Skip to main content

View Diary: Forced-birthers continue to maintain delusion that a brain-dead woman is only in a coma (62 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  She is and was dead. (51+ / 0-)

    Not disabled, not even "brain dead". Her medulla oblongata wasn't functioning. The hospital began her on a ventilator after she had been dead for an indeterminate amount of time. Though she was dead and everybody agreed she was dead, they never removed her from it. Then, when "life support" was terminated, she stopped breathing immediately. Even in the two news stories I read about it, both were phrased in such a way as to remove ambiguity. The articles said that the "body" was disconnected from life support and released to Erick Munoz. None of the usual "time of death" pronouncements, none of the dramatic "last gasps", etc. Why? Because she was already DEAD! Deceased. Expired. She had been declared dead by that hospital  months before. What they then did was to gruesomely and ghoulishly desecrate her body for two months. This is why the fetus was non viable, with a liquified brain and mortifying extremities: because it, too was dead. If she had been merely "brain dead" or in a vegetative state, removing the life support would just mean that she would expire when malnutrition and dehydration occur but in this case, it was as simple as removing the life support and releasing the body. So let's be very clear here; this wasn't at all a grey area or open to interpretation. She would not have even had a semblance of "life" without the ventilator and other equipment. She wouldn't just be considered dead in Texas or even dead in Texas and some other states. She fit the criteria for being dead everywhere.
    This is not to criticize the post, I've recommended it. But it's very important to be clear. The right wing always defines the terms of everything they address. Everything. Evolution, climate change, everything they address they first set the parameters of the conversation. That is the only way their hysterics sound in any way justified. It's time to stop them doing it. We should not be placed on the defensive again while they get away with arguing absurdities. They set the terms of the conversation and then everybody focuses on the bullshit details rather than how asinine their position is. Poor Marlise Munoz died that night at the end of November and then the hospital desecrated her corpse because somebody on the board is probably considering a run for office. Don't cede anything to them. She was dead everywhere.

    "Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for a real Republican every time." Harry Truman

    by MargaretPOA on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 04:38:23 PM PST

    •  brain death IS death (18+ / 0-)

      Brain dead IS dead in the US, except in New Jersey (where you astonishingly can get a religious exemption).

      No reason to put "merely" in front of brain dead or to put it in a sentence that seems to compare it to a vegetative state.

      Her time of death had nothing to do with the time of removal of ventilator, you are correct.

      You seem to be confusing brain death with forms of severe brain damage.

      For no brain dead person is it true that "removing the life support would just mean that she would expire when malnutrition and dehydration occur but in this case". Never. None.

      Brain death requires failing an apnea test. Someone who breathes when taken off of a ventilator isn't brain dead.

      The plural of anecdote is not data.

      by Skipbidder on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 04:57:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I wondred about that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        thanatokephaloides, jan4insight

        The parents of the poor girl who died after a tonsillectomy wanted a court order to force the hospital to insert a feeding tube, which I have read will not forestall the inevitable physical decay that continues to progress.

        So what happens to the fluids and nutrients they are apparently now pumping into their dead daughter? Can the body do anything with it, and if so, how, if the brain is dead? Is there some part of the brain that continues to control autonomic function?

        I know the definiton of brain death involves whether someone tries to draw a breath when disconnected from life support. People in vegetative states do try to breathe, which is an indication of brain function. But if you do not have enough autonomic function to try to breathe, how can your body do anything with food or fluids?

        **Electing Republicans to the government is like hiring pyromaniacs as firemen. They all just want to see everything burn to the ground.**

        by CatM on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 05:39:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is entirely artificial (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BlackSheep1, Penny GC

          The medical equipment is forcing it all through, as if one is a machine. The brain ceases to preserve autonomic nervous system functions, but the machines do all of the mechanical work. The extent to which the body can do anything with fluids and nutrients seems to be how rigorous the medical intervention is, but I think it is unknown just how long such conditions could be extended because we do not have many cases in which there is an effort to keep a whole-brain death person alive for an extended period of time. Hence, the feeling amongst many people that this was an attempt at a barbaric medical experiment. Why keep a person alive who could never breathe on their own? To birth a baby is the answer of these freaks, apparently.

    •  Wow. Tell it, sister. (10+ / 0-)

      You have said so very well...keep saying it. The obscenity is "life support" applied to a corpse, to keep growing a fetus that could never develop into a fully functioning human being. The logical and foreseeable result of all this rhetoric, indeed.

      You can observe a lot just by watching. - Yogi Berra

      by kayak58 on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 05:15:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  And you can't "treat" a corpse (14+ / 0-)

      The law in Texas, horrifying as it is, is about the removal of treatment, but one cannot treat a dead body. All one can do is keep the blood circulating and oxygen/carbon dioxide exchange continuing, typically only for long enough to harvest organs for transplantation. It's not meant for the amount of time since this woman died, and it is absolutely not surprising that it provided no help to the fetus.

      A government that denies gay men the right to bridal registry is a fascist state - Margaret Cho

      by CPT Doom on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 05:27:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A week ago yesterday (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ahianne, BlackSheep1, Penny GC

      my beloved 85 year old uncle, who was taking blood thinners, fell and hit his head. He was conscious for a few minutes after the fall, but then he collapsed. EMT arrived within minutes and immediately upon arriving at the ER, he was placed on a ventilator.

      It was only afterwards that it was determined that he had suffered a massive cerebral hemorrhage, exacerbated by the blood thinners. And because of the blood thinners, he could not be operated on. The next day, the hospital began testing his brain function and determined that he was brain dead.

      I saw my uncle in this condition, before the ventilator was disconnected. It was terrible. I can't adequately describe what it did to my aunt and cousin and mother to see him like that. I cannot imagine what their agony -- or mine -- would have been like if the hospital had insisted on keeping him in that condition for months.

      I was angry about what that hospital did to the Munoz family before my uncle's accident and death. Now that I've experienced a bit -- just a bit -- of what they went through, my anger knows no bounds.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site