A shameful, sad and gruesome chapter in Texas’ history is finally over: a judge ordered a Fort Worth hospital to remove Marlise Munoz from life support.
Munoz, who was pregnant with her second child, has been brain dead since November, when she apparently suffered a pulmonary embolism. Despite the 32-year-old’s own wish (supported by her husband) not to be kept on a ventilator, John Peter Smith Hospital refused to remove her because of the fetus inside her. The hospital feared running afoul of a 1999 Texas law which states “life-sustaining treatment” cannot be removed from a pregnant woman, despite the woman’s own wishes. Keep reading »
Yesterday, the family of Marlise Munoz filed an emergency motion against the Texas hospital asking them to take her off life support so they can bury her body. Thirty-three-year-old Marlise, who apparently suffered a pulmonary embolism in November, did not want to be kept alive on machines. Her wishes, and those of her husband and parents, are not being respected, though. The Forth Worth hospital where she is being kept believes it is following a state law by keeping her body functioning in order to keep her now 22-week-old fetus alive. Keep reading »
At 14 weeks pregnant, Marlise Munoz of Texas suffered what appeared to be a pulmonary embolism (blood clot) in her lungs and collapsed on the kitchen floor. She lay there for an hour until her husband found her, during which time her fetus was possibly not exposed to oxygen.
Marlise was a paramedic who was attending nursing school; her husband is a firefighter. Given their exposure to such circumstances in their professional lives, the Star-Telegram reports, each had conveyed to the other they did not want to be kept alive on life support if such a tragedy happened to them.
But their wishes don’t matter. Forth Worth’s John Peter Smith Hospital is keeping still brain dead Marlise technically alive on life support throughout the remainder of her pregnancy because of a law meant to “protect” her fetus. She is currently 20 weeks pregnant. Keep reading »
Fund Texas Women, a nonprofit that helps support women who seek abortions, has warned that anti-choicers are encouraging members of Christian groups in Texas — where abortion rights have just been gutted — to join an email list of volunteers to take women to abortion appointments. But instead of actually taking women to their abortions, the group Abolish Human Abortion warns, “it’s a wonderful opportunity to minister to an abortion-minded woman for an hour while you DON’T take her to her clinic.”
Or, you know, like, kidnapping. Keep reading »
“I am pro-life. I care about the life of every child: every child that goes to bed hungry, every child that goes to bed without a proper education, every child that goes to bed without being able to be a part of the Texas dream, every woman and man who worry about their children’s future and their ability to provide for that future. I care about life and I have a record of fighting for people above all else.”
Texas state senator Wendy Davis, who is running for governor of the Lone Star State, spoke at the University of Texas at Brownsville on Tuesday and pissed off anti-choice conservatives by reclaiming the term “pro-life.” I’ve always been bothered by the term “pro-life” being used by anti-abortionists because 1) it implies that those who support Roe V. Wade are “anti-life” or “pro-death,” 2) many so-called “pro-lifers” are against abortion even when pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, 3) repealing Roe V. Wade, as many “pro-lifers” want, would result in the deaths of women who will do what they must to terminate pregnancies they don’t want, and 4) many anti-choicers are against government programs that actually support families and allow children a decent quality of life. As far as I am concerned, Wendy Davis’ definition of being pro-life is more accurate than the one anti-choicers peddle because it recognizes the lives that exist outside the womb. [Valley Morning Star]