Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

  1. #1
    RZ Chamber of Commerce Unassisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    13,439

    Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

    It seemed to me like this story from Houston is far more momentous than the Schiavo case, but the media around the country has barely touched it. I've heard it played in the media as "Hospital removes baby from life support because family can't pay for care." It was also mentioned in the mainstream media outlet where I heard the story that the law which enabled the hospital to do this was passed under Governor George W. Bush's administration. Ironic?

    As the headline says, this is the first instance of a court allowing the removal of life support against the wishes of the family.

    Family handout
    Wanda Hudson holds her son, Sun, whose illness was characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs that were too small, doctors say.
    Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube

    Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care

    By LEIGH HOPPER
    Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle


    The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips.

    "I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive."

    Wanda Hudson ,
    mother of Sun Hudson


    Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.

    "I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months. ... They made a terrible mistake."

    Sun's death marks the first time a U.S. judge has allowed a hospital to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts. A similar case involving a 68-year-old man in a vegetative state at another Houston hospital is before a court now.

    "It's sad this thing dragged on for so long. We all feel it's unfair, that a child doesn't have a chance to develop and thrive," said William Winslade, a bioethicist and lawyer who is a professor at the Institute for the Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Paraphrasing the late Catholic theologian and ethicist Richard McCormick, Winslade added, "This isn't murder. It's mercy, and it's appropriate to be merciful in that way. It's not killing, it's stopping pointless treatment."

    The hospital's description of Sun that he was motionless and sedated for comfort has differed sharply from the mother's. Since February, the hospital has blocked the media from Hudson's invitation to see the baby, citing privacy concerns.

    "I wanted y'all to see my son for yourself," Hudson told reporters. "So you could see he was actually moving around. He was conscious."

    On Feb. 16, Harris County Probate Court Judge William C. McCulloch made the landmark decision to lift restrictions preventing Texas Children's from discontinuing care. However, an appeal by Hudson's attorney, Mario Caballero, and a procedural error on McCulloch's part prevented the hospital from acting for four weeks.

    Texas law allows hospitals to discontinue life-sustaining care, even if a patient's family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.

    Texas Children's said it contacted 40 facilities with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun. Without legal delays, Sun's care would have ended Nov. 28.

    Sun was born with a fatal form of dwarfism characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs too tiny, doctors said. Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth, genetic counselors say.

    Sun was delivered full term at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, but Hudson, 33, said she had no prenatal care during which his condition might have been discovered.

    He was put on a ventilator while doctors figured out what was wrong with him, and Hudson refused when doctors recommended withdrawing treatment.

    Texas Children's contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator.

    Another case involving a patient on life support a 68-year-old man in a chronic vegetative state whose family wants to stop St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital from turning off his ventilator was scheduled to be heard Tuesday by the Houston-based 1st Court of Appeals. But the case was transferred to the 14th Court of Appeals, which promptly issued a temporary injunction ordering St. Luke's not to remove the man's life support. No hearing date has been set.

    Last edited by Unassisted; 03-22-2005 at 10:30 PM.
    /r/reds

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,460

    Re: Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

    Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth, genetic counselors say.
    That's really all that needs to be said.

    And this is just stupid:

    Sun was delivered full term at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, but Hudson, 33, said she had no prenatal care during which his condition might have been discovered.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  4. #3
    RZ Chamber of Commerce Unassisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    13,439

    Re: Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    That's really all that needs to be said.

    And this is just stupid:
    Obviously, there's poverty involved, since she can't afford the medical care. She may have been in denial about the pregnancy, too, which explains the lack of prenatal care. I'm just bothered that the hospital, aided by the courts, effectively strong-armed this woman into removing her baby from life-support.
    /r/reds

  5. #4
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,460

    Re: Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

    She may have been in denial about the pregnancy, too, which explains the lack of prenatal care.
    If that's the case then it's hard to understand why she's so upset about the hospital ending treatment. And if she's poor enough then Medicare would have covered her prenatal care.

    Maybe I'm being too cynical here, it's entirely possible.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  6. #5
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,602

    Re: Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

    This is not analogous to the Schiavo case, IMO. Life support for breathing is totally different from refusing to feed someone who is breathing and heart is beating on their own. Removing life support against the family's wishes seems to me admitting that this patient is not medically alive. I don't see it as being directly about money.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  7. #6
    Member Red Heeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    1,658

    Re: Baby Dies After Hospital Removes Breathing Tube Against Mom's Wishes

    Quote Originally Posted by Unassisted
    I'm just bothered that the hospital, aided by the courts, effectively strong-armed this woman into removing her baby from life-support.
    The baby had no chance of survival, and the mother could not pay to extend the life-support. I see no obligation for the hospital to continue treatment.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25