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
    More: Obvious, Texas, pregnancy, court date  
•       •       •

5521 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jan 2014 at 6:28 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
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 08:05:39 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.
 
Displayed 50 of 146 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

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