A very sad situation, I can totally understand the family's desire to extend the life of this child but I don't know that I agree with them fighting to hold on to a hopeless situation as is described in this story. What do you folks think?

Updated:2007-04-10 10:52:20
Hospital Wants to End Child's Life Support
By KELLEY SHANNON
AP
AUSTIN, Texas (April 9) - As 17-month-old Emilio Gonzales lies in a hospital, hooked up to tubes to help him breathe and eat, his mother holds him close and cherishes every movement.


Doctors and an ethics panel determined that treatments are causing Emilio Gonzales to suffer without providing any medical benefit, a hospital lawyer said.

Catarina Gonzales knows her baby is terminally ill and that one day she'll have to let go. But it's not yet time, she and her attorneys contend in their legal clash with hospital officials who say it's best to stop Emilio's life-sustaining treatment.

A Texas law lets the hospital make that life-or-death call. The latest legal dispute over the law - Emilio's case - goes to court again Tuesday, the day his life support is set to end.

"The family has made a unified decision" to keep Emilio living through artificial means, said Joshua Carden, an attorney for the family. "The hospital is making quality of life value judgments. That's a huge source of concern."

Texas is one of the few states with a timetable allowing hospitals to decide when to end life-sustaining treatment, according to studies cited by activist groups. Other states allow hospitals to cut off treatment but do not specify a time frame.

Children's Hospital of Austin has been caring for Emilio since Dec. 28. He's believed to have Leigh's Disease, a progressive illness difficult to diagnose, according to both sides.

The boy cannot breathe on his own and must have nutrition and water pumped into him. He can't swallow or gag or make purposeful movements, said Michael Regier, general counsel for the Seton Family of Hospitals, which encompasses the children's hospital.

Emilio's higher order brain functions are destroyed, and secretions must be vigorously suctioned from his lungs, Regier said.

"The care is very aggressive and very invasive," Regier said. Though the treatment is expensive, Emilio has health coverage through Medicaid, and the hospital contends money is not part of its decision. Doctors and a hospital ethics panel determined the treatment is causing the boy to suffer without providing any medical benefit, Regier said.

So the hospital invoked the state law that allows it to end life-sustaining treatment in medically futile cases after a 10-day notice to the family. That deadline was voluntarily extended while the hospital and family tried, unsuccessfully as of Monday, to find another facility to care for Emilio.

Catarina Gonzales , 23, who has no other children and cannot have more, denies that her son is nonresponsive, as medical caregivers say, Carden said. She says the boy smiles and turns his head toward voices. "Every day that her son is alive and she gets to hold him and be next to him moving around is a precious day for her," Carden said.

The 1999 Texas law, signed by then-Gov. George W. Bush , is increasingly under fire from patient advocates, disability rights groups and Texas Right to Life, best known for its anti-abortion efforts. Those varying interests want to change the so-called futile care law to eliminate the 10-day provision for cutting off life support because they say it's not enough time to transfer a critically ill person to another facility. A state Senate committee plans to hear testimony on proposed changes to the law Thursday.

The powerful Texas Hospital Association and other medical organizations largely support the existing law and say it's not frequently used because families and doctors usually agree on the patient's treatment. Texas Right to Life said it has been involved in more than two dozen similar cases over the past year and a half.

Emilio's situation differs from the case of Terri Schiavo in Florida, who was in a persistent vegetative state and at the center of a legal dispute within her family over whether to remove her feeding tube. Schiavo died after her tube was removed in 2005.

In Emilio's case, the family is united in wanting to keep the boy alive.

Last week, a federal judge refused to intervene and left it to the state court where a lawsuit was pending that seeks to declare the law unconstitutional. An Austin judge will hear arguments Tuesday on whether to block the hospital from cutting off Emilio's life support.

"We feel that the original decision is right, and it's time to proceed," said Regier, the hospital's lawyer.

If the hospital is allowed to go forward, the life support equipment would likely be turned off during the day Wednesday when the family can be present and have the aid of social workers and chaplains, he said.

Carden argues that Emilio's death by asphyxiation would be painful. He said the law prevents hospital workers from even giving the boy the drugs death row inmates receive to help them as they are executed by lethal injection. "It's not like he'll just drift quietly off," he said.


Sad, very sad.

------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all. Some ran the other way.

yup - that is truly sad.
but, it is the Parents call. if they got the $$$ - have at it, keep their biological lump of goo going as long as they like.
there are endless levels to "quality of life", and mine and yours will never line up 100%
I myself dont even think retards should be saved. but, I completely understand that I would probably think different if my kid was, or I had a family member who was. and thats the catch - these things are impossible to "put yourself in". I must stand by the parents choice. this goes for both if they want to get rid of it at ANY point - conception included. why was this thing even squeezed out?? but, damage done. they wanna keep pumping air into it, fine. this also goes for the other side, where parents refuse medical treatment for religous reasons. fine. if your god wants to kill your kid, fine. I think Darwinism is the term

of course, thereare gonna be extremes, where intervention is required. this aint one. the outcome is gonna be the same, either way, just a matter of when. if they want to torment their offspring for a few more weeks, so they can feel complete, so be it. this is of course assuming THEY are paying for it? I have a hard time beleiving insurance is all fine with it.

We all know funerals are for the living, not the dead, right?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: yup - that is truly sad. but, it is the Parents call. if they got the $$$ - have at it

That's just it - the parents aren't making the call - the hospital is. That's why the parents are suing.

Well, it appears the courts will be deciding this.
Don't get me wrong, this is obviously one of the hardest decisions a parent can be asked to make. I sincerely mean it when I say that if I could save one of my children's lives by sacrificing my own, the decision wouldn't take half a heart beat. But, I'm also not one to make them suffer any longer than absolutely necessary. One has to assume that the doctor's are correct and this child's brain is damaged beyond it's own life sustaining capability. If it were my child, I believe I'd have to let him/her go.

------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all. Some ran the other way.

I wonder who is paying for it too.

It may be hopeless but something about the state deciding to kill you bothers me a bit.

You don't suppose they are illegal aliens do you? and would that change any views?.

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: I wonder who is paying for it too. It may be hopeless but something about the state deciding to kill you bothers me a bit. You don't suppose they are illegal aliens do you? and would that change any views?.

I didnt wanna go there....Gonzales.....
and, if so - was the child born here or there? if here - moot point - US citizen - if there - I expect a nice fat deportation truck should be pulling up, eh?

Well it said in the article that the parents had medicaid insurance. I wouldn't want to have to make that decision if it was my child, but if they were suffering I wouldn't want that them at all.

A ruling should be made on reason not emotion.

As a parent I can't even begin to express how illogical I would be when it came to a decision of this kind. every micro-second of life (limited that it might be) would be of immeasurable value to my family. But I can also see the necessity to end suffering and reduce the burden to society for care giving with no hope of improvement.

I'm just glad I am not the parent here. It is indeed horribly sad.

Most of us have enough sense to put our pets out of their misery when the time comes.

The sadness I see here is that this family refuses to let go in a hopeless situation.

Medicaid insurance means the tax-payer is picking up the tab. I'm a teacher and the life-time insurance coverage for one of my kids is $1,000,000. Should Medicaid patients also have a limit? I think so. Why should they have better care than the tax-payers providing the Medicaid? I had a foster child(no I didn't get a monthly check) once who was on Medicaid(so that she would have medical coverage). She had a better choice of doctors than the rest of the family. Furthermore, at the time, Medicaid mothers with a new-born were entitled to have a nurse come to the home twice after release from the hospital. That was more than we were ever offered through private insurance. Like the rest of us, those parents need have to face some difficult decisions. Am I heartless? No, I was in their shoes 24 years ago.

As a person who had to make that same call for my younger brother, I can tell for a fact, it is one of the hardest things that you may ever have to face.
But I did what I felt was best for him...not me or my family...for HIM.
For me, it was not months or even days.
Merely hours. But it was still very hard to do. He was my brother.
But...,what was best for him... was to let him go.

They should too.

Very sad story. I have a daughter a month older then their child. It would be very hard, but the child dont have much of a life.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: I myself dont even think retards should be saved.

Wow.. I cant believe someone can be so ignorant.. Too bad we cant give out more then one negative..

This reminds me of the Terry Schiavo situation.

Let me state this for anyone who cares...

If you keep me alive after I'm non responsive (dare I say "brain dead"?) and have no hope of recovery, any longer than is necessary, I'll come back and haunt you!

[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 04-10-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Raydar: This reminds me of the Terry Schiavo situation. Let me state this for anyone who cares... If you keep me alive after I'm non responsive (dare I say "brain dead"?) and have no hope of recovery, any longer than is necessary, I'll come back and haunt you!

Radar,
I whole heartedly agree with you for myself. Making that decision for this child is much more difficult. I've already stated that I don't want my children to suffer and if necessary would give my own life if it would save the life of one of my kids but, I also would not allow one of them to suffer like this child apparently is. But, it's also important to say that my kids aren't 18 months old. I'm sure this family is going through hell.

------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all. Some ran the other way.

My family went through a similar situation with my Great-Grandmother when she suffered a major heart attack. She had what we thought was severe brain damage due to a high fever. She was placed on life support and the whole nine yards. Our family could not decide what to do about pulling the plug, and after two weeks in ICU, she had no more need to be on life support. She had improved. Now, normally this would be good news. For her sake, it was not. She had improved only enough to be off life support, and mildly know what was going on, but had the mental capacity of an 8 yr old.

She had to live out her final two years this way in a nursing home. Unable to make many decisions, know how old she was, or to lead a productive life like she would have wanted to and had been before. Our indecisiveness cost her two years of suffering, whether she knew it or not. Not to mention, it did nothing to help us cope. Every minute counts, but it was extremely hard to enjoy those minutes, which turned into years, having to see her like that. It was hard knowing that she had the chance to die, and was now trapped here, until something else went wrong.

I hope to never be involved in making that type of decision again, but if I do, this memory will weigh heavily on that future decision.

Nic

Hard as this must be for the family, I always find it surprising when people with no medical backround dispute what every doctor tells them when its a hopeless situation.

quote Originally posted by Raydar: This reminds me of the Terry Schiavo situation. Let me state this for anyone who cares... If you keep me alive after I'm non responsive (dare I say "brain dead"?) and have no hope of recovery, any longer than is necessary, I'll come back and haunt you!

Me, too! If there's any real chance I can recover and have a good quality of life, by all means, keep me going. If I'll never recover and/or my quality of life after recovering will be poor, let me go!!!

quote treatments are causing Emilio Gonzales to suffer without providing any medical benefit

There you go. It's all about quality of life, not quantity. I don't care if I only live another day as long as the quality is top notch. (Not that my quality of life is all that good right now. ) Yes, that would be a terribly difficult decision for a parent to make but a good parent should be much more concerned with their childs needs/wants/feeling/etc than their own. The parents are being selfish. The article mentioned that the childs death wouldn't be painless. I understand that but think of it this way. Should the child suffer for a few minutes or for a few weeks/months/years?? In my very humble opinion, the parents should remove the life support systems and ask that the medical staff administer some sort of drug that will be sure to render the child incapable of feeling the asphyxiation. (BTW, I am a parent. I would hope and pray that I would be able to do this for my son if necessary.)

My prayers go out to the child, the family and to the courts.

While a truly sad situation and I can understand the hospital's stance, since we're talking about a 17-month-old, who cannot make the decision to pull the plug for his or herself, it should be up to the parents, not the hospital.

quote Originally posted by isthiswhereiputausername?: Wow.. I cant believe someone can be so ignorant.. Too bad we cant give out more then one negative..

yes, sorry.
I wont go into this to much, but thats how I feel about it. I dont see how thats "ignorant"?
one of my biggest fears is mental disability. I have compassion in many directions - this aint one of them. what's it to ya?

The Judge ruled its up to the parents. They're looking into other facilities that will take care (prolong the suffering) of the infant.

Pyrthian, it's not your opinion that members object to; it's how you stated it.

This story is sort of in my backyard. It is sad. Many things in life are. My feelings, after being regularly exposed to the news updates, is that this woman ought to let go of her child. Leave him in the hands of God of which he is in now. It seems sad to me that she can not. I do admire her love for her child but I wonder why she can not.

quote Originally posted by carnut122: Pyrthian, it's not your opinion that members object to; it's how you stated it.

I agree. I also have been called a retard. My wife and I care for a non-family mentally challenged woman. This task has opened my eyes to a fact of life that many wish not to see or do not actually see when they look at it. Many see these people as they wish to see them, which is prejudism.
heh, I was looking for a quote. It seems that I quoted you.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: yes, seeing them everyday has de-sensitized me. a admit that 100%.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: heh...seeing them. Have you actually really seen them? My wife and I care for a mentally challenged individual as she had for years before I met her. As did her parents. I do not think you have actually seen them. Retards ? My wife also works at the state hospital. Where the incompetent are committed. Full of mentally challenged people. Most due to drug abuse. They would be retards.

I don't think they should be saved either. Not that I think that drug use is wrong but, we should not have to pay for drug abuse.
Actually, the quote I was looking for was one of mine. A spontaneous reply I forget right now.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: 'Ya know, having cared for the mentally challenged and being around others, I have made some observations. They are honest. They might take something but it is not the calculated theft normally associated with stealing. They are all caring and have big hearts. They do not lust, they do not hate, the do not covet. I do not think I have ever seen a fight. They harbor no grudges. I could go on but you get the point. Who are the retards, us or them ?

Eugenics is not a popular idea, especially with it's history.

quote Originally posted by carnut122: Pyrthian, it's not your opinion that members object to; it's how you stated it.

yes, these kind of threads seem to bring out the worst in me. probably because so many people get dragged by the heartstrings, I throw out a "heartstring machete". like that quote Cliffw dragged out. check that thread out. I really covered myself in crap and did a dance.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: .... like that quote Cliffw dragged out.

Pyrthian, I like you. Your postings are an asset to our community. I know that every one of mine is not. I do the best I can. Perhaps sometimes I should not post. I am talking about me, not you. I did not drag out a quote to slam anyone. It was a heartstring moment.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: yes, seeing them everyday has de-sensitized me. a admit that 100%.

Ya know, had I not really seen them, up close and personal, I would still see them almost as you do. I guess what I am saying to myself, is that we should not judge this mother until we have walked in her shoes.

hmm - maybe I should have a talk show?
I have opinions on every gad damn thing.
and they're all right - just ask me

What ever you say Imus, .

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: one of my biggest fears is mental disability. I have compassion in many directions - this aint one of them. what's it to ya?

I hope you wear a helmet. All the time.