- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Texas keeps dead body as fetus incubator against family's wishes.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 11:55 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
Posted on 1/28/14 at 11:55 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
The DNR
This where I disagree with you. If there's nothing on the DNR stating that she has no problem with being taken off life support and letting a clearly viable fetus die because she is brain dead. That's basically aborting a viable fetus and IMO only the mother has the right to abort the fetus. Nobody else should hold that right for her even when she's brain dead, not the state or next of kin.
If there's nothing on the DNR stating otherwise, the fetus needs to be protected since it would be clearly viable.
3
Posted on 1/28/14 at 12:07 pm to LSUGrrrl
quote:
Why are you still posting as if she wasn't already ordered to be disconnected?
Because the OP was posting as if she wasn't already ordered to be disconnected.
quote:
The kid won't be here in a few years.
Another victory for modern medicine.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 12:08 pm to Sentrius
quote:
This where I disagree with you. If there's nothing on the DNR stating that she has no problem with being taken off life support and letting a clearly viable fetus die because she is brain dead. That's basically aborting a viable fetus and IMO only the mother has the right to abort the fetus. Nobody else should hold that right for her even when she's brain dead, not the state or next of kin.
If there's nothing on the DNR stating otherwise, the fetus needs to be protected since it would be clearly viable.
Yep. We disagree.
If I say "DNR"...it is on ME to have any caveat or codicil that modifies it.
Otherwise, if I die...those "systems" I support with my life / energy go with me.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 12:09 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Sentrius
Thank you for your contributions and getting this out of a pro-life, pro-choice rut
Just for clarification, are you saying a clearly viable fetus as in the fetus is already at 25 weeks when the mother dies, or do you mean the fetus has not suffered any setbacks from the mother's death and will soon be viable for a c-section?
Posted on 1/28/14 at 12:34 pm to MrTide33
quote:
clearly viable fetus as in the fetus is already at 25 weeks when the mother dies
Should be the rule of law, but I'd up that a few more weeks.
quote:
the fetus has not suffered any setbacks from the mother's death and will soon be viable for a c-section
This would require very extraordinary evidence that the fetus has suffered no harm and if brought to viability would not be deformed and have a potentially brutal short life span.
I don't think that's possible but I'm not qualified to opine on that medically.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 12:37 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Sentrius
Appreciate it
Posted on 1/28/14 at 1:05 pm to offshoretrash
quote:
I don't know why you call them "obssessed whackjobs"? If it was my wife and child I would do everything possible to see that the child lived. She is dead nothing is gonna change that but there is a possibility of the baby living why not try? This has been done before.
Because they are. Within this very thread.
And you miss the point. The husband, the family and the dead woman had all made the decision that there would be no life support. It's not what they wanted. Their choice was being taken by an out of control government full of obsessed whackjobs who only care about life as long as it is inside of a womb.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 1:18 pm to asurob1
quote:
obsessed whackjobs who only care about life as long as it is inside of a womb.
You should really abandon this idiotic stance.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 2:09 pm to thetempleowl
quote:
Heck, the higher brain can be dead with the persons brain stem still surviving and they can breathe on their own and their heart can still beat but they are dead.
This is incorrect and a common misconception. A patient can not be diagnosed brain dead if they still have brain stem function. The test that are performed in order to declare brain death include testing of the lower brain stem functions, i.e. respiratory effort.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 2:40 pm to BazookaJoe
quote:
This is incorrect and a common misconception. A patient can not be diagnosed brain dead if they still have brain stem function. The test that are performed in order to declare brain death include testing of the lower brain stem functions, i.e. respiratory effort.
Sorry. You are correct. I meant persistent vegetative state, for which patients are also be removed from life support.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 3:47 pm to thetempleowl
quote:
Sorry. You are correct. I meant persistent vegetative state, for which patients are also be removed from life support.
Pretty rich for a poster trying to break down /interpret what a medical expert(Mcmath's own doctor) is trying to explain to you when you barely understand the difference between death & a vegetative state.
I also don't need you to explain atrophy to me as I have discussed atrophy in other posts regarding these dead women. Since you know more than Mcmath's own Doctor I would like you to break down /interpret what Dr. Arthur Caplan (-Head of the Division or Bioethics at NYU) has to say about Mcmath:
"You can't feed a CORPSE. Are there some living cells in the body?(due to artificial oxygen source) Not all cells die at once. It takes time, but her body will start to breakdown & DECAY. It's a matter of when not whether if"
He goes on "They are trying to ventillate a CORPSE" ,but 'she is going to start decompose'. Caplan goes on to refer to the hospital that took McMath's 'corpse'(after being turned down by sane institutions) in professional terms as "CRAZY".
Since you understand the Doctors words better than themselves I will defer & allow you to interpret his words as well.
Just like no one is called 'heart dead' the term 'brain dead' should be dismissed because it obviously causes far too much confusion.
"Brain death" only refers to the cause of her death it is not implying that their is life any place else. Life , consciousness , our very bring is centered in the brain/brain stem & not muscles/organs like the lungs & heart. Lungs & heart are simply mechanical parts which are being artificially stimulated to mimic breathing/life.
Unless these women were horribly misdiagnosed (we don't fully understand the brain)they are dead & Mcmath was declared dead by the coroner weeks ago.
And to think anyone would like to harvest a fetus inside a slowly decaying corpse is sick. Stephen King mind could not come up with such a twisted ssaga.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:03 pm to sugar71
so who is going to pay for all these babies once born? I dont see the right to lifers opening their pocket book to make sure these babies are safe, once out of the body the pro-lifers dont care, a live born baby does not fit the narrative, only a fetus can, its disgusting and just as immoral as exploiting Newton for gun control.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:03 pm to Sentrius
quote:
IMO only the mother has the right to abort the fetus.
Devil's Advocate time since I don't agree with you nor what I am about to type:
What gives the mother more rights than the father? He is/will be the only living parent thus having 100% responsibility for the child for its lifetime but IYO 0% of the right to choose?
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:05 pm to sugar71
quote:Not sure what all of that means. But, back in the day before laws were written to allow the declaration of brain death, or whatever y'all want to call it, we ventilated patients for years. Everyone knew these patients would not survive without the artificial means of support but keeping patients "alive" for many, many months was quite possible.
Pretty rich for a poster trying to break down /interpret what a medical expert(Mcmath's own doctor) is trying to explain to you when you barely understand the difference between death & a vegetative state.
I also don't need you to explain atrophy to me as I have discussed atrophy in other posts regarding these dead women. Since you know more than Mcmath's own Doctor I would like you to break down /interpret what Dr. Arthur Caplan (-Head of the Division or Bioethics at NYU) has to say about Mcmath:
"You can't feed a CORPSE. Are there some living cells in the body?(due to artificial oxygen source) Not all cells die at once. It takes time, but her body will start to breakdown & DECAY. It's a matter of when not whether if"
He goes on "They are trying to ventillate a CORPSE" ,but 'she is going to start decompose'. Caplan goes on to refer to the hospital that took McMath's 'corpse'(after being turned down by sane institutions) in professional terms as "CRAZY".
Since you understand the Doctors words better than themselves I will defer & allow you to interpret his words as well.
Just like no one is called 'heart dead' the term 'brain dead' should be dismissed because it obviously causes far too much confusion.
"Brain death" only refers to the cause of her death it is not implying that their is life any place else. Life , consciousness , our very bring is centered in the brain/brain stem & not muscles/organs like the lungs & heart. Lungs & heart are simply mechanical parts which are being artificially stimulated to mimic breathing/life.
Unless these women were horribly misdiagnosed (we don't fully understand the brain)they are dead & Mcmath was declared dead by the coroner weeks ago.
And to think anyone would like to harvest a fetus inside a slowly decaying corpse is sick. Stephen King mind could not come up with such a twisted ssaga.
The ones that started to "decompose" would develop sepsis and be dead in a day or three.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:06 pm to sugar71
quote:
Pretty rich for a poster trying to break down /interpret what a medical expert(Mcmath's own doctor) is trying to explain to you when you barely understand the difference between death & a vegetative state.
Sorry. In reality, they are treated very similarly where life extending therapy can be stopped.
quote:
"You can't feed a CORPSE. Are there some living cells in the body?(due to artificial oxygen source) Not all cells die at once. It takes time, but her body will start to breakdown & DECAY. It's a matter of when not whether if"
Sorry if you are a moron and can't understand it. The person is considered brain dead. The patient can be declared dead before the heart stops beating.
However, the simple fact is people live for weeks on supportive measures. Her body will start to break down. Yes. Muscles will atrophy.
However it will not decay. How can you say such stupid things. Signs of life will abound at the cellular level. New cells will be made. Cells will die.
And yes, you can give nutrition to a brain dead person. And yes, they will metabolize it. And yes, they will get rid of waste material. I frankly do not care what one doctor says.
The body will start to break down. The body will develop bed sores because the protective mechanism of the brain is gone. Certain types of bed slow the formation of them. Moving the patient frequently helps prevent this, but they will form.
Though the person is technically dead, their heart can continue to pump till something else does it in. Frequently this is infection from the indwelling tubes, pneumonia, and even the above mentioned bed sores.
Brain dead people have had their bodies kept alive for weeks till they have been removed from machines, been done in by infection, etc.
There is no telling how long a persons body could be kept alive with todays technology.
And yes, I would call the person dead. In that sense, it is a corpse. However many of the organs and systems in that body will work for quite some time till something else does them in.
To say it is decaying is simply theatrical to make a point. It is breaking down. But not decaying.
Decaying is after the body has been dead and can no longer metabolize things, can no longer reproduce at the cellular level, can no longer get nutrients to the individual cells and they die.
I don't understand why I am debating this with you.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:11 pm to sugar71
quote:
And to think anyone would like to harvest a fetus inside a slowly decaying corpse is sick.
Why do you say "harvest a fetus?" To make it sound sicker? I'd call it trying to save every life you can.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:12 pm to MrTide33
quote:
I'd call it trying to save every life you can.
why the world is an unfair place?
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:49 pm to MrTide33
(no message)
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:49 pm to MrTide33
quote:
Why do you say "harvest a fetus?
The truth too much for you?
Does it make you feel better to put a PR spin on it.
Pathetic.
Posted on 1/28/14 at 4:55 pm to asurob1
quote:Crudity contributes nothing to veracity.
The truth too much for you?
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News