Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Family of dead, pregnant woman is suing Texas for using her body as an incubator. [View all]KitSileya
(4,035 posts)260. It doesn't seem like it.
For all the questions posed in this thread towards her, they've answered nary a one. Makes for a very weird 'discussion'.
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:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Family of dead, pregnant woman is suing Texas for using her body as an incubator. [View all]
pnwmom
Jan 2014
OP
A number of prominent ethicists say that they are misinterpreting the state law.
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#116
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
Okay, so they have gotten the death threats already... This is sick. I'm wondering how the child
freshwest
Jan 2014
#13
So why did other brain dead women manage to produce normally developing children?
LisaL
Jan 2014
#43
There's no indication that woman suffered a lack of oxygen that Marlise had
riderinthestorm
Jan 2014
#107
You use and article as proof yet say the article is wrong. And that is ethical?
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#117
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
There is a critical difference that you're ignoring. This woman didn't stop breathing for an hour
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#130
She was kept on life support much longer than two days after she was declared brain dead.
LisaL
Jan 2014
#228
Lisal I don't understand what you're saying. Are you arguing that it's okay to ignore the
OregonBlue
Jan 2014
#293
Yup. They are careful to never answer a direct question but indeed, do advocate non-self determinati
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#307
Why won't you answer the question. Are you okay with the State using this woman as an incubator?
OregonBlue
Jan 2014
#333
Suppose fetus is born quasi-"normal" but requires constant care for rest of its life.
MH1
Jan 2014
#115
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
Any cases where the mother's skin was already starting to feel "rubbery" six weeks before
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#119
Link to a baby being delivered from a decaying corpse? And not the one you say is credible but wrong
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#167
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
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 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
I agree, calling them corpses or remains is not needed. They are a body, but still a person deservin
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#151
Yes, I have worked with a lot of people who have died, who were dying. Some on mechanical support
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#178
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
You can frame it in terms of the husband's right. He has the legal right to control
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#139
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
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
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
Yup, briefly, until the oxygen level drops and the heart nerves die. The brain stem does control
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#213
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 was using the term "make" loosely. But the fact remains that a functioning brain stem
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#215
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
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. OK, now I understand, you are just joking around! And we took you
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#232
You are. Is it ethical to do this against the wishes of the woman and the family?
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#243
It is "awesome" to have a state over ride the parent's wishes. As for the rest, what the fuck
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#24
wow, such ignorance and disrespect toward women's autonomy is sad to see at DU
bettyellen
Jan 2014
#40
These articles indicate otherwise. If someone does, the state can ignore it. Is that ethical?
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#66
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
There is almost no chance that a fetus that was oxygen deprived at 14 weeks for an hour
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#135
It is not up to me to bet. Only the family should be able to make this decision.
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#191
Of course it’s an experiment. The fact that it isn’t entirely without precedent
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#229
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
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
Backing up, how do they know the fetus is "alive"? And you still miss the BIG issue
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#317
THAT is the problem. Even if she did, they would not allow it. Her family wants to stop the machines
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#310
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
"totally dead" is not a legal concept, hence can have different meanings. IMO, family wishes
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#31
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
^^^ 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
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
A living will is not a regular will, but advance directives. Educate yourself here..
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#54
According to some news reports, she did. Are you ok with ignoring family wishes, IF it was written?
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#71
Since news media says she did, why do you keep saying she didn't? Credible link for your statement?
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#88
No, you are going by what NYDaily News reports, I am going by what NY Times reports.
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#99
Is it ethical to force life support on someone who has said, whose family says, no?
uppityperson
Jan 2014
#155
I already posted a directo quote from the husband that they never got around to it.
LisaL
Jan 2014
#87
Is there anything which kept you from noting the family itself is suing to take her off
Judi Lynn
Jan 2014
#55
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
I'm not surprised that the hospital's lead attorney is a well known right-to-lifer. n/t
Gormy Cuss
Jan 2014
#74
I don't think their willingness to accept fate or God's will (whatever you call it)
kestrel91316
Jan 2014
#196
Because she's dead, I anticipate her insurance company declining to pay squat after her date of deat
kestrel91316
Jan 2014
#198
In 12 states, including Texas, a living will is set aside by law if the patient is pregnant.
KitSileya
Jan 2014
#92
My understanding if testing shows fetus isn't vialbe hospital can turn off the ventillator.
LisaL
Jan 2014
#67
I think the family should have been able to unhook her from the very beginning,
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#219
This is why the right is fighting so hard on these cases, even though they're so rare.
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#267
Another Science Experiment propagated by a Religious Nut Job State Government
warrant46
Jan 2014
#180
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
How about we make the state of Texas sponsor the upbringing of the unborn baby?
MrMickeysMom
Jan 2014
#168
That is a sicko way to treat someone after declared dead( and their family wishes )
lunasun
Jan 2014
#205
I don't blame them. I would slap a lawsuit on their ass so fast their heads would spin.
Tuesday Afternoon
Jan 2014
#240
The mother was a paramedic who had strongly made her wishes known to her parents and husband.
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#265
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
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
She is dead, so they're not even keeping her alive. It's not possible to keep her alive.
pnwmom
Jan 2014
#273
She is brain dead. Her heart is kept beating because she is getting oxygen from the ventilator
KitSileya
Jan 2014
#302
But according to the article, the hospital is "keeping her alive". It is what it is.
WillowTree
Jan 2014
#313