Basing its argument on a law protecting the fetus, a hospital is keeping a brain-dead patient alive in opposition to her family’s advice. The case is sparking debate.
Her name is Marlise Munoz, and her case crystallizes both the discussions around abortion and those on ending one’s life in the very conservative [state of] Texas. On Nov. 26, this 33-year-old woman, mother to a little boy and 14 weeks pregnant, collapsed, the victim of a pulmonary embolism. At the John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas, the doctors declared her brain-dead. A month and a half later, Munoz is still in intensive care, being kept alive artificially. The doctors refuse to “disconnect” her against the advice of her family and Munoz’s expressed wish.
The young woman had made it clear to her husband, Erick Munoz, that if anything happened to her, she did not want extraordinary, life-saving measures to be taken, but the hospital says it is complying with the law. Texas is one of 12 American states that prohibit anyone from “stopping or suspending a life-sustaining treatment on a pregnant patient,” regardless of the what stage the pregnancy is in, under an act passed in 1989 and amended in 1999.
Today, Munoz’s fetus is in its 20th week of development. According to the doctors, his heart rate is normal, but, for the young woman’s father:
“That poor fetus had the same lack of oxygen, the same electric shocks, the same chemicals that got her heart going again. For all we know, it’s in the same condition that Marlise is in,” according to his statements to The Dallas Morning News.
Interviewed by many American media,the family has indicated that, in view of the low chances of the fetus’s survival, they wanted to let him die in peace, as well as his mother. The hospital has not indicated whether it is planning on prolonging the pregnancy artificially until delivery by Caesarean section but has discussed this possibility in front of the husband. Physicians should make a decision in February, based on the fetus’s condition at that time.
According to an article in the journal BMC Medicine published in 2010, 12 cases of children born while their mother was in a state of brain death have been reported. It is known that at least six of them have developed normally; there is a lack of data on other cases.
“It’s about a matter of our daughter’s wishes not being honored by the state of Texas.”
The case has re-activated the bioethics debate on ending one’s life and the right of women to abortion, which is very limited in Texas and the subject of a constant battle between Republicans and Democrats. Some “pro-choice” people remind us that at this stage in her pregnancy, Munoz would have been able to assert her constitutional right to an abortion. The “pro-life” contingent says that the fetus is a person, who has the right to life.
“The law can make a woman stay alive to gestate the fetus,” confirms Katherine A. Taylor, a lawyer specializing in bioethics at Drexel University in Philadelphia, to The New York Times, while stressing that “these laws essentially deny women rights that are given others to direct their health care in advance and determine how they want to die.” Several experts in bioethics nevertheless consider that the hospital made an error in interpretation: According to them, Munoz is not terminally ill but technically dead, and her case is therefore not subject to this law.
“This is not a question of pro-choice and pro-life,” says Munoz’s mother. “It’s about a matter of our daughter’s wishes not being honored by the state of Texas.” The family is planning to rely on a lawyer, who would bring the matter to justice.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.