Medical Ethics

[Wells 1st MRB]

TLDR: A pregnant woman in Texas was kept alive in a brain dead state after being found pregnant. The hospital continued to keep her on life support despite her wishes. Later the judge ruled to take her off life support; the baby was also growing abnormally. Thoughts?

After hospital yields, brain-dead pregnant woman taken off of life support

By Hasani Gittens, NBC News

A pregnant woman who lapsed into brain-dead state late last year was finally removed from life-support on Sunday after the Texas hospital caring for her announced it would comply with a judge's order to disconnect her from the machines keeping her alive.

John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas issued a statement Sunday saying they would "follow the court order" issued Friday in the case of Marlise Munoz.

"The past eight weeks have been difficult for the Munoz family, the caregivers and the entire Tarrant County community, which found itself involved in a sad situation," the statement read.

"JPS Health Network has followed what we believed were the demands of a state statute. From the onset, JPS has said its role was not to make nor contest law but to follow it. On Friday, a state district judge ordered the removal of life-sustaining treatment from Marlise Munoz. The hospital will follow the court order."

Judge R.H. Wallace had given the Fort Worth hospital until Monday at 5 p.m. to comply with his ruling to remove Munoz from life support, which her husband Erick Munoz says she would have wanted.

She was 14 weeks pregnant when her husband found her unconscious Nov. 26, possibly due to a blood clot.

About an hour after the hospital said it would comply, the Munoz family attorneys released a statement saying Marlise had been taken off life support at about 11:30 a.m. Central time.

"May Marlise Munoz finally rest in peace, and her family find the strength to complete what has been an unbearably long and arduous journey," the statement said.

Both the hospital and family agreed before Wallace's ruling that Marlise Munoz meets the criteria to be considered brain-dead — which means she is dead both medically and under Texas law — and that her fetus could not be born alive this early in pregnancy.

The case has raised questions about end-of-life care and whether a pregnant woman who is considered legally and medically dead should be kept on life support for the sake of a fetus.

It also has garnered attention on both sides of the abortion debate, with anti-abortion groups arguing Munoz's fetus deserves a chance to be born.

Last week before the judge's ruling, lawyers for the Munoz family said that medical tests showed the fetus was "distinctly abnormal," and not developing properly.

[Wyatt]

It is doubly unfortunate that the woman was pregnant... however, I think the court made the right choice. In this case, I don't think it would be justified to keep a brain-dead woman on life support for 6 months (she was 14 weeks pregnant) for the sake of a fetus, particularly when the fetus is described as "distinctly abnormal". Not much else to say except... well, I don't have the words to express how fucked up the situation is and I wish no one had to experience it.

[Ultranator BAR]

I always like arguing the abnormal side of things, but a parasite can't survive on it's own without a host. If the woman was already (brain)dead and did not wish to be on life support, then their wishes should be granted. Not sure what these pro-life people are crying about. I didn't recall anything about an abortion in this document (which again is up to the woman and her body). Seem stupid that they had to have a court order just to terminate her life support when that's what she would have wanted.

This whole thing is a sad story. I'm happy that my parent's, and yours McDowell, chose to take care of their little parasites and feed and shelter them. Also, "distinctly abnormal" is really broad. All and all, I'm wondering if the baby was getting enough nutrients, since his/her mother was brain dead. The only other time I've heard mention of anything like this was on a Law and Order episode, so I really can't form a decent opinion about it other than It's a really sad story.

[Takel 1st MRB]

seems more like a process issue. the hospital kept her on life support because they interpreted local laws as saying that's what they had to do in this situation. the court just said 'well, she's dead. so it really isn't the thing to do'. On the subject of the foetus, it being described as 'distinctly abnormal' with 6 months left to go before an actual birth seems a pretty good indicator that it would likely not be very well off either, or possibly expire beforehand. it was also agreed by all parties that the woman was dead medically and under texas law, so keeping her on 'life-support' is technically not possible if she's legally dead.

basically, hospital kept her on life-support for the sake of the baby while agreeing that she was dead, the court says that because she is dead, there is no life to sustain and that they can legally end the life-support without going against the law.

it's just sad really, the husband has had to deal with the death of his wife in one of the harshest ways possible (finding her unconscious at home, while she's pregnant) and has not been able to hold a proper funeral for two months because the hospital is keeping her alive despite the wishes of the deceased and her close family