Clinicaly dead pregnant woman on life support

Sala

I think some people think I am arguing against their right to bodily integrity, I'm not. I am fully pro choice and as a woman of childbearing age I find it horrendous that I live in a country where I have little to know rights over my own body if it's pregnant. That said, in advance of repealing the 8th (which will happen eventually, but not soon I think) we can legislate.

Putting my legal hat on, I think the " right to life of the unborn" gets more weight than "guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."
It is the interpretation of respect, practicable and vindicate that are open to interpretation and I think medical professionals should be able to make a medical decision without fear. In this case and the Halappanavar case it is certainly arguable that it was not practicable to vindicate the right to life of the unborn. We could certainly legislate in a way that is not unconstitutional but still gives more power to the individual and their medical advisers

amdublin

oceanclub wrote: »

Does anyone know is this the first ever case of a pregnant woman dying on life support? If not, then why is this the first case in which the woman was kept on life support to bring the foetus to term?

Interesting point

Sala

oceanclub wrote: »

Does anyone know is this the first ever case of a pregnant woman dying on life support? If not, then why is this the first case in which the woman was kept on life support to bring the foetus to term?

P.

No it's not the first. Maybe the first in Ireland? But there was one recently http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2880661/Mother-declared-clinically-dead-October-gives-birth-healthy-baby-boy-nine-weeks-later-doctors-kept-life-support-machine-saved-child.html (apologies for linking the daily mail!)

Sala

Also in Texas http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/27/us/texas-hospital-to-end-life-support-for-pregnant-brain-dead-woman.html?_r=0

Shrap

Sala wrote: »

I think some people think I am arguing against their right to bodily integrity

Certainly not me. I hear you loud and clear.

We could certainly legislate in a way that is not unconstitutional but still gives more power to the individual and their medical advisers

But if I have to vote for another amendment to the amendment, I will surely puke. Christ, the anger I have over this increases year on year. I take your point though.

Stheno

oceanclub wrote: »

Does anyone know is this the first ever case of a pregnant woman dying on life support? If not, then why is this the first case in which the woman was kept on life support to bring the foetus to term?

P.

No two other cases in Waterford and I think Galway were cited today where pregnant women were kept on life support but both foeti died within two weeks.

In one of the cases the then AG Micheal McDowell advised that there was no eight amendment issues and the case did not go to court.

Sala wrote: »

I think some people think I am arguing against their right to bodily integrity, I'm not. I am fully pro choice and as a woman of childbearing age I find it horrendous that I live in a country where I have little to know rights over my own body if it's pregnant. That said, in advance of repealing the 8th (which will happen eventually, but not soon I think) we can legislate.

Putting my legal hat on, I think the " right to life of the unborn" gets more weight than "guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."
It is the interpretation of respect, practicable and vindicate that are open to interpretation and I think medical professionals should be able to make a medical decision without fear. In this case and the Halappanavar case it is certainly arguable that it was not practicable to vindicate the right to life of the unborn. We could certainly legislate in a way that is not unconstitutional but still gives more power to the individual and their medical advisers

I'm going to be very pedantic here and suggest that we need to legislate for the families also, this poor individual who is dead has no power whatsoever in this case, and instead is being artifically maintained with multiple treatments, pumps, feeding tubes etc while brain dead.

Of all our politicians I would hope Veradkar might build on his statement earlier this week to progress the abortion issue.

Even the archbishop of Dublin came out today and said that women should not be treated as incubators.

gctest50

oceanclub wrote: »

Does anyone know is this the first ever case of a pregnant woman dying on life support? If not, then why is this the first case in which the woman was kept on life support to bring the foetus to term?

P.

a few

In May 2001, a woman who was 14 weeks pregnant and suffered a brain haemorrhage was taken to hospital in Waterford, where she was placed on life support but declared brain dead. Life support was maintained while legal advice was sought, but after two weeks the foetus died and the machine was switched off.

In a second incident, at University Hospital Galway in 2003, a 26-year-old woman presented with a headache and her condition deteriorated over a number of days until, following two series of brainstem tests, she was declared brain dead. As the woman was 13 weeks pregnant, the hospital put her on life support, but eight days later the foetal heartbeat stopped.

In the 2001 Waterford case, the then attorney general, Michael McDowell, refused to become a party to High Court proceedings seeking a court order to continue life support for the brain dead woman.

Mr McDowell told the hospital that he was not of the view that a court order would be necessary before the life support could be withdrawn.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/medics-called-for-guidelines-after-two-previous-cases-1.2046848

Dreannz

When I heard this first I had no facts and thought there might have been a chance. But I have completely changed my mind now that the reality has been made public by the doctors. The family should be given peace and let their daughter rest in peace,I can't imagine what they are facing as each day passes.

Stheno

Dreannz wrote: »

When I heard this first I had no facts and thought there might have been a chance. But I have completely changed my mind now that the reality has been made public by the doctors. The family should be given peace and let their daughter rest in peace,I can't imagine what they are facing as each day passes.

Just last week I had conversations with work colleagues who were parents and none of us could understand what the issue was, given that we all assumed the lady was in a coma and could just stay in the coma until the foetus was viable.

Like others on here, reading the reports today was truly shocking, and I now would be in favour of turning off the machines. God love that family enduring this trauma at the moment, the poor children most of all with their visit, imagine that being their last image of their mam

flunkyfearsome

amdublin wrote: »

It is beyond sad. Apparently she is actually.

Yes I've read that too, its absolutely horrendous situation, she has left behind 2 kids and had she the scans(CT/MRI) afforded to a woman who was not pregnant she'd still be here.

Stheno

Shrap wrote: »

But if I have to vote for another amendment to the amendment, I will surely puke. Christ, the anger I have over this increases year on year. I take your point though.

This is actually one of the very few areas of politics law that get me engaged, I remember voting in the early nineties on this, and over twenty five years later this **** is still happening

mrbike

There simply is no way to legislate for these tragic cases. The highest law in the land states that from the moment of conception a foetus has exactly the same right to life as the woman bearing that foetus. That's where the problem lies.

I'm less pessimistic about the 8th amendment being repealed.

In a recent poll, 67% were in favour of a liberalisation of our existing laws. There is simply no way to do that when the 8th amendment is in place.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/majority-of-voters-want-abortion-law-liberalised-1.1961142

I hate to be discussing the legal situation, but frankly this tragic case makes me sick to my stomach. I'm ashamed to live in a country that continues to do these awful things to our mothers, sisters and daughters.

Shrap

Dreannz wrote: »

When I heard this first I had no facts and thought there might have been a chance. But I have completely changed my mind now that the reality has been made public by the doctors. The family should be given peace and let their daughter rest in peace,I can't imagine what they are facing as each day passes.

I'm sorry now, but when you say you had no facts, you probably had the same as the rest of us. a) The woman had died b) The life support machines were continuing to try and keep the foetus alive against the wishes of the family and c) That the machines were not switched off was because the 8th amendment requires doctors to go against their own judgement and seek legal advice.

Some people don't see the potential of the foetus as more important than the well being of born people.

I'm not trying to offend you, but a foetus is more expendable in real life crisis in nearly every other country in the world, and there are an infinite number of real life reasons why this is the case. Here, we pretend our foetuses are as important as our women until they leave the country for an abortion. You must have known that.

pmasterson95

The idea that a woman can be a woman up until the point sperm meets egg and she becomes an incubator and the foetus takes precedence over the own womans body and she has no control over how her own body is treated I always found incredibly stupid. The fact that even in death a woman is still secondary to the foetus is utterly barbaric and prehistoric...

Sala

Shrap wrote: »

I'm sorry now, but when you say you had no facts, you probably had the same as the rest of us. a) The woman had died b) The life support machines were continuing to try and keep the foetus alive against the wishes of the family and c) That the machines were not switched off was because the 8th amendment requires doctors to go against their own judgement and seek legal advice.
.

Whn I first heard it my first thought was why is it in court, she has died, surely it has to be the choice of the next of kin?? I obviously forgot where I live momentarily

Stheno

Sala wrote: »

Whn I first heard it my first thought was why is it in court, she has died, surely it has to be the choice of the next of kin?? I obviously forgot where I live momentarily

I too would genuinely have thought that given the foetus was unviable at the point of death of the mother that this would have been the case.

professore

Initially i thought she should have been left on life support thinking it to be like a coma, but having heard the medics opinion on the news today I have changed my mind. Since the chance of the child being viable and healthy is small, and the mum is already decaying, they should switch off the life support.

volchitsa

Shrap wrote: »

I'm sorry now, but when you say you had no facts, you probably had the same as the rest of us. a) The woman had died b) The life support machines were continuing to try and keep the foetus alive against the wishes of the family and c) That the machines were not switched off was because the 8th amendment requires doctors to go against their own judgement and seek legal advice.

Some people don't see the potential of the foetus as more important than the well being of born people.

I'm not trying to offend you, but a foetus is more expendable in real life crisis in nearly every other country in the world, and there are an infinite number of real life reasons why this is the case. Here, we pretend our foetuses are as important as our women until they leave the country for an abortion. You must have known that.

Yes, agreed. Until people stop assuming that they have the right to tell families (or women) what to do with their own lives, this sort of total misjudgment of people's personal situations will happen regularly.

The family wanted the life support switched off, and unless there was some reason to think the family were irresponsible, that should have been enough for the rest of us. We shouldn't have needed to have such private information, and it shouldn't have had to be made public. It's an unwarranted intrusion. And I would say the same about abortion, tbh. We don't live in other people's lives, and we should leave them to sort out their own tragedies, unless there is some reason for social services etc to get involved.

Sala

mrbike wrote: »

There simply is no way to legislate for these tragic cases. The highest law in the land states that from the moment of conception a foetus has exactly the same right to life as the woman bearing that foetus. That's where the problem lies.

I'm less pessimistic about the 8th amendment being repealed.

In a recent poll, 67% were in favour of a liberalisation of our existing laws. There is simply no way to do that when the 8th amendment is in place.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/majority-of-voters-want-abortion-law-liberalised-1.1961142

I hate to be discussing the legal situation, but frankly this tragic case makes me sick to my stomach. I'm ashamed to live in a country that continues to do these awful things to our mothers, sisters and daughters.

I think the way it will be portrayed is what makes me pessimistic. Asking people do they agree with a woman's right to choice over her own body sounds different to asking people do they want to withdraw constitutional protection for the unborn. I am all for repealing it, I just envisage a massive dirty battle to get there, and am not confident it would pass. I know I've said it before but the closest fought referendum was divorce - that is the type of voters out there

volchitsa

professore wrote: »

Initially i thought she should have been left on life support thinking it to be like a coma, but having heard the medics opinion on the news today I have changed my mind. Since the chance of the child being viable and healthy is small, and the mum is already decaying, they should switch off the life support.

It doesn't matter that you have changed your mind, what matters is what the 8th amendment says. And it says that the fetus cannot be destroyed no matter how small its chances of being healthy.

Stheno

Sala wrote: »

I think the way it will be portrayed is what makes me pessimistic. Asking people do they agree with a woman's right to choice over her own body sounds different to asking people do they want to withdraw constitutional protection for the unborn. I am all for repealing it, I just envisage a massive dirty battle to get there, and am not confident it would pass. I know I've said it before but the closest fought referendum was divorce - that is the type of voters out there

I do wonder though, that was nearly twenty years ago, I was in my very early twenties at the time, and between that and the abortion referendum in 1992, remember travelling a fair distance for both to vote as I was strongly in favour of both.

It might sound like ancient history but young people at the time felt strongly about both and turned out in high enough numbers to vote. And the twelveth Amendement was also defeated

Twenty years on, we've a different demographic, and quite frankly, what was revealed in the High Court today about the condition of that poor woman is stomach churning

From personal experience, in my early forties, and childless, I cannot have a tubal ligation as the medical profession here frown on childless women having one, it's ridiculous.

Shrap

volchitsa wrote: »

It doesn't matter that you have changed your mind, what matters is what the 8th amendment says. And it says that the fetus cannot be destroyed no matter how small its chances of being healthy.

Unless it is not considered to be practicable to keep it alive, which in Ireland either means putting a family through immense and horrific trauma until the court says stop, or just as far as the airport/boat to England.

gctest50

mrbike wrote: »

There simply is no way to legislate for these tragic cases. ............

yes there is - fully legalise abortion

Stheno

volchitsa wrote: »

It doesn't matter that you have changed your mind, what matters is what the 8th amendment says. And it says that the fetus cannot be destroyed no matter how small its chances of being healthy.

Someone earlier quoted a supreme court ruling which allowed withdrawal of treatment rather than provision of treatment as acceptable under the law.

gctest50 wrote: »

yes there is - fully legalise abortion

Not going to happen in your or mine lifetimes tbh, our politicians are too afraid of the topic.

Sala

Shrap wrote: »

Unless it is not considered to be practicable to keep it alive, which in Ireland either means putting a family through immense and horrific trauma until the court says stop, or just as far as the airport/boat to England.

You see, I think we can legislate to make the "practicable" element a matter for the doctors not the courts. The HSE are arguing in court it is not practicable in this case.. therefore they shouldn't really be in court, it's the lack of clarity and the fear that has them seeking the direction of the court. In the absence of or prior to repealing the 8th amendment (which won't solve our issues, we will still need legislation or abortion will still be illegal for the most part) we should have some legislation that empowers medical professional to make the decisions they need to make

Stheno

Sala wrote: »

You see, I think we can legislate to make the "practicable" element a matter for the doctors not the courts. The HSE are arguing in court it is not practicable in this case.. therefore they shouldn't really be in court, it's the lack of clarity and the fear that has them seeking the direction of the court. In the absence of or prior to repealing the 8th amendment (which won't solve our issues, we will still need legislation or abortion will still be illegal for the most part) we should have some legislation that empowers medical professional to make the decisions they need to make

Being very cynical I actually think it is the more senior ranks of our medical profession who hold strong religious beliefs who may stymie this by challenging such decisions every time

mrbike

This says it all really:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/scale-of-tragedy-depth-of-distress-too-big-to-process-1.2048031

Doctors were sitting down trying to figure out the 8th amendment. They weren't sure about the legal standing. Then they had to explain to the family why they couldn't switch off the life support...

lazygal

Stheno wrote: »

Being very cynical I actually think it is the more senior ranks of our medical profession who hold strong religious beliefs who may stymie this by challenging such decisions every time

Not completely unbelievable given the symphisiotomy scandal and the dearth of doctors willing to sterilize women who haven't had children. Also hospitals have a religious ethos in many cases, meaning priests and nuns decided to decline cancer drug trials because women would've had to go on the pill.

Stheno

mrbike wrote: »

This says it all really:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/scale-of-tragedy-depth-of-distress-too-big-to-process-1.2048031

Doctors were sitting down trying to figure out the 8th amendment. They weren't sure about the legal standing. Then they had to explain to the family why they couldn't switch off the life support...

That article is probably one of the worst to read due to the sheer confusion and raw emotion it conveys.

Annabella1

Seven medical consultants all agree that this should proceed no more