|
This should be fun.
Quote:
Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Two days ago, Texas Children's Hospital in Houston removed a baby from life support contrary to the mom's wishes. The baby was born with a type of dwarfism where his lungs and heart weren't going to grow, and he was on artificial breathing for six months. According to the hospital, his death was only a matter of time, and there was nothing anyone could do for him. Everything was done in accordance with Texas law (finding that treatment is inappropriate by a physician, careful review and agreement by the facility ethics committee), and the mom had ten days to find alternate care for him. Apparently she contacted 40 neonatal units and no one would take him.
The case brought a lot of attention to local media, but I didn't really see any national coverage, which sort of surprised me in light of the Shavio case. Poor baby.
ETA: I always find an interesting dichotomy between the right-to-life and right-to-healthcare. No one ever talks about how much it costs to keep the life support systems going, and yet losing the cuts on Medicaid was a major hit to the Republicans today.
|
More on the Texas law and this particular case by one of the bill's drafters.
__________________
"In the olden days before the internet, you'd take this sort of person for a ride out into the woods and shoot them, as Darwin intended, before he could spawn."--Will the Vampire People Leave the Lobby? pg 79
|
