Brain-dead pregnant woman’s life support can be switched off, Irish court rules

[Medusa Cascade]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...t-switched-off

Ireland’s high court has ruled that doctors can switch off the life support machine of a brain dead woman who is 18 weeks pregnant.

The landmark judgment is a serious challenge to the Irish constitution which gives a mother and an unborn child equal rights.

On Friday the three judges, Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns, Ms Justice Marie Baker and Ms Justice Caroline Costello, granted the woman’s family’s wish that she be allowed to die.

Clearly the right decision in my opinion. Thoughts? Should the constitution be amended for these situations?

[Deleted]

Equal rights sounds unfortunate if you have to make the choice.

[Deleted]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...t-switched-off



Clearly the right decision in my opinion. Thoughts? Should the constitution be amended for these situations?

Legislation is in the works right now to actually outline the role of doctors in this capacity, given that the constitutional referendum necessary will be a mixed bag.

It's more practical, right now, to instigate legislation which is more actionable for doctors in these scenarios and protect them from constitutional legal battles.

Please remember that Ireland was completely in control of the Catholic Church until the mid-late 80's, 90% of schools are still owned by the Church. It's a sad remnant of our unsavoury history.

[Stormdash]

There are no depths with human beings. There is no bottom. There is just more down.

[Nachturnal]

It is a saddening case but I agree with the call. She is brain dead, at this point she is just an incubator. It is not an easy decision to make in the least bit, but it is the wish of her family as well.

[AndaliteBandit]

Not familiar with Irish law, but it seems like a strange ruling if the "child" and living corpse have equal rights.

Her doctors didn't believe the fetus had any chance of surviving, gestating inside of a living corpse. Her body had started to decompose. An intensive care expert testified that the woman's brain had liquefied, and that they were struggling and failing to keep her body temperature at a safe level for the fetus. This is at 18 weeks, long before 24 weeks, which is the bare minimum amount of time suggested for a fetus to be developed enough to even have a chance of surviving outside of the womb.

It's a very sad case, but it was time to say goodbye.

[Yunru]

Her doctors didn't believe the fetus had any chance of surviving, gestating inside of a living corpse. Her body had started to decompose. An intensive care expert testified that the woman's brain had liquefied, and that they were struggling and failing to keep her body temperature at a safe level for the fetus. This is at 18 weeks, long before 24 weeks, which is the bare minimum amount of time suggested for a fetus to be developed enough to even have a chance of surviving outside of the womb.

It's a very sad case, but it was time to say goodbye.

Well it kinda sucks. They could spend some money and at least try too use new tehnology (like the one you see in movies) too try and grow a kid inside a tube.

[Deleted]

[url]
Clearly the right decision in my opinion. Thoughts? Should the constitution be amended for these situations?

in the abstract, its wrong.
in the practical, the foetus has no viable chance of surviving to the 20 week mark at which point it would have a decent (less than 50%) to survive outside the womb.
for practical purposes its dead too.

- - - Updated - - -

This is at 18 weeks, long before 24 weeks, which is the bare minimum amount of time suggested for a fetus to be developed enough to even have a chance of surviving outside of the womb.

i do believe its 50% survivability chance (the cut off point) and it is at 22 (iirc) weeks, that being said, yes.

[ngc2440]

in the abstract, its wrong.

In the abstract there is no right and wrong. Just varying shades of grey.

[AndaliteBandit]

Oh, OK. That makes more sense then. I was thinking it was possible to keep it alive until maturity, which if they believe it is a child with a full set of rights, seems like the logical decision.

Yeah, this is a case where the doctors were fully behind ending life support, but were afraid of violating Irish law which strictly prohibits abortion unless the mother's life is in danger.

[Adam Jensen]

Well it kinda sucks. They could spend some money and at least try too use new tehnology (like the one you see in movies) too try and grow a kid inside a tube.

Sure, if that even existed.

[AndaliteBandit]

i do believe its 50% survivability chance (the cut off point) and it is at 22 (iirc) weeks, that being said, yes.

At 24 weeks, it's a 25% chance of survivability. For the 25% that survive, they face a 85% chance of being disabled.

[Deleted]

At 24 weeks, it's a 25% chance of survivability. For the 25% that survive, they face a 85% chance of being disabled.

at 24 weeks its 53%.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ties-rise.html

which was the first link i even looked at.

[Calfredd]

at 24 weeks its 53%.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ties-rise.html

which was the first link i even looked at.

As people are probably going to have issues with Dailymail, I'm gonna throw out a couple of links myself:
http://umm.edu/health/medical/pregna...rn-prematurely 4th paragraph.
http://miscarriage.about.com/od/preg...aturebirth.htm There's a chart when you scroll down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability Of course nothing is complete without a Wiki link.

[AndaliteBandit]

As people are probably going to have issues with Dailymail, I'm gonna throw out a couple of links myself:
http://umm.edu/health/medical/pregna...rn-prematurely 4th paragraph.
http://miscarriage.about.com/od/preg...aturebirth.htm There's a chart when you scroll down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability Of course nothing is complete without a Wiki link.

Yeah, there's a lot of conflicting data out there, even with what you've linked right there, ranging from 39% to 70%. The figures I listed were given at the actual court hearing for this case--

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime...sque-1.2048040

Consultant obstetrician Dr Peter Boylan said the viability of a foetus was generally regarded as 24 weeks, but only 25 per cent of babies born then survived. Of those, only 15 per cent were not disabled.

[Calfredd]

Yeah, there's a lot of conflicting data out there, even with what you've linked right there, ranging from 39% to 50%. The figures I listed were given at the actual court hearing for this case--

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime...sque-1.2048040

Yeah whenever someone links dailymail, someone has issues with it so I figured I'd link to a few other websites but yeah I realize there's conflicting data.

[Saft]

Ireland's abortion law was passed by religious nut-jobs, of course the woman has fuck all rights if there's a fetus in the picture. This woman was being kept alive only to see if they fetus could live long enough to survive outside the womb or die before her. Who gives a shit if the girl was a rotting corpse, WE HAVE TO SAVE THE BABY.

[Deleted]

Yeah, there's a lot of conflicting data out there, even with what you've linked right there, ranging from 39% to 70%. The figures I listed were given at the actual court hearing for this case--

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime...sque-1.2048040

im guessing the disparity is a medical versus statistic approach.
a study at a NICU is likely to have better numbers, and a statistical one darker.
And the 24 weeks magic, is to some degree that prior to this point most places doesn't even try.

- - - Updated - - -

Ireland's abortion law was passed by religious nut-jobs, of course the woman has fuck all rights if there's a fetus in the picture.

the two has equal rights.
not fuck all.
Also she is dead, and the foetus is not.
arguably, only he/she has rights at this point.

Who gives a shit if the girl was a rotting corpse, WE HAVE TO SAVE THE BABY.

Yes minor inconvenience to the dead person is worse than saving a baby.
Are you aware of how stupid that sounded?.
or are you not sarcastic?.

[AndaliteBandit]

im guessing the disparity is a medical versus statistic approach.
a study at a NICU is likely to have better numbers, and a statistical one darker.
And the 24 weeks magic, is to some degree that prior to this point most places doesn't even try.

The figures I gave were provided by a consultant at this case's court hearing.

Even with the most generous estimate of survivability and disability rates at 24 weeks though, odds are most of those babies accounted for didn't gestate for nine weeks in a decomposing corpse with a liquefied brain, multiple infections, an open and oozing wound, and a body temperature that couldn't be regulated.

[Deleted]

Normally, if the woman was only in a coma but kept alive by machines, I'd argue for the baby yet... from what I read she's dead dead, her body is filling with infections and wounds. According to this, she's already in a sort of decomposition state. The chances for the baby surviving another ... 8 weeks or more is close to 0. If it was close to birth, sure, then keep her alive for a few more days and extract the baby... but this is not the case.

So, overall, a special and unfortunate event. If it was merely a coma, yes, she should have been kept on life support until the baby was ready to be born at least... but she's dead for good and decomposing, there's no argument here, the baby is already as good as dead.