry.


Interesting, that makes sense, I'd just never realized that.  I knew the brain was in charge of involuntary muscle movement, but I didn't realize it had a role in actual body chemistry.  I figured that was all organs and tissues that would function normally as long as they were getting oxygenated blood and nutrients.
 
2014-01-24 07:45:30 PM  
I posted this in the other thread about the topic, but since the discussion has moved here, I think it bears repeating:

Something just occurred to me.

What do we call someone who does something to your body against your will, that takes away from your dignity, that violates your personal wishes regarding your sex organs?

We call that person a rapist. And I honestly don't think that's too strong of a word.

If being turned into cadaver-incubator against your will isn't a hideous violation of your most intimate parts, then what is it?

Sure, she isn't alive to feel the emotional pain of it all, but that doesn't make it any less of a violation. Its as if they raped her corpse.

/fark that judge and all the Bible-thumpers who did that to her.
 
2014-01-24 07:46:48 PM  

JoieD'Zen: FarkingHateFark: 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.

Holy shiat, you're right. How was this not published from the rooftops?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22330010-texas-judge-recu se s-herself-from-lawsuit-over-brain-dead-pregnant-woman?lite

This is one of the most horrific stories I've read in a long time and finding out about the Judge's financial ties was the icing on this stinking, goddamn festering urinal cake of a situation.
That man has been tortured and those heartless cocksuckers will most likely try to bankrupt him to pay for this.
The entire situation is barbaric.


Because when you think about bankruptcy, judicial corruption, and conniving hospital administrators, the first image that comes to mind is of an illiterate, filth-caked savage bludgeoning a nun to death with the leg of the horse he just raped.
 
2014-01-24 07:48:01 PM  

big pig peaches: IlGreven: 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.

It was a state thing or even a fundie hospital thing. This was a case of a hospital not knowing how to interpret a law so they waited for a judge to interpret the law. It's just sad it took so long.

Typical bureaucratic nonsense and no one willing to take responsibility.



The original judge was connected to the hospital General Counsel who argued for this course of action.  He is her campaign treasurer.  After this became known, she resigned from the case.

A new judge was chosen and this decision made in less than a week.  The law isn't vague as some claim - brain dead is dead.
 
2014-01-24 07:49:44 PM  

MeanJean: I posted this in the other thread about the topic, but since the discussion has moved here, I think it bears repeating:

Something just occurred to me.

What do we call someone who does something to your body against your will, that takes away from your dignity, that violates your personal wishes regarding your sex organs?

We call that person a rapist. And I honestly don't think that's too strong of a word.

If being turned into cadaver-incubator against your will isn't a hideous violation of your most intimate parts, then what is it?

Sure, she isn't alive to feel the emotional pain of it all, but that doesn't make it any less of a violation. Its as if they raped her corpse.

/fark that judge and all the Bible-thumpers who did that to her.



I know its in bad form to invoke them... but Dr. Mengele would approve.
 
2014-01-24 07:51:59 PM  

big pig peaches: IlGreven: 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.

It was a state thing or even a fundie hospital thing. This was a case of a hospital not knowing how to interpret a law so they waited for a judge to interpret the law. It's just sad it took so long.

Typical bureaucratic nonsense and no one willing to take responsibility.


That isn't what happened at all.  The hospital decision makers knew exactly what they were doing.  Dude is a well-known, bible-thumping, pro-life nutjob in Texas.

There are some links in posts above that explain exactly how evil this is.  It is quite possibly one of the most effed-up things I've ever seen in my life.
 
2014-01-24 07:53:17 PM  

MeanJean: I posted this in the other thread about the topic, but since the discussion has moved here, I think it bears repeating:

Something just occurred to me.

What do we call someone who does something to your body against your will, that takes away from your dignity, that violates your personal wishes regarding your sex organs?

We call that person a rapist. And I honestly don't think that's too strong of a word.

If being turned into cadaver-incubator against your will isn't a hideous violation of your most intimate parts, then what is it?

Sure, she isn't alive to feel the emotional pain of it all, but that doesn't make it any less of a violation. Its as if they raped her corpse.

/fark that judge and all the Bible-thumpers who did that to her.


They're raping her husband and other family members as well.

F*CK THOSE RESPONSIBLE!
 
2014-01-24 07:53:32 PM  
*Ctrl+F "Axlotl Tank"*

*0 Results*

Fark, I am dissapoint.
 
2014-01-24 07:53:41 PM  

TheDirtyNacho: big pig peaches: IlGreven: 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.

It was a state thing or even a fundie hospital thing. This was a case of a hospital not knowing how to interpret a law so they waited for a judge to interpret the law. It's just sad it took so long.

Typical bureaucratic nonsense and no one willing to take responsibility.


The original judge was connected to the hospital General Counsel who argued for this course of action.  He is her campaign treasurer.  After this became known, she resigned from the case.

A new judge was chosen and this decision made in less than a week.  The law isn't vague as some claim - brain dead is dead.


Guess I missed that part.

I try to tune out the depressing stuff. Probably because this is pretty much a nightmare scenario.


fark those farkers.
 
2014-01-24 07:54:42 PM  

another cultural observer: JoieD'Zen: FarkingHateFark: 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.

Holy shiat, you're right. How was this not published from the rooftops?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22330010-texas-judge-recu se s-herself-from-lawsuit-over-brain-dead-pregnant-woman?lite

This is one of the most horrific stories I've read in a long time and finding out about the Judge's financial ties was the icing on this stinking, goddamn festering urinal cake of a situation.
That man has been tortured and those heartless cocksuckers will most likely try to bankrupt him to pay for this.
The entire situation is barbaric.

Because when you think about bankruptcy, judicial corruption, and conniving hospital administrators, the first image that comes to mind is of an illiterate, filth-caked savage bludgeoning a nun to death with the leg of the horse he just raped.


precisely
 
2014-01-24 08:00:14 PM  

FarkingHateFark: TheDirtyNacho:

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

Holy shiat, you're right. How was this not published from the rooftops?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22330010-texas-judge-recu se s-herself-from-lawsuit-over-brain-dead-pregnant-woman?lite


So much THIS.  Just to reiterate:

The lawyer for the hospital, Neal Adams, was also the campaign treasurer for the original judge, Melody Wilkinson.

Holy fark
 
2014-01-24 08:00:36 PM  
wait until the baby slithers out
 
2014-01-24 08:02:03 PM  

TheDirtyNacho: At least we now know that a human corpse can not be used as an incubator.

/hooray for science, i guess...


There was a failure with the axlotl tank that made the decanting impossible.

(Shutting up now)
 
2014-01-24 08:05:39 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.


it's TX, there was a state law.

vague, ambiguous, overly broad but hey a law someone in authority at the hospital could point at for this fark up.
 
2014-01-24 08:08:07 PM  

DrBenway: Heamer: Hopefully they'll remove that brain-dead judge from the bench.

You think this was the wrong decision, to allow her to be disconnected from life support? From a legal perspective or from a moral perspective?


Or are you referring to the original judge, the one with the financial/political connection to the hospital administrator and who was obliged to recuse herself when that came to light? I hadn't considered that possibility.
 
2014-01-24 08:12:07 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: Interesting, that makes sense, I'd just never realized that.  I knew the brain was in charge of involuntary muscle movement, but I didn't realize it had a role in actual body chemistry.  I figured that was all organs and tissues that would function normally as long as they were getting oxygenated blood and nutrients.


The baby also needs, like, input from the mother. Physical sensations. Sounds and breathing and movement. If it doesn't have any of that while it's developing, it's like it developed in a sensory deprivation chamber. I don't know what that would do to a fetus, since obviously it's never been done, but even if the physical body came out fine, the baby would be messed up. It might never be able to bond with people or something.

That's how babies who are raised in bad orphanages get all screwed up. They're taken care of, physically, but they never get any affection or touching or anything. Even if they get adopted, they usually never have normal relationships with others.

Anyway, I'm just as glad we can't find this out.
 
2014-01-24 08:13:08 PM  

cryinoutloud: dennysgod: 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.

This woman's been in purgatory the whole time she's been dead, if you believed in such things. How do they justify that?


Texas Bible thumpers believe in Purgatory? You learn something new every day.
 
2014-01-24 08:14:32 PM  

cryinoutloud: TuteTibiImperes: Interesting, that makes sense, I'd just never realized that.  I knew the brain was in charge of involuntary muscle movement, but I didn't realize it had a role in actual body chemistry.  I figured that was all organs and tissues that would function normally as long as they were getting oxygenated blood and nutrients.

The baby also needs, like, input from the mother. Physical sensations. Sounds and breathing and movement. If it doesn't have any of that while it's developing, it's like it developed in a sensory deprivation chamber. I don't know what that would do to a fetus, since obviously it's never been done, but even if the physical body came out fine, the baby would be messed up. It might never be able to bond with people or something.

That's how babies who are raised in bad orphanages get all screwed up. They're taken care of, physically, but they never get any affection or touching or anything. Even if they get adopted, they usually never have normal relationships with others.

Anyway, I'm just as glad we can't find this out.


Actually, there have been a few cases of healthy babies born to braindead mothers, which I linked to in the other thread. Not much info about what point they became braindead and if the kids had any mental issues afterwards though.
 
2014-01-24 08:16:29 PM  
First, there is no difference between brain death and death. Brain dead is dead. This woman was not on any sort of life support. She was dead. Let's be absolutely clear about this.

Uniform Determination of Death Act:

"§ 1. [Determination of Death]. An individual who has sustained either (1)
irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible
cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead.
A
determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical
standards."

Second, I fear that this decision was made because this fetus was in very poor condition, and that this horrible abomination against nature will be tried again should the fetus appear in better shape.
 
2014-01-24 08:20:17 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: Jim_Callahan: 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. That's sort of interesting in a macabre way.

Not terribly surprising, though.  Given that we can clone most of the tissues and organs involved, if it was even remotely workable to run the process to term off of machines we'd have given up on natural child-birth and gone full Cyteen half a decade ago.

// The brain regulates a hell of a lot more than breathing and heartbeat, I would imagine the most relevant things it does in this case is manage metabolic chemistry.

Interesting, that makes sense, I'd just never realized that.  I knew the brain was in charge of involuntary muscle movement, but I didn't realize it had a role in actual body chemistry.  I figured that was all organs and tissues that would function normally as long as they were getting oxygenated blood and nutrients.


Not just that, but a brain dead body on machines will decompose. Not as fast as if you tossed it in the back yard, but it will not look or smell like the patient is peacefully sleeping for long.
 
2014-01-24 08:32:45 PM  
it's funny that there are a group of people in this country who only care that you are born, don't give a living sh*t about your welfare while your alive, and then won't even grant you a dignified death.
/Terri Schiavo
 
2014-01-24 08:36:13 PM  
McBeth seen celebrating outside the courthouse.
 
2014-01-24 08:37:58 PM  

Fat Man Of La Mancha: McBeth seen celebrating outside the courthouse.


Right next to Julia Caesar.  Jesus Christ.
 
2014-01-24 08:42:01 PM  

bigbobowski: it's funny that there are a group of people in this country who only care that you are born, don't give a living sh*t about your welfare while your alive, and then won't even grant you a dignified death.
/Terri Schiavo




Healthcare is SOCIALISM!
 
2014-01-24 08:45:57 PM  

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


Lets just say that I've *cough* noticed that just due to medical liability getting married is a bad bad bad idea.

Under Covered California My GF and I,

Married:  $1245
Living in Sin: $727

If you're married and have to go bankrupt both of your credit is wrecked. Living in sin, you can finagle things.
 
2014-01-24 08:58:32 PM  
Well - if he is smart - he should claim that his marriage (Tell Death Due Us Part) was null and void at the moment of her death, and that it's solely the hospital's responsibility for any costs incurred after that moment. If he and his lawyers can pull this off - and I hope that that the do, then it will curb this kind of nonsense for the future.
Best of luck - and condolences for your loses TX guy.
 
2014-01-24 09:03:17 PM  

minarke: (Tell Death Due Us Part)


www.maniacworld.com
 
2014-01-24 09:11:24 PM  
Okay, a simple "wrong" would've done just fine.
 
2014-01-24 09:13:26 PM  
ts3.mm.bing.net
Looking to the future.
 
2014-01-24 09:18:16 PM  
And on top of that - if insurance companies refuse to pay for medical expenses for corpses - that would also make a big dent in these kind of cases. I sure don't feel the need to pay the health care of the undead, no matter how good it feels to the relatives that refuse to live in the real world. Once the brain is gone - there's no coming back folks.
 
2014-01-24 09:20:37 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.com 2.bp.blogspot.comUnless you're this guy.
 
2014-01-24 09:22:46 PM  

Pointy Tail of Satan: This sets a rather scary precedent, seeing there are so many other brain-dead people in Texas.


Rick Perry seen sneaking out of state.
 
2014-01-24 09:38:57 PM  

MeanJean: I posted this in the other thread about the topic, but since the discussion has moved here, I think it bears repeating:

Something just occurred to me.

What do we call someone who does something to your body against your will, that takes away from your dignity, that violates your personal wishes regarding your sex organs?

We call that person a rapist. And I honestly don't think that's too strong of a word.

If being turned into cadaver-incubator against your will isn't a hideous violation of your most intimate parts, then what is it?

Sure, she isn't alive to feel the emotional pain of it all, but that doesn't make it any less of a violation. Its as if they raped her corpse.


First it was rape wands, now this.... I hate to imagine what they'll think of next.
 
2014-01-24 09:46:38 PM  
Apparently numerous Freepers are outraged over the decision not to force a family to continue enduring emotional torment and significant financial burden (as the hospital has already announced an intent to bill the family for the thus-far unwanted medical "treatment" of Ms. Munoz's body) in order to sustain the existence of a fetus that will not actually survive outside of the mother's corpse.
 
2014-01-24 09:56:41 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.


It can't possibly. She was 14 weeks pregnant when she died, and is at 22 weeks now. This is what the latest ultrasound showed:

"Even at this early stage, the lower extremities are deformed to the extent the gender cannot be determined," the statement says.
In addition the statement says the fetus has swelling of the brain - "hydrocephalus" - as well as a possible heart problem.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/22/22404705-fetus-of-texas-w om an-on-life-support-distinctly-abnormal-family-lawyers-say?lite

It can't have been a surprise to anyone--certainly not to a neonatal specialist, for instance--that a 14-week fetus deprived of oxygen and a healthy blood flow through the placenta would not develop normally in the first trimester. This wasn't a near-term baby--it was a fetus that would have been abortable. The idea that they would have been able to keep her body going for the additional two months to bring the baby to viability is just insane.

I hope everyone involved in this mess feels as horrible as possible and that the husband sues them for as much pain and emotional distress as he can manage.
 
2014-01-24 09:57:40 PM  

GWSuperfan: *Ctrl+F "Axlotl Tank"*

*0 Results*

Fark, I am dissapoint.


Many machines in TX.
 
2014-01-24 10:03:58 PM  

MeanJean: Actually, there have been a few cases of healthy babies born to braindead mothers, which I linked to in the other thread. Not much info about what point they became braindead and if the kids had any mental issues afterwards though.


I remember one, if it was fairly recently.

Oh yeah, very recently. In Hungary In Hungary. And she was six months along

/That sonogram looks kind of funny though.
 
2014-01-24 10:04:06 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: 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.


A whole bunch of people should be sued for this. Including the hospital and the family. If a dnr order exists that is pretty clear instruction as to what to do.
 
2014-01-24 10:06:36 PM  
Oh, she wasn't very far along either. The baby was very premature. Doesn't sound like a very good outcome to me either way.
 
2014-01-24 10:12:15 PM  

Warlordtrooper: Grand_Moff_Joseph: 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.

A whole bunch of people should be sued for this. Including the hospital and the family. If a dnr order exists that is pretty clear instruction as to what to do.


The family should be sued? Have you followed this trainwreck at all?
WTF is wrong with you?
Get current on the situation and get back to us.
 
2014-01-24 10:20:33 PM  

Dimensio: Apparently numerous Freepers are outraged over the decision not to force a family to continue enduring emotional torment and significant financial burden (as the hospital has already announced an intent to bill the family for the thus-far unwanted medical "treatment" of Ms. Munoz's body) in order to sustain the existence of a fetus that will not actually survive outside of the mother's corpse.


How the hell can you bill someone for something they express said they didn't want?

Send the bill to the guy who pushed to keep her on life support.  Let HIM pay for it.
 
2014-01-24 10:22:01 PM  

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


I rather think the hospital should hope THEY have excellent insurance, because they're going to be getting sued into oblivion.
 
2014-01-24 10:23:35 PM  
Common sense found in Texas.  It's always in the last place you look right?
 
2014-01-24 10:24:28 PM  

TheDirtyNacho: Seems the copy/paste put some spaces in the URL's, sorry.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/01/09/5473242/family-of-pregnant-b rain-dead.html

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-22-14-brain-dead-preg nant-woman-sues-fort-worth-hospital-remove-wife-life-support-marlise-m unoz/

There was another article (you can google it) that notes that the General Counsel is Neal Adams, who was the treasurer for the original case judge that recused herself in a 1 paragraph statement.


If you are going to link a story, do this:

Type out what you want the link to say and then highlight it. Pick the link icon and add the url. Done.

This is your link

(Or . . . just click on the question mark icon and do what the first line says.)

I'm sorry for butting in. . . .
 
2014-01-24 10:24:55 PM  

ciberido: Dimensio: Apparently numerous Freepers are outraged over the decision not to force a family to continue enduring emotional torment and significant financial burden (as the hospital has already announced an intent to bill the family for the thus-far unwanted medical "treatment" of Ms. Munoz's body) in order to sustain the existence of a fetus that will not actually survive outside of the mother's corpse.

How the hell can you bill someone for something they express said they didn't want?


Texas.
 
2014-01-24 10:43:23 PM  
I hope this hospital and the entire Texas healthcare system will DIAF. I can't even imagine what this poor guy is suffering through, Sign up the lawyers.
 
2014-01-24 11:00:37 PM  
You gotta love small government.
 
2014-01-24 11:02:51 PM  

cryinoutloud: The baby also needs, like, input from the mother. Physical sensations. Sounds and breathing and movement. If it doesn't have any of that while it's developing, it's like it developed in a sensory deprivation chamber. I don't know what that would do to a fetus, since obviously it's never been done, but even if the physical body came out fine, the baby would be messed up. It might never be able to bond with people or something.  That's how babies who are raised in bad orphanages get all screwed up. They're taken care of, physically, but they never get any affection or touching or anything.



The fetus is not a conscious, sentient and aware being until it breathes outside the womb.  Amniotic fluid transmits muffled sound similar to how water does, and if fetus has hearing in utero then it could hear the ventilator machine pumping mother's lungs and people speaking near the mother.  Thus, the uterus is not technically a sensory-deprivation chamber because external sound, movement, breathing and other stimuli could be perceptible from within, but only if fetus is conscious and aware which current science says it is not.

The consequences of sensory deprivation once born, however, may be what you're thinking of regarding neglected babies who are conscious and aware of said neglect.
 
2014-01-24 11:04:58 PM  
Great! Now maybe the parents of Jahi McMath will be forced to stop playing with her corpse, too.
 
2014-01-24 11:12:21 PM  

Khazar-Khum: Great! Now maybe the parents of Jahi McMath will be forced to stop playing with her corpse, too.


The difference between that situation and this one is that the family here recognized their loved one was already dead. The McMaths are still under the delusion that brain death is a curable condition.
 
2014-01-24 11:30:40 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.


The hospital was merely following texas law, as they are required to do.
The state needs to cover the costs on this.
 
2014-01-24 11:37:49 PM  
Had this stupid law on TX not been on the books, the hospital's GC would have been irrelevant, period.
 
2014-01-24 11:46:18 PM  
OooShiny:
The fetus is not a conscious, sentient and aware being until it breathes outside the womb.


Wut?
 
2014-01-25 01:29:24 AM  

Kiwimann: OooShiny:
The fetus is not a conscious, sentient and aware being until it breathes outside the womb.


Wut?

[sic]

Wow, irony.  Maybe before you question the sentience and intelligence of a fetus, you should check your own spelling.
 
2014-01-25 01:33:52 AM  

Warlordtrooper: A whole bunch of people should be sued for this. Including the hospital and the family. If a dnr order exists that is pretty clear instruction as to what to do.


You're saying the family should be sued?

The family that didn't want it to happen in the first place?  The family that had to hire a lawyer to keep the hospital from using artificial BS to make the heart pump and the longs breath in a body that was long-past-dead?  That family should be sued?

Fark  you, you farking fark.

voristrupp: The hospital was merely following texas law, as they are required to do.


Bullshiat.  There isn't any such law, because she was dead, and there is no farking law about using dead bodies to create children.

I quote : "The judge agreed, saying the state law does not apply to Marlise Muñoz "because she is deceased."
 
2014-01-25 02:48:48 AM  
Christians... is there anything they can't make worse?
 
2014-01-25 03:21:06 AM  

aleister_greynight: Kiwimann: OooShiny:
The fetus is not a conscious, sentient and aware being until it breathes outside the womb.


Wut? [sic]

Wow, irony.  Maybe before you question the sentience and intelligence of a fetus, you should check your own spelling.


thatsthejoke.jpg

Get a brain! Moran.
 
2014-01-25 08:04:17 AM  
Here is the story of the judge's recusal.

Apparently a reporter did a bit of journalism and found the link between the judge and general counsel.
 
2014-01-25 08:31:48 AM  
This horror story is finally over.  But I wonder..what happens if the hospital still refuses to pull the plug after 5pm Monday?
 
2014-01-25 08:38:06 AM  
DubyaHater


/we need a single-payer system
//with a national fee schedule
Because NOTHING ever goes wrong when the government fixes the price.

Between 2006 and 2011, Medicare spent a total of $172 million to purchase 473,620 penis pumps, at an average cost to the government of $360 each.
 
2014-01-25 09:32:32 AM  

Fark You Buddy: This horror story is finally over.  But I wonder..what happens if the hospital still refuses to pull the plug after 5pm Monday?


i4.mirror.co.uk
 
2014-01-25 10:01:56 AM  

Fark You Buddy: This horror story is finally over. But I wonder..what happens if the hospital still refuses to pull the plug after 5pm Monday?


It'll only be over if the hospital does what the judge ordered.  So far, they've shown no sign of being reasonable.

Even after they turn off the machines, the hospital is likely to bill the guy and try and force him to pay for all the "life support" that they did to the dead woman against his wishes.
 
2014-01-25 10:10:13 AM  

Iworkformsn: Christians... is there anything they can't make worse?


We should force the coont who was behind all this to be the one pulling the plug.
 
2014-01-25 10:26:51 AM  

DrBenway: 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.


Except that was never realistic in the first place.  The fetus had the same lack of oxygen she had.

DubyaHater: 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.


He should be elated to get bills from them.  We have here a case of medical malpractice and the higher the bills, the higher the payout.
 
2014-01-25 10:52:56 AM  
Crazy Jesus freaks.
 
2014-01-25 11:05:29 AM  

OooShiny: cryinoutloud: The baby also needs, like, input from the mother. Physical sensations. Sounds and breathing and movement. If it doesn't have any of that while it's developing, it's like it developed in a sensory deprivation chamber. I don't know what that would do to a fetus, since obviously it's never been done, but even if the physical body came out fine, the baby would be messed up. It might never be able to bond with people or something.  That's how babies who are raised in bad orphanages get all screwed up. They're taken care of, physically, but they never get any affection or touching or anything.


The fetus is not a conscious, sentient and aware being until it breathes outside the womb.  Amniotic fluid transmits muffled sound similar to how water does, and if fetus has hearing in utero then it could hear the ventilator machine pumping mother's lungs and people speaking near the mother.  Thus, the uterus is not technically a sensory-deprivation chamber because external sound, movement, breathing and other stimuli could be perceptible from within, but only if fetus is conscious and aware which current science says it is not.

The consequences of sensory deprivation once born, however, may be what you're thinking of regarding neglected babies who are conscious and aware of said neglect.


I know it isn't conscious, but movement might be important for development in ways we don't understand yet.
 
2014-01-25 11:59:43 AM  

MeanJean: OooShiny: cryinoutloud: The baby also needs, like, input from the mother. Physical sensations. Sounds and breathing and movement. If it doesn't have any of that while it's developing, it's like it developed in a sensory deprivation chamber. I don't know what that would do to a fetus, since obviously it's never been done, but even if the physical body came out fine, the baby would be messed up. It might never be able to bond with people or something.  That's how babies who are raised in bad orphanages get all screwed up. They're taken care of, physically, but they never get any affection or touching or anything.


The fetus is not a conscious, sentient and aware being until it breathes outside the womb.  Amniotic fluid transmits muffled sound similar to how water does, and if fetus has hearing in utero then it could hear the ventilator machine pumping mother's lungs and people speaking near the mother.  Thus, the uterus is not technically a sensory-deprivation chamber because external sound, movement, breathing and other stimuli could be perceptible from within, but only if fetus is conscious and aware which current science says it is not.

The consequences of sensory deprivation once born, however, may be what you're thinking of regarding neglected babies who are conscious and aware of said neglect.

I know it isn't conscious, but movement might be important for development in ways we don't understand yet.


Which is why women are never, ever put on bed rest. This isn't about movement, this is about whether or not the host is even alive. And why are people so shocked that a dead body can't support new life? Was anybody honestly actually expecting a fully formed, healthy and functional baby to come out of this woman's dead body, if only they could get it up to that 24 week mark?
 
2014-01-25 12:09:00 PM  
You want to know what's extra farked up?

They only reason why this was allowed is because the fetus is horribly deformed and they don't want to foot the tax bill.

The pro-life will probably consider this a victory.
 
2014-01-25 01:10:16 PM  

ciberido: How the hell can you bill someone for something they express said they didn't want?


Remember the guy who clenched his butt cheeks in a suspicious manner during a traffic stop? The one who ended up in the hospital against his will, with several digital rectal exams, abdominal x-rays, and an invasive colonoscopy under anesthesia? All completely and totally against his will (and without a warrant)? The one they found absolutely no drugs in?

Yeah, they billed him.
 
2014-01-25 01:21:04 PM  

IlGreven: 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.


Oh, please. Texas threatened to prosecute physicians for doing the wrong "type" of abortion.  That gave the hospital all the cover it needed.

Not to mention providing political cover for pro-lifers who murder abortion doctors.

Why can't wingnuts ever take responsibility for the consequences of their legislation?  They're SUPPOSED to be all about personal accountability.

I guess that's only when it's convenient.
 
2014-01-25 01:28:26 PM  

Dimensio: Apparently numerous Freepers are outraged over the decision not to force a family to continue enduring emotional torment and significant financial burden (as the hospital has already announced an intent to bill the family for the thus-far unwanted medical "treatment" of Ms. Munoz's body) in order to sustain the existence of a fetus that will not actually survive outside of the mother's corpse.


Wouldn't surprise me.  I got banned (again) over there back during the Schiavo nonsense when I asked about "small government."

And they say lefties on college campuses stifle dissent :)
 
2014-01-25 01:34:48 PM  

Warlordtrooper: Grand_Moff_Joseph: 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.

A whole bunch of people should be sued for this. Including the hospital and the family. If a dnr order exists that is pretty clear instruction as to what to do.


Probably not worth it, thanks to tort reform down there.  Max damages are $250k.  Minimum expenses for a good med-mal case start at $50k, and go up from there.  And if you don't spend that money, any competent defense counsel will know it, take you to trial, and eat you alive.  Those costs are up front; you only get them back if you win.  And assuming the other side doesn't drag out the appeals for ten years.

So, if his contingent fee is 30%, you're expecting an attorney to shell out $100k for a $50k return after expenses, which is only if he wins.

He's better off putting that money on red at a roulette table.
 
2014-01-25 02:55:34 PM  
I think this is a life lesson in exactly why anti-choicers don't know what the fark they're talking about. They  honestly did not understand until now that the fetus wouldn't have lived, and if it had it would have lived a short, painful 'life'.  If you cannot figure this out, you should be back in high school biology, not trying to force other people to live by your decisions.

/F*cking assholes.
 
2014-01-25 03:41:19 PM  
The My Little Pony Killer:

Which is why women are never, ever put on bed rest. This isn't about movement, this is about whether or not the host is even alive.

I'm aware of that. But even the slight movement of the body might be good for the fetus. There's a difference in being dead and immobile and simply lying down.

But that's very much beside the point, I agree.
 
2014-01-25 05:34:07 PM  

PsiChick: I think this is a life lesson in exactly why anti-choicers don't know what the fark they're talking about. They  honestly did not understand until now that the fetus wouldn't have lived, and if it had it would have lived a short, painful 'life'.  If you cannot figure this out, you should be back in high school biology, not trying to force other people to live by your decisions.

/F*cking assholes.


This isn't about "choice" so much as the government taking away your rights.

Hubby shouldn't have been forced to go through months of medical and legal costs so that some people far away could feel good about themselves.
 
2014-01-25 06:39:55 PM  

shortymac: PsiChick: I think this is a life lesson in exactly why anti-choicers don't know what the fark they're talking about. They  honestly did not understand until now that the fetus wouldn't have lived, and if it had it would have lived a short, painful 'life'.  If you cannot figure this out, you should be back in high school biology, not trying to force other people to live by your decisions.

/F*cking assholes.

This isn't about "choice" so much as the government taking away your rights.

Hubby shouldn't have been forced to go through months of medical and legal costs so that some people far away could feel good about themselves.


Yes, that's another side of it, and it still plays into the general theme of 'these farkwits were trying to inflict their choices on other people without thinking it through'.
 
Displayed 147 of 147 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report