It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Husband of Pregnant Brain Dead Woman Who is on Life Support, Sues Hospital

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 11:56 AM

But anyways, to answer your question ... the wait in the USA was WAY too long.
There is a shortage of babies for adoption.

Thanks for the answer. I never would have guessed that given how many families I see who don't appear to want the children they are raising.

posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 12:25 PM
reply to post by FlyersFan

I have a question, if anyone has an answer...
There are hormones crucial to pregnancy. The pituitary gland (in the brain) sends messages for hormone production/release. If the woman is brain-dead, how is the pregnancy even able to continue? I would have thought that the circulation of blood would not be enough. Chemicals governed by the brain are also needed.

posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 12:26 PM
reply to post by new_here

Good question!! Perhaps the fetus stimulates the hormones/autonomic nervous system????


Again, this suggests that "brain-dead" doesn't necessarily = DEAD dead.

posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 12:43 PM
As long as the hospital was willing to eat the medical bills from the moment the husband said take her off life support, then sure let them keep her "alive". I would not pay one cent of the bills if they were the ones keeping her "on tap" so to say. Life support is expensive. My father was in a coma for 19 days and it was wicked expensive. I could see a hospital administrator seeing her being pregnant as way to bump up the cost and make a few extra bucks.

Not trying to be mean, just trying to see it from another point of view.

posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 03:16 PM
We are all speculating on the condition of the foetus and therefor blind to the full

prognosis, which the father will be privy to.

To those who would have the baby regardless of the state or condition, please answer

me this.

I have a 27 year old grandson who is autistic .... and functional, but he is totally

unable to live alone, has no idea of danger. To all outward appearances he seems


He is a lovely young man and enjoys the life he has. Now here is the quandary for

my daughter - who will care for him when she is no longer here? She has been fierce

in her protection of his vulnerability having read of the types of things that can

happen to those who are totally dependant and don't have a 'voice'. She has said

to me (and I don't blame her although my heart bleeds I won't be around to help)

" When I know my time is near we will take something together) I have a lump in

my throat as I type this ..... but I understand.

So however good the fathers intentions may be and he may succeed in giving the

child a reasonable life ... when the father dies who will care for the child who is

now a fully grown adult?

Its hard, very hard but ... Sometimes loving means letting go

posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 08:40 PM
I will always ALWAYS vote on the side of life....

Imagine what a douche bag this father is going to feel like if his child ends up being born completely healthy.

posted on Jan, 16 2014 @ 08:57 PM
While reading this i was thinking of my pregnancies & havin had 4D ultrasound scans done @ 20 weeks and seeing how the baby really is a little baby then kicking around sucking its thumb etc with a little mind of its own it instantly made me wonder how anyone could want to pull the plug on both their wife & unborn baby, maybe he needs to be showed an ultrasound to realise that its a real baby in there is it their first child? Maybe having not been through it before and being a man who arent usually instantly maternal and dont realise all them things maybe he just needs that realisation i dont know i would really hope my partner would choose to let our baby go full term to me thats murder what he is trying to do and i strongly disagree with it. Very heartbreaking it should be such a happy time for her aswell.

posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 03:48 PM
reply to post by FlyersFan

This is just another example of the state treating a woman's body as a vessel instead of her body.

If someone says they want taken off of life support then pregnant or not they should be taken off life support. A pregnancy is a part of a woman's body and the only one who should decide what happens to that woman's body is her. That includes whether she wants to continue hosting a pregnancy, being taken off life support, or anything else pertaining to HER body.

That's all I'm going to comment on.

posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 04:09 PM
I was looking up some Roman laws for a different purpose, and came across this one attributed to the king Numa Pompilius;

12. – A royal law forbids the burial of a pregnant woman before the child is extracted from the womb. Whoever violates this law is deemed to have destroyed the child's expectancy of life along with the mother.

The same point that you're making, I think.

edit on 19-1-2014 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 05:03 PM
I dont think im in any position to judge this man - Im only grateful that I and many other's stand a good chance of never being in his situation. I hope whatever happens, he comes to terms with what life has thrown at him and find's his own little piece of happiness.

posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by FlyersFan

Windword has a thread about this and according to her article the mother had a brain embolism when she was found she was blue they didn't give her oxygen until she arrived at the hospital. The minimum time I am thinking that there was no oxygen going to the fetus would be 20 - 40 minutes maximum could be close to an hour.

The article states the husbands concern is that the fetus was harmed due to lack of oxygen and fears that even if the baby survives there will be serious health problems.

Doctors typically can't detect such problems till 24 weeks long past the 20 week ban. They should respect the family wishes.

original thread

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 07:31 AM

I will always ALWAYS vote on the side of life....

Imagine what a douche bag this father is going to feel like if his child ends up being born completely healthy.

And now that we know that there is zero chance for a completely healthy birth?

Attorneys: Brain-dead woman's fetus 'abnormal'

"According to the medical records we have been provided, the fetus is distinctly abnormal," the attorneys said. "Even at this early stage, the lower extremities are deformed to the extent that the gender cannot be determined." The attorneys said the fetus also has fluid building up inside the skull and possibly has a heart problem. "Quite sadly, this information is not surprising due to the fact that the fetus, after being deprived of oxygen for an indeterminate length of time, is gestating within a dead and deteriorating body, as a horrified family looks on in absolute anguish, distress and sadness," the attorneys said.

The only douches here are the wannabe Dr. Frankenstiens.

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 08:12 AM
i am appalled to learn that both of these "EMTs" failed to establish EOL directives that would resolve this situation without the fuss.

i'm equally dismayed that the rights of the living are continuously subverted by administrative policy while the wishes of the 'patient' and family were definitive, articulated and specific. (no artificial life-support)

as a woman and parent, armed with the knowledge of extended oxygen deprivation during the first trimester, there is no chance that i would endorse bringing this fetus to term.

this, is a decision for the 'father' and none other.
may his wishes be honored.

reading the update, knowing that the fetus is mal-formed, likely mal-nourished and has been accompanied by death for months on end, the best way to love it is to let it go.

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 09:53 AM
So why is this still being discussed? Not here - I mean in real life.

It was proven the child is (at the very least) not healthy - something the father probably knew for a while. He's been through enough, including being vilified...let his family do what they feel is right to do already. And then leave him alone!

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 10:04 AM
reply to post by RedParrotHead

You are so right. Now that we know the child is very very abnormal there is no reason for further discussion.

My turning point on "all abortion is bad" was a real life experience I had when it was illegal.

My husband was in seminary and the wife of another seminary student found out that her unborn baby had no brain. It would likely live only minutes before dying after birth because it was only the mother's "life support" that was keeping the baby alive. She was not allowed to have an abortion and was forced to carry the baby to term.

I still don't believe in abortion as birth control, but there are circumstances that out of compassion for others it should be done. The same with allowing God (or nature as you believe) to take his/its course by removing the woman from life support.

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 10:08 AM

reply to post by FlyersFan

Hmmm. Tricky one indeed. I've been sort of following this story, but hadn't read details on it.

As you said: "Why?" would he want to lose the baby too? Although s/he is probably likely to survive if taken by Cesarean Section and put in a NICU, what then? Does the Dad not want to have to raise the child himself? Perhaps it isn't his baby???

I dunno. Something fishy about this.

As for 'brain dead' vs 'dead' - I'm beginning to have my doubts about all that. I've seen reports that 'brain-dead' people who are 'organ donors' are often 'harvested' without anesthetic - but - do we know FOR SURE that the patient "feels nothing"?

Also, how did she 'fall unconscious'? I suppose I should read up on the case - to find out more.


YUP...fishy indeed. This is from the article:
"Munoz found his wife unconscious in the early morning on Nov. 26. The family says it doesn’t know the exact cause of her condition, though a pulmonary embolism is a possibility. Marlise Munoz was 14 weeks pregnant at the time."

Is the situation being investigated at all? Paramedics have extensive medical fact, not much difference between a Paramedic and a PA (I'm not talking about EMT's...paramedics have EXTENSIVE medical training). No one cares about this viable infant...not even HER parents?
At the end of the day...this woman's family just...
wants her and that baby dead.
I can see of the woman was suffering from some terrible disease or injury...but she didn't. She just "passed out".

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 11:02 AM
reply to post by AFewGoodWomen

Once she is taken off life support her body will die and then they can do an autopsy. I'd bet it shows some natural yet undetectable reason for her death. People do "just collapse" and die...seemingly in perfect health - but they're not.

If there was any "foul play" they'll find it in the autopsy.

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 11:08 AM


Even if that something is a lifelong burden? I dont mean to sound cruel but practical here. It isnt cheap to take care of a child with severe neurological impairments.

- We dont know if any damage was done to the baby.
- The studies from previous pregnant brain dead women show most babies were born okay and lived normal lives.
- If the husband doesn't want the child then place the child up for adoption. Our daughter is adopted. There is a waiting list a mile long for domestic adoptions. People want babies.

Correction. People want to adopt healthy white babies. Everyone else is shuffling around the system.

posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 10:24 AM
reply to post by Honor93

i am appalled to learn that both of these "EMTs" failed to establish EOL directives that would resolve this situation without the fuss.

It wouldn't have mattered.

"Section 166.049 Pregnant Patients. A person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment under this subchapter from a pregnant patient," the code reads.

Even more, in a health directive form found under the Health and Safety Code, it reads, "I understand under Texas law this directive has no effect if I have been diagnosed as pregnant."

i'm equally dismayed that the rights of the living are continuously subverted by administrative policy while the wishes of the 'patient' and family were definitive, articulated and specific. (no artificial life-support)


posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 10:31 AM
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

it's because everybody wants a newborn, children from the age of about 4 or 4 have practically no chance of being adopted.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in