Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

1999 Gov Dubya Signed Law Withdrawing Life Support Despite Family Objectin

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:22 PM
Original message
1999 Gov Dubya Signed Law Withdrawing Life Support Despite Family Objectin
this fact should be spread far and wide to the Wash Post, New York Times, Sy Hersh, Dowd, Olbermann, Matthews, every news show you can think of and every local paper.

There ought to be a Nobel for the Hypocrite of the Century (although he'll probably say that was before he found Jesus. You have to feel sorry for the bad name this heathen gives to Jesus IMHO

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_03_13_atrios_archive.ht...

"In 1999 then governor Bush signed a law which allowed hospitals to withdraw life support from patients, over the objections of the family, if they consider the treatment to be nonbeneficial."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. Shout it from the rooftops: "HYPOCRITE!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zimmer Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. He is a hypocrite
What a liar...2008 cant come soon enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. Good Find
But there are still those here on DU that think that Bush along with Delay are doing a good thing. They refuse to see this for what it is, not concern for Terri Schiavo, but part of a political agenda to keep the Xtian Taliban back with the Republican party.

Now, why are the Democrats in the Senate going along with this?

1. Perhaps when Congress returns from it's recess, the Democrats will use this to point out the hypocrisy of the Republicans when they try to cut funding for programs that might help those like Terri Schiavo.

2. They made some kind of backroom deal, in the false hope that the Republicans will give them a crumb or two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. "Braindead" can also apply to those who don't understand ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. push this, push this. push this. It shows bush's crass political
hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyLizzie Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. Don't the Republicans have a name for this kind of behavior?
What is it they call it? Ah, yes, flip-flopping, I believe. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
6. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida must read Atrios or
this board.
She just quoted this law - and pointed out Bush's hypocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Rep. Wasserman...
was eloquent! Floridians are fortunate to have her representing them.
The press conference was the most heartening experience I've had in quite awhile. Some truth to power at last!


I'm enjoying my mental image of * and Kkkkarl and Kkkkaren swigging PeptoBismol all afternoon and evening .

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. FAN-FAN-FAN-TASTIC!!!
Rollin, Rollin, Rollin! HYPOCRITE, TRAITOR and all around DUMB-ASS!

IMPEACH HIM!! Or something!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-20-05 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. I've ben shying away from this so-called "issue"
Edited on Mon Mar-21-05 12:01 AM by pnorman
for the reasons that many others here have. But surfacing of that internal RNC memo, as well as this sudden calling of Congress into session over this Orwellian Issue, is making me change my mind. Here's an item a websearch revealed:

>
>
iled an amicus curiae brief in the Florida Supreme Court on behalf of 55 bioethicists and a disability rights organization opposing the governor's action. Two months later I participated in a public debate on the case at Florida State University. Among the participants supporting Gov. Bush's position were Pat Anderson, one of multiple attorneys who have represented the Schindlers, and Wesley Smith and Rita Marker, two activists whose specialty is opposing surrogate removal of life-support from comatose and persistent vegetative state patients. I found myself wondering: "I'm doing this pro bono; are they?"

I did some Internet research and learned that many of the attorneys, activists and organizations working to keep Schiavo on life support all these years have been funded by members of the Philanthropy Roundtable.

The Philanthropy Roundtable is a collection of foundations that have funded conservative causes ranging from abolition of Social Security to anti-tax crusades and United Nations conspiracy theories. The Roundtable members' founders include scions of America's wealthiest families, including Richard Mellon Scaife (heir to the Mellon industrial, oil and banking fortune), Harry Bradley (electronics), Joseph Coors (beer), and the Smith Richardson family (pharmaceutical products).

I found a Web site called mediatransparency.com which tracks funding for these foundations. Using just that Web site and the Schindlers' own site, terrisfight.org, I learned of a network of funding connections between some of the Philanthropy Roundtable's members and various organizations behind the Schindlers, their lawyers and supporters, and the lawyers who represented Gov. Bush in Bush v. Schiavo.

Here are a few examples:

Schindler lawyer Pat Anderson "was paid directly" by the anti-abortion Life Legal Defense Foundation, which "has already spent over $300,000 on this case," according to the foundation's Web site. Much of the support for Life Legal Defense Foundation, in turn, comes from the Alliance Defense Fund, an anti-gay rights group which collected more than $15 million in private donations in 2002 and admits to having spent money on the Schiavo case "in the six figures," according to a recent article in the Palm Beach Post. Mediatransparency.org states that between 1994 and 2002, the Alliance Defense Fund received $142,000 from Philanthropy Roundtable members that include the Lynde & Harry Bradley Foundation and the Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation.

Wesley Smith and Rita Marker also work for organizations that get funding from Roundtable members. Smith is a paid senior fellow with the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank that advocates the teaching of creationist "intelligent design" theory in public schools. Between 1993 and 1997, the Discovery Institute received $175,000 from the Bradley Foundation. Marker is executive director of the International Task Force on Euthanasia, which lobbies against physician-assisted suicide. In 2001, Marker's organization received $110,390 from the Randolph Foundation, an affiliate of the Smith Richardson family.

Roundtable members also played a role in financing the Bush v. Schiavo litigation.

The Family Research Council, which uses its annual $10 million budget to lobby for prayer in public schools and against gay marriage, filed an amicus curiae brief in Bush v. Schiavo supporting Gov. Bush, at the same time its former president, attorney Kenneth Connor, was representing the governor in that litigation. Between 1992 and 2000, the council received $215,000 from the Bradley Foundation.
>
>
http://blog.bioethics.net/2005/03/have-conservatives-bo...





>
In 1999 then governor Bush signed a law which allowed hospitals to withdraw life support from patients, over the objections of the family, if they consider the treatment to be nonbeneficial
>
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_03_13_atrios_archive.ht...

(I'm stil looking for further confirmation on that. This is probably what it was referring to:

>
Life-Support Stopped for 6-Month-Old in Houston

Yesterday Sun Hudson, the nearly 6-month-old at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, diagnosed and slowly dying with a rare form of dwarfism (thanatophoric dysplasia), was taken off the ventilator that was keeping him alive. A Houston court authorized the hospital's action, and Sun died shortly thereafter. Today's Houston Chronicle and Dallas Morning News have most of the details.

Both papers report that this is the first time in the United States a court has allowed life-sustaining treatment to be withdrawn from a pediatric patient over the objections of the child's parent. (The Dallas paper quotes John Paris, a bioethicist at Boston College, as its source.) If true, the unique Texas statute under which this saga was played out contributed in no small way to the outcome. As one of the laws co-authors (along with a roomful of other drafters, in 1999) let me explain.
>
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/healthlawprof_blog/200...

pnorman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 03:11 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. PNORMAN - what leads me to think the baby Hudson was non-caucasion ?
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 03:48 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Um, Watching his Afro American mom writhe in court on tv?
I caught it. Just appalling.

And, to sweeten the deal, Texas is still in the middle of a huge worker's comp scandal. The commission was headed up by an INSURANCE COMPANY LOBBYIST. Basically, doctors who ordered appropriate treatment were cut out of the loop. So, people were not getting care. It's ongoing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nonconformist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
11. Why in the HELL is this the first I've heard of this?
Yes, we need to push this. Hard!

Great find!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nonconformist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 03:13 AM
Response to Original message
13. KICK!
EVERYONE needs to see this.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 03:14 AM
Response to Original message
14. Congress just voted to abolish the judicial branch of government.
Schiavo resolution

passed 203 yes
58 no

that means democrats also voted yes.

meaning the congress has just taken over the duties of the judicial branch and said "separation of powers? never heard of it".

That's what Congress has done to the original document of law of what used to be the United States of America.

I guess it's time to give this country a new name
and of course a new flag
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
postulater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. Sensenbrenner is such a hyprocrite
I assume he voted for this, yet he replied to my request for Gannon investigation by saying the Secret Service was handling it, he replied to my request for Bush nominee investigation by saying it was a Senate affair, he responded to my request for voting fraud investigation by saying it was a Justice Department matter.

How does he reconcile this strong separation of powers stance (when there clearly deserves investigation) with intervening to allow the courts to rule in this case?

Separation of powers is only important when it would hurt him to step in, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 03:31 AM
Response to Original message
15. This and more on Schiavo case is Digby's at his blog, Hullaballo
Edited on Mon Mar-21-05 03:35 AM by Nothing Without Hope
In my opinion, Digby's entry on the Schiavo case is the best, clearest, most to the point. He lists the very obvious conflicts between what the Repubs are claiming and what their own actions have shown them to support, including the point you mention but also many more. He points out how this is really back to framing issues, with the Repubs and the corporate media screaming about saving lives, demonizing the husband and ignoring the rule of law, including the laws they themselves have pushed through:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2005_03_20_digbysblog_ar...

EXCERPT:
The Days Of Our Lives

Tom DeLay of Texas says (link = http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-nyhen20418257... ):

"Mrs. Schiavo's life is not slipping away - it is being violently wrenched from her body in an act of medical terrorism," DeLay said. "Mr. Schiavo's attorney's characterization of the premeditated starvation and dehydration of a helpless woman as 'her dying process' is as disturbing as it is unacceptable. What is happening to her is not compassion - it is homicide. She doesn't need to die, and as long as Terri Schiavo can breathe and her supporters can pray, we will not rest."


By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware (link = http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2005/03/schiavo... ) that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday.

Those of us who read liberal blogs are also aware that Republicans have voted en masse to pull the plug (no pun intended) on medicaid funding that pays for the kind of care that someone like Terry Schiavo and many others who are not so severely brain damaged need all across this country.

Those of us who read liberal blogs also understand that that the tort reform that is being contemplated by the Republican congress would preclude malpractice claims like that which has paid for Terry Schiavo's care thus far.


(SNIP - much more at the blog. No one has summed it up better.)

Edited to add two of Digby's links in the article - there are more for later sections of the piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldcoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 04:04 AM
Response to Original message
17. It was a youthful indiscretion
You know the type that Republicans have when they are in their forties and fifties.

The Texas law is terrifying. I am afraid that, if we are not careful, such a law could become federal law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 05:30 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. They make me sick!
You can't believe a word they say!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 06:14 AM
Response to Original message
19. and how many state sponsored murders did he preside over
while he was gov?

Talk about the ultimate flip-flop.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 06:29 AM
Response to Original message
20. follow the money
in 1999 - who was paying for the medical care? from what I've read I'm under the impression that the cost wasn't being paid for by these families - but rather by the state of Texas

so who is paying for Terri's care? Florida? the parents? insurance company?

Meanwhile -- this smells like a PR stunt to boost bush*'s numbers -- it's funny that this becomes a big broo-ha-ha and takes an act of congress just after newsweeks's poll numbers come out and show that bush*'s is dropping in the polls
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 06:50 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. All of this political grandstanding over a ...
dead person. The light is on but nobody is home.

This is about control over the bodies of Amerikan Citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTwentyoNine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
23. Bump this ALL day.......nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spunky Donating Member (469 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
24. Well of course. The financial bottom line of a business (the hosptials)
will always trump actual people for the neocons.

Its a "culture of life" just so long as that life doesn't detract from anyone's profits. But as soon as it does, the culture of life becomes the culture of greed.

I'm sad that I'm not more surprised by this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
25. Printing for mass distribution, thanks !
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selteri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
26. As I've called this before Repug-icrosy. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jchristy2001 Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
27. Send your comments to media outlets...
maybe they will give it 20 seconds of airtime...here's how...

360@cnn.com, 48hours@cbsnews.com, am@cnn.com, Colmes@foxnews.com, comments@foxnews.com, crossfire@cnn.com, dateline@nbc.com, daybreak@cnn.com, earlyshow@cbs.com, evening@cbsnews.com, insidepolitics@cnn.com, inthemoney@cnn.com, live@cnn.com, livefrom@cnn.com, newsnight@cnn.com, nightline@abcnews.com, nightly@nbc.com, rrhodes@airamericaradio.com, today@nbc.com, wam@cnn.com, wolf@cnn.com, wsj.ltrs@wsj.com, letters@nytimes.com, public@nytimes.com, netaudr@abc.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On Par Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. Do We Have Solid Confirmation?
Unless I missed it, I continue to read but don't see a confirming link or source. Before I send to news organizations, I'd like to see something concrete. Even where the Florida Congressman said it would be good.

OP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
28. Politics drove that decision..............
he didn't want the "State" to absorb the cost of keeping those folks alive, and politics is driving THIS decision as well.
bush knows there's political brownie points to be gained with all of the evanhellicals and right to lifers.
Every action these diseased swine take is designed with politics in mind. None of them gives two shits about Terri Shiavo, they just want to claim the "moral high ground." This claim is in appearances only, because their actions certainly don't match up with their words. They're cheap hucksters. They're Carnival barkers trying to sucker us all into their tent to see a show that little resembles the claims outside at the ticket booth.
Carnies. That's what these bastards are. Cheap, huckster, Carnies.
In the old days, when the Carnival came to town, crime would increase tenfold while they were around. People loved to see the Carnival, but hated the damn Carnies because they were stealing them blind. It's the same with this bunch in the White House now. They're robbing this country to the bone, but everybody's too busy watching the show to notice.
Well, we notice. Apparently the media doesn't, but we do. Lets keep making noise, let's keep screaming about the Carnies in the White House. There won't be anything left when they leave, but at least we'll be able to tell everybody, "WE TOLD YOU SO"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kzootalker Donating Member (43 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
29. AAARRRRGGG
oh man this really burns me, I dont know if terri is aware of anything, but i dont believe its the governments place to chime in on whether some one should live or die!!

now i hear shrub did this while governor--what is wrong with our country.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thethinker Donating Member (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
30. The Texas law boils down to who can pay
We have had a case here that has been on TV every night. The lady wants to keep her husband alive, the hospital wants to disconnect him. The courts have ruled she could keep him alive if she could find another hospital to take him. No hospital in Houston would take him. This has gone on for weeks. She finally found a nursing home in San Antonio that took him.

The hospitals here can disconnect anyone who they think does not have the money to pay their bills. The family has to go to court to have any say in the matter. It boils down to money.

Bush passed this law when he was governor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JimmyJazz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
31. Oh for Pete's sake. What a jackass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
outrage Donating Member (74 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
33. What's scary about this
is that it's obviously a ploy to detract from the war, and the administrations lame attempts to destroy the SS program and the fact that the bankruptcy bill is fucking everybody, but especially their stupid conservative base up the ass with no vasaline. But more than all this, the Schiavo thing is another brick they're trying to lay on the road to overturning Roe v. Wade. This is so transparent to me. Fuck I HATE THESE PEOPLE! It's disgusting how they're using this poor woman and her family as a political prop. These bastards are heartless ghouls and should ashamed. Did I mention how much I HATE the Bush et all. I hate them to the depth of my very soul. If there is a God I pray that they will PAY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
34. FYI - I dug this up from a 2001 post from a Right to Life site
The California policies are by no means the first attempts to deny life-sustaining measures to patients and families who request and would benefit from them. After a 1996 medical journal article revealed that Houston-area hospitals were implementing policies allowing for the refusal of lifesaving treatment in spite of the patients' or families' wishes, then- Governor George W. Bush vetoed a bill that would have had the effect of ensuring legal protection for such policies.

As a result of his strong stand on the 1997 bill, Texas Right to Life was invited by a number of Texas medical groups to participate in a series of negotiations beginning in 1998 to develop a new version of the legislation, negotiations in which now-President Bush's staff played an important role. These negotiations resulted in a Texas law Bush signed in 1999.

This measure required that a health care facility must provide lifesaving treatment until a realistic opportunity has been afforded for transferring the patient to another physician or health care facility willing to comply with the choice for life. Furthermore, laws and policies that deny medically effective treatment desired by the patient or family on the basis of a health care facility's negative view of the patient's "quality of life" discriminate against people with disabilities and therefore violate the Americans with Disabilities Act and other federal law.

http://www.nrlc.org/news/2001/NRL02/nolan.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On Par Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. Super work Rambo!
Two thumbs up.

OP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nonconformist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
36. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
37. Why are DEMS afraid to go on TV and call Bush a "Lying Hypocrite?"
Edited on Mon Mar-21-05 04:11 PM by Dr Fate
The Repubs were never too cowardly to send their top names on TV to call Clinton a "liar" and a "serial rapist." It worked too.

Why is Dean, Hillary, Kerry, Obama, etc too frightened to go on TV and speak the blunt, honest truth about Bush, in language that everyone understands?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abluelady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. Why Why Why
You are so correct. WTF is wrong with our democrats. I believe if they had been 1/2 as "evil" as the republicans, they would have won the election. What do they want to happen before they get on the stick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
38. Who has link to picture of black baby Sun Hudson who was not deemed
vegetative to live, just retarded for life therefore pull the plug.

Due to underdeveloped lungs.

Strange.

I've heard of lung transplants - and babies are even operated on in
the womb

But I guess not if you're black and on medicaid.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
39. Buzzflash says this is the bill Bush signed
Edited on Mon Mar-21-05 05:23 PM by RamboLiberal
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/HS/content...

Buzzflash says to read 166.039

166.039. PROCEDURE WHEN PERSON HAS NOT EXECUTED OR
ISSUED A DIRECTIVE AND IS INCOMPETENT OR INCAPABLE OF
COMMUNICATION. (a) If an adult qualified patient has not
executed or issued a directive and is incompetent or otherwise
mentally or physically incapable of communication, the attending
physician and the patient's legal guardian or an agent under a
medical power of attorney may make a treatment decision that may
include a decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining
treatment from the patient.
(b) If the patient does not have a legal guardian or an agent
under a medical power of attorney, the attending physician and one
person, if available, from one of the following categories, in the
following priority, may make a treatment decision that may include
a decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment:
(1) the patient's spouse;
(2) the patient's reasonably available adult children;
(3) the patient's parents; or
(4) the patient's nearest living relative.
(c) A treatment decision made under Subsection (a) or (b)
must be based on knowledge of what the patient would desire, if
known.
(d) A treatment decision made under Subsection (b) must be
documented in the patient's medical record and signed by the
attending physician.
(e) If the patient does not have a legal guardian and a
person listed in Subsection (b) is not available, a treatment
decision made under Subsection (b) must be concurred in by another
physician who is not involved in the treatment of the patient or who
is a representative of an ethics or medical committee of the health
care facility in which the person is a patient.
(f) The fact that an adult qualified patient has not
executed or issued a directive does not create a presumption that
the patient does not want a treatment decision to be made to
withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment.
(g) A person listed in Subsection (b) who wishes to
challenge a treatment decision made under this section must apply
for temporary guardianship under Section 875, Texas Probate Code.
The court may waive applicable fees in that proceeding.

Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 678, 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1989. Amended
by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 291, 3, eff. Jan. 1, 1998.
Renumbered from 672.009 and amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg.,
ch. 450, 1.03, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
styersc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. Bush's Flip-flop is clear-
in 1999,as Governor of Texas, he signed a law that said in the absence of written instructions otherwise, the life or death decision should be made by a husband (Guardian) and doctor, even if it meant the cessation of life supporting procedures..... (Exactly the claim that Michael Shiavo is making)......

in 2005, Bush says in the absence of written instructions otherwise, the Federal Gov't should tread on the states rights, individuals' rights and the separations of power to "err on the side of life".

In this light, and considering the recently discovered "Talking Points" memo urging GOP politicians to use this issue to advantage, one would be hard pressed to see this whole tragedy as nothing more then a GOP charade.

I've long had Terri Shaivo's parents in my prayers. My prayers seem more urgent now that I realize that they are in the grips of a tragedy and have, equally as bad, been set upon by GOP vultures who want to make a feast of their heart-break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
41. Bunch of heartless hypocrites, as has been captured in this CARTOON
Found today at AllHatNoCattle.net:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
styersc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-21-05 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. "Hospital Ends Life Support of Baby...Against Mother's Wishes"....
Trolling at FR, I found that the Freeps were up in arms and damning the Democratic (Clinton) "Culture of Death" over a story from Houston in which Hospital administrators cut a dying infant off of life support against the wishes of the mother...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1367546/posts

Nowhere did any of the Freepers point out that the law that facilitated this death was signed by Gov. GW Bush- future President, King and Messiah (if Fox News is to be believed).

By their twisted logic, Bush should be held on Murder charges....hey wait, do we agree on something????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jun 27th 2019, 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC