Father Barred from Taking Pregnant Wife Off Life Support

[statlerwaldorf]

shine.yahoo.com/parenting/texas-father-barred-taking-pregnant-wife-off-life-200600388.html

On Nov. 26, Erick Munoz woke to the sound of his year-old son crying and found his 14-weeks-pregnant wife, Marlise, lying on the kitchen floor, blue in the face and without a pulse. A firefighter and paramedic, Munoz called 911 and performed CPR, to no avail. When they arrived at the John Peter Smith Hospital (JPS) in Fort Worth, Texas, he thought he would have to make an agonizing decision: refuse life support even though that meant losing both his wife and his future child. Munoz said in a WFAA News report that four years ago, when Marlise's brother was killed in an accident, she told him that she would never want to be on life support — something they had discussed many times since.

More on Yahoo: Family Fights to Save Teen Daughter on Life Support

A month later, against his requests, she is still on a ventilator. Not only does Munoz want to honor his wife's wishes, but also he believes that the fetus she is carrying has been seriously harmed. "I don't know how long she was there prior to me finding her," he said. Munoz, who could not be reached for comment, wrote on WFAA's Facebook page, "All I know is that she was without oxygen long enough for her to have massive brain swelling. I unfortunately know what that type of damage could do to a child during crucial developmental time." Doctors say it's likely that Munoz's wife suffered a pulmonary embolism, and no longer has brain activity.

More on Yahoo: Doctors Vary on Willingness to Talk Hospice

When Munoz first arrived at the hospital, he discovered that, according to Texas law, life-sustaining procedures may not be withheld or withdrawn from a pregnant woman, — even if she has an advance health care directive (also called a living will) stipulating that she does not want to be kept alive on a machine. There are conflicting reports about whether Marlise Munoz had an official DNR (Do Not Resuscitate order), and the family could not be reached for comment. But according to the Center for Women Policy Studies, as of 2012, Texas and 11 other states have automatically invalidated pregnant women's advance directives to refrain from using extraordinary measures to keep them alive, and others have slightly less restrictive but similar laws. A spokesperson from the hospital told Yahoo Shine, "Our responsibility is to be a good corporate citizen while also providing quality care for our patients. At all times, JPS will follow the law as it applies to healthcare in the state of Texas."

Marlise Munoz's mother and father say they support their son-in-law's request to take their daughter off life support. "She absolutely DID NOT EVER want to be connected to Life Support," her mother, Lynne Machado, wrote on WFAA's Facebook page. "This issue is not about Pro Choice/Pro Life. Our intent is purely one of education about how this [statute] null and voids any woman's DNR [if she is] pregnant. We know our daughter well enough, after numerous discussions about DNR, that she would NEVER EVER consent to being hooked up to Life Support." While the family's tragic situation hits a nerve in a state where abortion debates rage, Munoz also said he doesn't want to participate in arguments over right-to-life verses pro-choice issues, but instead wishes to honor his wife and inform the public about a little-known law.

Marlise Munoz, at approximately 18 weeks pregnant, remains unresponsive and her husband describes her as "simply a shell." Doctors check the fetal heartbeat daily, but Munoz doesn't think the testing is sufficient to measure the fetus's viability. "Its hard to reach the point where you would wish your wife's body would stop," he said.

[pixy0stix]

oh god. I can't even...

[starlily]

When even the vast majority of self-described "pro lifers" in the comments section agree that the family's wishes should be respected, then you know TX legislators have *really* lost their damn minds. What a nightmare.

[stealthmom]

I read this earlier today. It enrages me. ENRAGES ME.

[pescalita]

Holy fuck

[Nonny]

Holy shit. How can they (and apparently the other 11 states) override someone's wishes like that. Such an overreach.

Does anyone know which other states are like this? Being used as a brain dead incubator is my idea of hell.

[Velar Fricative]

This is horrifying. I just can't with this shit anymore.

[Deleted]

Horrifying. I'm not normally the litigious type but I hope this family has a really good lawyer take up their case.

[IIOY]

Dec 20, 2013 23:52:08 GMT -5 statlerwaldorf said:

But according to the Center for Women Policy Studies, as of 2012, Texas and 11 other states have automatically invalidated pregnant women's advance directives to refrain from using extraordinary measures to keep them alive, and others have slightly less restrictive but similar laws.

This is horrifying and I find this more offensive than your run-of-the-mill restrictions on abortion.

[Miss Phryne Fisher]

So she is basically just a womb now. Charming.

Fuck Texas.

[summer]

This is horrifying.

[heyjude]

This is horrifying. Death panels indeed.

[NewOrleans]

Omfg. I swear that dead women have more rights than living women. They are keeping her alive as a fucking incubator. It's like a horrific sci fi book.

[secretlyevil]

I really hate people.

[heyjude]

I've never even heard of such laws until now! How do these even pass without threat of revolt?! I'm horrified so many states have these laws! How are they even fucking constitutional?!

[IIOY]

Dec 21, 2013 8:50:18 GMT -5 heyjude said:

I've never even heard of such laws until now! How do these even pass without threat of revolt?! I'm horrified so many states have these laws! How are they even fucking constitutional?!

^^^ my reaction exactly

ETA: my guess is that these laws have flown under the radar because they are so infrequently invoked. It will be interesting to see if this situation starts a movement to repeal them.

[mominatrix]

Dec 21, 2013 8:47:04 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

I take that back - that looks like old info. I went to the Center on Women's Policy and they say the 12 states that AUTOMATICALLY INVALIDATE A DNR are: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, South Carolina,
Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin)

ETA: The Uniform Rights of the Terminally Ill Act (URTIA): The number of states following

the URTIA model increased from 10 (Alaska, Arkansas, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska,

Nevada, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and South Dakota) in 1992 to 14 (Alaska, Arizona,

Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota,

Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and South Dakota) in 2011. URTIA requires that a

pregnant woman be given life-sustaining treatment if she is pregnant and if it is “probable” that

the fetus will develop to the point of “live birth.”

www.centerwomenpolicy.org/programs/health/statepolicy/documents/REPRO_PregnancyExclusionsinStateLivingWillandMedicalProxyStatutesMeganGreeneandLeslieR.Wolfe.pdf

::chokes on coffee::


Seriously, this is one of the worst things I've ever heard.

Off to write to my state rep and senator.


ETA: awesomesauce. My state rep is the chair of the Health Care and Wellness committee. Guess who's getting a hard core letter from me.


ETA2:  I can't find it in the actual Wa statutes, and that list is old. NOLO says that WA law says "The law in your state does not allow your document directing health care to take effect when you are pregnant."... but again not finding it...
WA stats: apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=70.122&full=true#70.122.040
hmmm....

[penguingrrl]

How horrifying. That poor man. Not only has he lost his wife but now he has to watch this drag on? And most likely deal with a handicapped child if the baby makes it? What if he signs away custody? Does the state now have to pay for her to be an incubator and a likely disabled child for life?

[Kattey]

This really is heartbreaking. It's fucking detestable that the woman's wishes are completely disregarded, without even the thought that the baby will probably have no real life. Forget the hardship this puts on her family, and the enduring hardship the husband and son will have to face after the child is born. Thank God I don't live in one of those states.

[fortmyersbride]

How awful. And now I know I live in one of the states where they automatically invalidate a pregnant patient's DNR.

[IIOY]

Dec 21, 2013 13:42:50 GMT -5 tillie said:

This very scary to think that Drs can wield this much power, clearly disregarding the wishes of the woman and her family.

In this case, it's legislators wielding the power.

[sushi]

Dec 21, 2013 8:50:18 GMT -5 heyjude said:

I've never even heard of such laws until now! How do these even pass without threat of revolt?! I'm horrified so many states have these laws! How are they even fucking constitutional?!

Exactly

I'm pretty familiar with awful anti woman laws, and I've never heard of this. I'm horrified. Appalled.

I have a living will. I was planning on updating to include a request to avoid catholic hospitals. Note apparently I have to avoid 12 states, too.

[sushi]

Dec 21, 2013 13:42:50 GMT -5 tillie said:

This very scary to think that Drs can wield this much power, clearly disregarding the wishes of the woman and her family.

I imagine the doctors hate this and are horrified

[twodogsandababy]

I can't imagine the hell that family is dealing with and am horrified that so many other states have laws, or at least gray areas that would allow Advanced Directives to not be honored.

[Nonny]

I'm so fucking horrified at all of this. I've been meaning to get our wills/advanced directives in order, and now I have another thing to fucking worry about.

Note to self: Specify that regardless of pregnancy status I don't want to be kept alive artificially, and put in a note that if that unlikely and horrific event should happen to me, that I want my case to become a challenge to this barbaric law.

[NewOrleans]

I keep coming back to this idea: the state owns her body right now. She doesn't, and her family doesn't. This case is TERRIFYING.

There HAS to be a suit in this somewhere, a legal challenge to this law. asdfjkl ?

[pugz]

I really have no words. I want to cry that this is allowed in my state and the adjacent state.

[mominatrix]

Dec 21, 2013 17:00:42 GMT -5 mr+ms said:

Dec 21, 2013 14:21:58 GMT -5 @ojo said:

I am concerned about the fetus if it becomes viable. It will never have experienced movement since the mom can't even roll over, the taste of food in the amniotic fluid because the mom can't eat, the touch and pressure of the mother's hands on her belly, the sound of the mother's voice, changes in lighting.

I think this point makes for a case against these laws. The things you mention are likely necessary for proper development so it's like the family is being forced into an unwanted experiment on sort of living beings :/ It makes me sick to my stomach. I have heard of a comatose woman giving birth but just what in the heck are they going to do if the baby does not come out the usual route? Can surgical procedures be performed on people with DNRs and arrangements of that sort? Ugghh... this is so sick.

Huh.

I wouldn't have imagined that somebody in a coma or vegitative state could deliver vaginally.


...but you learn something new every day:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-62940/Coma-woman-gives-birth-daughter.html

[pugz]

I assume they'd do a c-section once the baby is well into the viability stage.

[Kattey]

The more I read this, the more disturbed I am about the government using this woman's body to try to further their own agenda.