General Discussion

KitSileya

(4,035 posts)

114. It is such a horrific prospect.

Sat Jan 11, 2014, 06:44 PM

Jan 2014

Any woman of fertile age is just one step away from having her body used as a piece of medical equipment. It doesn't matter what your stated wishes are, doesn't matter if you make a living will, if you have been to a doctor and had your pregnancy confirmed. That can happen as early as 6 weeks gestation, and then your body literally isn't yours to control. And what the ghoulish brigade doesn't want to acknowledge, is that it's such a slippery slope from not getting to decide what happens to your body after you die, to not getting to decide what happens to your body when you're alive, as long as you are pregnant. Already there's a case of a woman who was jailed in a rehab clinic because she told her doctor she had stopped taking her suboxone because she was afraid of what it would do to the fetus.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

336 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Family of dead, pregnant woman is suing Texas for using her body as an incubator. [View all] pnwmom Jan 2014 OP

I am disgusted at the hospital's action. CaliforniaPeggy Jan 2014 #1

I thought it was state law alarimer Jan 2014 #20

A number of prominent ethicists say that they are misinterpreting the state law. pnwmom Jan 2014 #116

Just what I was thinking MattBaggins Jan 2014 #238

Interesting point. eom Maraya1969 Jan 2014 #277

How in the heck is a fetus growing normally in her? Maraya1969 Jan 2014 #278

It's not, but the *idea* of a baby is the important thing. We're not dealing with sane people here - nomorenomore08 Jan 2014 #305

Incubator is right. So sad to hear this is how we treat women in this day and age. bettyellen Jan 2014 #2

The family needs to get ready for the Death Threats that will come from the Pro-LIfers. n/t freshwest Jan 2014 #3

They've already had them. I think DevonRex Jan 2014 #5

Okay, so they have gotten the death threats already... This is sick. I'm wondering how the child freshwest Jan 2014 #13

I hope it isn't born. The effects DevonRex Jan 2014 #18

Nobody knows if fetus has sustained any damage until tests are run on it. LisaL Jan 2014 #29

The fetus went through everything the mother went through. DevonRex Jan 2014 #38

So why did other brain dead women manage to produce normally developing children? LisaL Jan 2014 #43

Perhaps they died of head trauma & babies were 8 mos DevonRex Jan 2014 #56

No. LisaL Jan 2014 #77

Links. DevonRex Jan 2014 #80

Here is what appears to be a most recent case. LisaL Jan 2014 #90

There's no indication that woman suffered a lack of oxygen that Marlise had riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #107

More than 3, despite what the article said. LisaL Jan 2014 #108

You use and article as proof yet say the article is wrong. And that is ethical? uppityperson Jan 2014 #117

Story about brain dead pregnant woman is quoted from associated press. LisaL Jan 2014 #144

The article says 3, you claim it is credible, yet is wrong "More than 3, despite what the article... uppityperson Jan 2014 #149

Again, this article just quotes associated press on a brain dead pregnant woman. LisaL Jan 2014 #159

"More than 3, despite what the article said." So, is the article credible or wrong? uppityperson Jan 2014 #161

The stroke cut her oxygen off, but not for an HOUR. The amount of time pnwmom Jan 2014 #132

There is a critical difference that you're ignoring. This woman didn't stop breathing for an hour pnwmom Jan 2014 #130

It's the first time I posted this link. LisaL Jan 2014 #147

There's a big difference that cannot be ignored. Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #227

She was kept on life support much longer than two days after she was declared brain dead. LisaL Jan 2014 #228

The Texas woman was found dead. Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #234

She wasn't found dead. LisaL Jan 2014 #235

Lisal I don't understand what you're saying. Are you arguing that it's okay to ignore the OregonBlue Jan 2014 #293

Well, she's refused to answer us others when we've asked those questions, KitSileya Jan 2014 #297

I always thought they were male, from what they write and support. uppityperson Jan 2014 #301

That was my bad assumption - KitSileya Jan 2014 #303

Yup. They are careful to never answer a direct question but indeed, do advocate non-self determinati uppityperson Jan 2014 #307

Not impressed? I am disgusted. KitSileya Jan 2014 #309

Since I don't know you, I frankly couldn't care less how you feel about me. LisaL Jan 2014 #316

I am pro-choice. LisaL Jan 2014 #315

Why won't you answer the question. Are you okay with the State using this woman as an incubator? OregonBlue Jan 2014 #333

Most of those other rare cases were in a vegetative state, not brain dead. pnwmom Jan 2014 #123

Women ARE NOT just an INCUBATOR. alphafemale Jan 2014 #138

Thank you! drmeow Jan 2014 #236

However ann--- Jan 2014 #103

Fetus is alive. LisaL Jan 2014 #106

Suppose fetus is born quasi-"normal" but requires constant care for rest of its life. MH1 Jan 2014 #115

Are you for real? LisaL Jan 2014 #163

Did you vote for those who put this law in place? uppityperson Jan 2014 #166

Seriously? What do you think? LisaL Jan 2014 #224

No, all we know is that the fetus has a heartbeat, like the mother. The mother has a heartbeat pnwmom Jan 2014 #133

Having a heartbeat isn't equivalent to being alive. You don't speak for the hospital. pnwmom Jan 2014 #148

If the fetus wasn't alive the hospital wouldn't have to keep the mother's body on life support. LisaL Jan 2014 #158

1. A fetus is not a person. 2. they have no clue if the fetus' brain works. nt DevonRex Jan 2014 #175

"Alive" does not mean able to ann--- Jan 2014 #312

Any cases where the mother's skin was already starting to feel "rubbery" six weeks before pnwmom Jan 2014 #119

I have no clue how, but it has happened in a number of cases. LisaL Jan 2014 #165

Link to a baby being delivered from a decaying corpse? And not the one you say is credible but wrong uppityperson Jan 2014 #167

What in the world are you talking about? LisaL Jan 2014 #183

"I have no clue how, but it has happened in a number of cases." uppityperson Jan 2014 #185

Brain dead woman on life support are not "decaying corpses." LisaL Jan 2014 #190

No, I did not make that claim. Another swing and a miss. I quoted you so you did say that. Whoosh! uppityperson Jan 2014 #192

Have you ever cared for a brain dead individual on a ventillator? I have. w8liftinglady Jan 2014 #329

"death threats�from Pro-Lifers" volstork Jan 2014 #65

This, and another case like it, made news this week. dixiegrrrrl Jan 2014 #4

And who, if a baby were somehow produced with massive damage, would pay for its care? n/t pnwmom Jan 2014 #134

I know this is a weird question and I ask it cause I'm not always the smartest person in the world Arcanetrance Jan 2014 #6

The fetus must still be developing, that's easy to check. But they won't know TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #8

They're judging by heartbeat, last I heard. But the heart can be beating and the brain dead. There freshwest Jan 2014 #12

It's horrific. It should be up to the family. The state should not have the power TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #15

I agree... But the state regards the fetus as a Person with all due rights until born. If the GOP freshwest Jan 2014 #17

"She" is not a person shaayecanaan Jan 2014 #63

No, she is a person. There's no such thing as a "viable corpse". TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #94

She is dead, TwlightGardener. Brain-dead is still dead. Her heart is only beating pnwmom Jan 2014 #140

I do draw a distinction between brain death and actual death (heart stops, all cells die). TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #146

Her father says her skin is already feeling rubbery. Isn't that dead enough for you? pnwmom Jan 2014 #150

The ventilator doesn't make a heart beat. It forces oxygen into the lungs, but the heart TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #157

Poor Tissue Perfusion. Sounds like a reasonable Ilsa Jan 2014 #193

Medically that is incorrect MattBaggins Jan 2014 #279

She's ventilator-dependent because she has no respiratory drive. TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #281

I would disagree on the term of corpse. MattBaggins Jan 2014 #286

OK. That's your call. TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #287

I agree, calling them corpses or remains is not needed. They are a body, but still a person deservin uppityperson Jan 2014 #151

You see dead people? shaayecanaan Jan 2014 #176

Yes, I have worked with a lot of people who have died, who were dying. Some on mechanical support uppityperson Jan 2014 #178

Some would say the same for fetuses... shaayecanaan Jan 2014 #182

Congratulations for not giving me the "what about evil people" line but instead going for fetuses uppityperson Jan 2014 #187

I remember when Kennedy died the media refered to him as a corpse and that Auntie Bush Jan 2014 #217

Then life begins at conception shaayecanaan Jan 2014 #171

OK. TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #174

in terms of rights, the DNR should be respected, PERIOD. bettyellen Jan 2014 #120

What if they needed to preserve the corpse... shaayecanaan Jan 2014 #172

what if your question had ANYTHING to do with this situation? bettyellen Jan 2014 #181

You can frame it in terms of the husband's right. He has the legal right to control pnwmom Jan 2014 #139

Not really... shaayecanaan Jan 2014 #179

It is a legal right with the exception of when an autopsy must be performed. pnwmom Jan 2014 #188

It isn't. The earliest possible date at which this fetus would be termed viable is at 24 weeks. pnwmom Jan 2014 #113

Yikes, I assumed she was much further along. I guess the state's plan is to wait TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #118

fetal viability the ability of a fetus to survive outside the uterus with artificial aid. Not devel uppityperson Jan 2014 #125

Yes, I know that. I was imprecise in my language--corrected it. TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #128

No worries, it shows that legal and medical terms and how we use them in daily life all can uppityperson Jan 2014 #129

They plan to test her in February at 22 or 24 weeks and then decide what to do. pnwmom Jan 2014 #143

The record time for a brain dead pregnant woman being on life support is 107 days. LisaL Jan 2014 #164

Machines are not keeping her heart beating. They are keeping her lungs breathing, and since the kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #194

If her brain stem is dead, then her heart isn't beating either -- not on its own. pnwmom Jan 2014 #195

False false false false false. kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #202

The heart does not beat independently of the brain STEM. The brain STEM controls automatic pnwmom Jan 2014 #203

Yes, it will beat independently. Briefly. If you stop the vent, O2 levels will drop and the heart uppityperson Jan 2014 #206

"Briefly" is the key word. As in minutes. The heart could not continue pnwmom Jan 2014 #210

Yup, briefly, until the oxygen level drops and the heart nerves die. The brain stem does control uppityperson Jan 2014 #213

Okay, that makes sense. pnwmom Jan 2014 #214

False again. The heartbeats are generated entirely by the sinoatrial node. kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #207

The fact that the heart can be made to beat while on mechanical breathing support pnwmom Jan 2014 #209

I know that. Jesus. I am NOT arguing that a brain dead person is alive. kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #212

I was using the term "make" loosely. But the fact remains that a functioning brain stem pnwmom Jan 2014 #215

Yes it does beat independently MattBaggins Jan 2014 #282

But you're not saying the heart can beat without either a brain stem pnwmom Jan 2014 #283

Yes it will beat until the oxygen and energy stores MattBaggins Jan 2014 #285

But that time is measured in minutes, not hours -- and certainly not months. pnwmom Jan 2014 #292

The vent oxygenates the blood. It doesn't make the heart beat. But once the vent is stopped, the uppityperson Jan 2014 #204

Thank you. Correct. When oxygen levels drop too far, the cells in the sinoatrial node kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #208

It can be confusing because while it may not make the heart beat, stopping it then causes the heart uppityperson Jan 2014 #211

Doctors can provide whatever hormones the body needs. LisaL Jan 2014 #223

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. OK, now I understand, you are just joking around! And we took you uppityperson Jan 2014 #232

WTF is so funny? LisaL Jan 2014 #239

You are. Is it ethical to do this against the wishes of the woman and the family? uppityperson Jan 2014 #243

The woman's body lasted six weeks already. LisaL Jan 2014 #248

No the lungs are keeping the heart going MattBaggins Jan 2014 #280

The fetus is not viable enlightenment Jan 2014 #121

No, I'm going to correct that, I used the wrong word. TwilightGardener Jan 2014 #124

Thanks. enlightenment Jan 2014 #127

only her brain is dead hfojvt Jan 2014 #10

I thought this was sarcasm until I read your other post. Good grief. uppityperson Jan 2014 #14

pretty disturbing to see on DU U4ikLefty Jan 2014 #19

It is "awesome" to have a state over ride the parent's wishes. As for the rest, what the fuck uppityperson Jan 2014 #24

It's not clear at this point if the fetus will ever be viable. LisaL Jan 2014 #25

wow, such ignorance and disrespect toward women's autonomy is sad to see at DU bettyellen Jan 2014 #40

This woman had a living will and health directive about this riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #49

No she didn't. LisaL Jan 2014 #59

These articles indicate otherwise. If someone does, the state can ignore it. Is that ethical? uppityperson Jan 2014 #66

I am going by what her family members said. LisaL Jan 2014 #70

Is. It. Ethical. To. Ignore. Family. Wishes? uppityperson Jan 2014 #75

Give me a fucking credible link that says DevonRex Jan 2014 #84

She was an EMT as is her husband ann--- Jan 2014 #109

Her brother died last year, prompting them to talk more about it. uppityperson Jan 2014 #111

Here's another link that says she had a living will. riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #96

Read the actual freaking story in New York Times. LisaL Jan 2014 #156

It doesn't mention it at all so that means she didn't have one? riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #177

Does New York Times article say the woman had a living will? LisaL Jan 2014 #186

No, the body is a corpse. It isn't being kept artificially alive. It has only been given pnwmom Jan 2014 #145

The difference between coma, vegetative state and brain death is "some brain activity." LisaL Jan 2014 #220

No, I don't. The father has reported that her skin feels like that of a mannequin, pnwmom Jan 2014 #222

Have a gander at this... Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #233

I read it already. LisaL Jan 2014 #237

And you have no idea how revolting this is do you? Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #247

I never said I think all dead bodies should be kept in best shape possible. LisaL Jan 2014 #259

It's my understanding that the fetus is too young to test Beaverhausen Jan 2014 #16

The hospital can test the fetus in about 2 weeks. LisaL Jan 2014 #23

Do you feel that makes it OK to violate her body and wishes MattBaggins Jan 2014 #284

There is almost no chance that a fetus that was oxygen deprived at 14 weeks for an hour pnwmom Jan 2014 #135

How much are you willing to bet on it? LisaL Jan 2014 #160

The father is willing to let it die if it is still alive. uppityperson Jan 2014 #162

Ever heard of CEREBRAL PALSY? Lack of oxygen DevonRex Jan 2014 #170

It is not up to me to bet. Only the family should be able to make this decision. pnwmom Jan 2014 #191

How is it an experiment since it has been done before? LisaL Jan 2014 #226

Of course it�s an experiment. The fact that it isn�t entirely without precedent pnwmom Jan 2014 #229

Certainly different? LisaL Jan 2014 #231

The medical team of the Texas woman said that they thought it was an hour OR MORE. pnwmom Jan 2014 #244

As far as I know medical team said nothing. They aren't allowed to talk because of privacy laws. LisaL Jan 2014 #246

But the father and his in-laws aren't bound by privacy laws, pnwmom Jan 2014 #252

The family seem like nice sincere people. LisaL Jan 2014 #254

The medical team is talking to the husband, and he is telling the press what they said. pnwmom Jan 2014 #258

Here is the father saying "they" (I presume the medical team) doesn't know how long the LisaL Jan 2014 #261

They don't know exactly how long she was without oxygen. But the hospital told the family pnwmom Jan 2014 #263

I see these statements as inconsistent. LisaL Jan 2014 #295

Same way as the woman, artificially. uppityperson Jan 2014 #311

If she is brain dead, then she isn't considered alive. LisaL Jan 2014 #314

Backing up, how do they know the fetus is "alive"? And you still miss the BIG issue uppityperson Jan 2014 #317

They could have but they haven't, for reasons of their own. pnwmom Jan 2014 #321

They're not inconsistent. The husband says they didn't know, and it was true pnwmom Jan 2014 #320

You would want to know MattBaggins Jan 2014 #288

If that was so, one would think she would have been unplugged already. LisaL Jan 2014 #294

You seem to deny the basis of this story in every post you make - KitSileya Jan 2014 #298

THAT is the problem. Even if she did, they would not allow it. Her family wants to stop the machines uppityperson Jan 2014 #310

I am kinda surprised at the husband and the parents hfojvt Jan 2014 #7

Who are you to ask that type of question? Humanist_Activist Jan 2014 #11

It's unethical to keep body alive with no hope of recovery even when this body is pregnant? LisaL Jan 2014 #22

It's unethical to do this against the family's wishes. Is it that difficult of a concept to understa uppityperson Jan 2014 #26

Is it unethical to turn the ventillator off if the family insisted it should be on? LisaL Jan 2014 #27

It depends on if the person is totally dead or only part way dead. I am not comfortable turning uppityperson Jan 2014 #28

Brain death is considered totally dead. LisaL Jan 2014 #30

"totally dead" is not a legal concept, hence can have different meanings. IMO, family wishes uppityperson Jan 2014 #31

Those seem to be your own definitions. LisaL Jan 2014 #36

Yes, those are my definitions, obviously. You still didn't answer what's your opinion, ethically? uppityperson Jan 2014 #39

Did you miss this? Waiting for you to answer about ethics, your opinion and maybe you missed it uppityperson Jan 2014 #68

Good luck on getting any answers from that corner. nt KitSileya Jan 2014 #72

No that is not unethical MattBaggins Jan 2014 #289

I have been a nurse to a few of those patients. w8liftinglady Jan 2014 #328

^^^ This^^^ I wish LisaL would respond to this. Thanks for weighing in w8liftinglady nt riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #334

Withdrawing this post! I addressed it to the wrong person, am so embarrassed. n/t Judi Lynn Jan 2014 #33

Did you reply to the right person as I fully support the family? It is unethical to keep uppityperson Jan 2014 #34

Oh, jeez. I misfired! Very, VERY sorry about that! Judi Lynn Jan 2014 #52

No problem, they are something. that makes sense, about their anti-abortion stance. uppityperson Jan 2014 #57

She had a DNR and a living will that is being willfully disregarded simply because she was pregnant. KitSileya Jan 2014 #42

No. She didn't have anything in writing. LisaL Jan 2014 #48

A living will is not a regular will, but advance directives. Educate yourself here.. uppityperson Jan 2014 #54

Did you miss the part about "written instructions?" LisaL Jan 2014 #60

According to some news reports, she did. Are you ok with ignoring family wishes, IF it was written? uppityperson Jan 2014 #71

If so, I am mistaken, but it wouldn't have mattered. KitSileya Jan 2014 #58

That's correct. LisaL Jan 2014 #61

You still haven't answered my question. KitSileya Jan 2014 #62

Is that ethical, in your opinion? To ignore that if in writing? uppityperson Jan 2014 #78

SHE HAD A LIVING WILL. HOSPITAL HAS DNR. nt DevonRex Jan 2014 #73

Please post a credible link to this claim. LisaL Jan 2014 #79

Here are 2 links. uppityperson Jan 2014 #81

Don't you think her husband knows if she had a written will? LisaL Jan 2014 #86

Since news media says she did, why do you keep saying she didn't? Credible link for your statement? uppityperson Jan 2014 #88

I am going by what her family members said. LisaL Jan 2014 #97

No, you are going by what NYDaily News reports, I am going by what NY Times reports. uppityperson Jan 2014 #99

New York Times report does not say anything about her having a living will. LisaL Jan 2014 #153

Is it ethical to force life support on someone who has said, whose family says, no? uppityperson Jan 2014 #155

Is it ethical to turn off life support if family wants it on? LisaL Jan 2014 #249

Do you ever directly answer a question? uppityperson Jan 2014 #250

It doesn't seem like it. KitSileya Jan 2014 #260

Look upthread. Others already did. DevonRex Jan 2014 #82

Her own husband's word is that they discussed it but never got around to it. LisaL Jan 2014 #83

credible link to that. I gave you links showing otherwise. uppityperson Jan 2014 #85

I already posted a directo quote from the husband that they never got around to it. LisaL Jan 2014 #87

If you did, you should have no problem posting it now. Link? uppityperson Jan 2014 #89

I alredy posted it. LisaL Jan 2014 #93

Excuse me for not keeping up with your edits. Is. It. Ethical? uppityperson Jan 2014 #98

This message was self-deleted by its author DevonRex Jan 2014 #95

Is there anything which kept you from noting the family itself is suing to take her off Judi Lynn Jan 2014 #55

I meant medically unethical, generally... Humanist_Activist Jan 2014 #110

It's a fetus, not a child. Even at this point it likely lacks... Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #35

What are you talking about? LisaL Jan 2014 #37

She was 14 weeks pregnant when she died. NT KitSileya Jan 2014 #45

She is now at 20 weeks gestation. LisaL Jan 2014 #46

So, her wishes don't matter, huh? KitSileya Jan 2014 #51

Per our laws, family wishes aren't considered in cases of brain dead persons. LisaL Jan 2014 #64

What about living wills? KitSileya Jan 2014 #69

You sound like a pretty big fan of such laws. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #242

Judging by McMath threads, most on here don't have a problem with turning life support off LisaL Jan 2014 #251

I'm not talking about anyone else but you. You a pretty big fan of laws... Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #253

My poll says otherwise. You have never answered, will you? I doubt it. Want to vote? uppityperson Jan 2014 #255

You should be a bit clearer with the choices in that poll MattBaggins Jan 2014 #291

It is not "life support" MattBaggins Jan 2014 #290

Cases as in a couple out of millions of births. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #126

I'm not surprised that the hospital's lead attorney is a well known right-to-lifer. n/t Gormy Cuss Jan 2014 #74

Being without oxygen for over an hour ann--- Jan 2014 #104

HIgh probability that the fetus is damaged and will suffer. MH1 Jan 2014 #122

They are trying to respect the well-known and strong wishes of the mother AND pnwmom Jan 2014 #142

If the baby is born severely disabled, who pays? Is ecstatic Jan 2014 #184

Of course the poor father will be stuck with a disabled child -- you don't Nay Jan 2014 #331

I don't think their willingness to accept fate or God's will (whatever you call it) kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #196

That law needs to be done away with LittleBlue Jan 2014 #9

Gruesome, ghoulish, it's a nightmare. What a ghastly beginning for a fetus. Judi Lynn Jan 2014 #21

The Fundies see all women as incubators. nt SunSeeker Jan 2014 #32

And they'd prefer that we all be brain dead from the get go. kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #197

Of course. That's why they want us uneducated. nt SunSeeker Jan 2014 #201

Who is going to foot the hospital costs assciated with doing this benld74 Jan 2014 #41

That's a good question. LisaL Jan 2014 #44

Because she's dead, I anticipate her insurance company declining to pay squat after her date of deat kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #198

We don't even know if she was actually diagnosed as brain dead. LisaL Jan 2014 #221

The hospital is defying her living will and DNR. DevonRex Jan 2014 #76

In 12 states, including Texas, a living will is set aside by law if the patient is pregnant. KitSileya Jan 2014 #92

I am aghast at Colorado law. DevonRex Jan 2014 #101

It is such a horrific prospect. KitSileya Jan 2014 #114

If there was justice? The religious wackos would pay. alphafemale Jan 2014 #274

Terri Schiavo, Part III blkmusclmachine Jan 2014 #47

Schiavo was not brain dead. LisaL Jan 2014 #50

No,not at all. The parents and husband are in complete agreement. pnwmom Jan 2014 #152

Correct - thought she did pull off a pretty good imitation. kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #199

Intensely sad story karynnj Jan 2014 #53

My understanding if testing shows fetus isn't vialbe hospital can turn off the ventillator. LisaL Jan 2014 #67

That would make complete sense as there is then no argument that the baby karynnj Jan 2014 #100

I think the family should have been able to unhook her from the very beginning, pnwmom Jan 2014 #219

I hadn't connected it to abortion, but at 14 weeks the mother could karynnj Jan 2014 #266

This is why the right is fighting so hard on these cases, even though they're so rare. pnwmom Jan 2014 #267

This is really sad Gothmog Jan 2014 #91

And what happens if the child is born and is disabled? riderinthestorm Jan 2014 #102

Texas Repub lawmakers don't care ann--- Jan 2014 #105

Having worked with developmentally disabled adults HockeyMom Jan 2014 #136

Cerebral palsy at a minimum. DevonRex Jan 2014 #173

Failure to thrive me b zola Jan 2014 #112

Growing a 4 oz baby inside a dead woman for months DevonRex Jan 2014 #131

Outright ghoulish me b zola Jan 2014 #137

Another Science Experiment propagated by a Religious Nut Job State Government warrant46 Jan 2014 #180

Would it be creepy if her family wanted to have it done? LisaL Jan 2014 #225

Yes it would be creepy Boudica the Lyoness Jan 2014 #241

Well I guess the relatives of these women didn't think so. And neither do I. LisaL Jan 2014 #245

I do have to wonder about that rebecca_herman Jan 2014 #262

Something else... DevonRex Jan 2014 #296

This is like a HORROR story/movie. Only, it's real. I can't believe the hospital would go against BlueCaliDem Jan 2014 #141

Really? Is it a good thing thing that a hospital could potentially be removed from the community? Lost_Count Jan 2014 #154

No, but all the persons running the hospital need to be removed and sued/prosecuted/ kestrel91316 Jan 2014 #200

All those local people with their medical degrees lying around... Lost_Count Jan 2014 #216

Methinks the Newbie doth protest too much. BlueCaliDem Jan 2014 #257

You should write a FAQ... Lost_Count Jan 2014 #269

I look forward to your years of harmonious contributions to DU. Orrex Jan 2014 #271

An all or nothing approach is *bound* to make you popular here, LC. BlueCaliDem Jan 2014 #275

Are you being purposely obtuse? BlueCaliDem Jan 2014 #256

Well... Lost_Count Jan 2014 #270

Well... BlueCaliDem Jan 2014 #276

How about we make the state of Texas sponsor the upbringing of the unborn baby? MrMickeysMom Jan 2014 #168

I think they're both responsible. A number of legal experts have said that the pnwmom Jan 2014 #169

That's probably not by coincidence... MrMickeysMom Jan 2014 #189

That is a sicko way to treat someone after declared dead( and their family wishes ) lunasun Jan 2014 #205

I know that if it was my daughter OwnedByCats Jan 2014 #218

This. Is. Obscene. Hekate Jan 2014 #230

I don't blame them. I would slap a lawsuit on their ass so fast their heads would spin. Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2014 #240

this story is an amazing addition to the abortion debate. Sirveri Jan 2014 #264

The mother was a paramedic who had strongly made her wishes known to her parents and husband. pnwmom Jan 2014 #265

yeah, she was out for an hour without O2... Sirveri Jan 2014 #300

You are arguing that the fetus is a person with all the rights of a citizen. KitSileya Jan 2014 #306

I am not saying that, I am playing Devil's advocate and engaging in moral relatavism. Sirveri Jan 2014 #322

I guess playing devil's advocate with real persons just doesn't appeal to me. KitSileya Jan 2014 #327

The state owes no duty to a non-viable fetus because it has no existence independent of its mother. pnwmom Jan 2014 #318

I agree, if non viable, however... Sirveri Jan 2014 #323

There's another legal right you're forgetting. pnwmom Jan 2014 #324

Well yes, but where do I rank them? Sirveri Jan 2014 #325

The SCOTUS position on abortion was that women had the choice because of the right pnwmom Jan 2014 #332

While I like the right to privacy established by the 14th, I prefer the 13th amendment defense. Sirveri Jan 2014 #335

Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2014 #268

This is all part of a sinister agenda to dehumanize women. PeaceNikki Jan 2014 #272

She is dead, so they're not even keeping her alive. It's not possible to keep her alive. pnwmom Jan 2014 #273

She's not dead according to the article, which clearly says....... WillowTree Jan 2014 #299

She is brain dead. Her heart is kept beating because she is getting oxygen from the ventilator KitSileya Jan 2014 #302

I understand that. But then, for the sake of accuracy....... WillowTree Jan 2014 #304

Her family considers her dead. KitSileya Jan 2014 #308

But according to the article, the hospital is "keeping her alive". It is what it is. WillowTree Jan 2014 #313

This might help you understand w8liftinglady Jan 2014 #330

The reporter misspoke. The machines are giving her the semblance of life, pnwmom Jan 2014 #319

I hope those two lawyers are outstandingly good, and fight this all the way Hekate Jan 2014 #326

probably too late to change the outcome in this case rebecca_herman Jan 2014 #336