Since we're on the topic of the Schiavo case in the last few days, I came across this story, and frankly it disturbed me. And no this has no underlying political commentary, even though the president will come into play here.

HoustonChronicle.com - Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube



This I don't understand. All of this is very hard to talk about. But let me start by quoting the newspaper.

"The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips.

Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died."

This may sound like the story at any hospital any day of the year. But the thing that bothers me here, is that in this case the legal guardian in this case, the mother of this child did not consent to removing this child from life support.

The hospital decided to do this, and were given permission to do so by the courts.

"Sun's death marks the first time a U.S. judge has allowed a hospital to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts."

To make matters worse in my opinion the hospital refused to allow media, invited by the mother, to see the baby's condition.

"The hospital's description of Sun - that he was motionless and sedated for comfort - has differed sharply from the mother's. Since February, the hospital has blocked the media from Hudson's invitation to see the baby, citing privacy concerns.

'I wanted y'all to see my son for yourself,' Hudson told reporters. 'So you could see he was actually moving around. He was conscious.'"

A little background. The boy was born with a form of dwarfism that included short limbs and small lungs.

Now here is where I really question the morality of the law.

"Texas law allows hospitals to discontinue life-sustaining care, even if a patient's family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.

Texas Children's said it contacted 40 facilities with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun."

And yes, this law was signed into law by Governor George W. Bush in 1999¹. I really am not attacking here, but I don't understand the contradiction (see I didn't use the h word) here between his stance in the Schiavo case, and him signing this law.

I really don't think this law is right. It seems to me that as a patient has the right to refuse treatment, or refuse it through a legal guardian, they also should have the right to demand treatment, even when it may seem that it will be futile. But hey what is the harm in trying? Ok now I know that money is an issue, and I believe that in this case that this family could not afford to pay for Sun's treatment. But you know what, I think everyone has the right to life saving medical treatment even if they have no money what so ever. It's just the humane thing to do in my opinion.

Ok I am spent now.


No Life Support for You