Clinically dead Irishwoman being used as human incubator

[FayKorgasm]

I am on my phone so cannot link but I was reading an article about a pregnant Irish woman who is clinically dead being kept alive against her next of kins wishes. The Irish constitution gives equal right to life of both woman and foetus.

Very sad situation made a million times worse .

Poppies, in that English case, it's clear that (a) they would have continued treatment of Anne whether or not she was pregnant (b) her best interests were paramount and (c) they had hope of partial recovery, in which case birthing the baby could have meant something to Anne.

It's really interesting to hear their thought process though and thanks for posting it.

Poppies, the woman in the Radio 4 programme wasn't dead. She was showing signs of response. The woman in the current story is a corpse.

The other vast difference is where the specialist on the R4 programme says "obviously this is an incredibly fraught scenario. Perhaps it's helpful to start by separating the legal and the moral and what might be thought to be a rather curious thing is that foetus itself doesn't have any legal status or legal personality and that means that its interests can't be legally asserted against Anne."

This is the polar opposite of the situation in Ireland.

Given where she lived, it is a bit of a reach to say this was probably a wanted pregnancy, since her ability to do anything about an unwanted pregnancy would be limited

I don't see it as a reach, plenty of Irish women have much wanted pregnancies, it's not clear either way. What is clear is that the law in Ireland is so restrictive it leads to these awful scenarios where the ability of medical professions to make decisions in consultation with NOK is actually nil. They can't do what may be medically advisable or carry out the wishes of the NOK.

People on the Internet are people with thoughts and opinions that are valid.

I wouldn't base my chances on a fitness to practice tribunal on Internet opinions though, which is likely to be a consideration for the doctors, at least, and that was my point. Not that people can't have opinions, but that this is a legal situation for the doctors.

My comment was in reference to the number of people saying 'well I would want my baby to live'. We should not be using dead women's bodies as incubators without their express consent.

side note to Jeanne, I am not familiar enough with what they have done to determine in this case. From the article it really didn't say a lot (lack of clinical signs doesn't mean immediate brain death) and I'm not based in Ireland. I'd be interested to know what level of monitoring etc they put in place regarding neurological activity- you don't need brainstem death to be declared dead, indeed you don't need brain activity monitored other than shining a light to see pupil reflex, but it's taken as a given that cessation of heartbeat will stop blood flow, brain activity will cease. Sorry if I confused you. I'd like to assume they have monitored fully in various ways before taking this decision.

Karasea I 100% agree. There have been huge cuts to services,benefits and education opertunities for children with all sorts of differing needs. So supposing this foetus becomes viable and is born very prematurely it is highly likely that he/she would be left with serious physical and/or developmental disabilities.

I think this case is awful, but I don't believe that the foetus will get to full term, or even to viability because the medical complications are just immense. I'm not a medical expert but I know that the drugs used in situations like this will be considerably stronger than all the over counter medicines and cups of coffee that pregnant women are told to avoid. The doctors themselves will know that drugs that are life-saving for adults are fatal for infants - it's one of the reasons that premie babies have such trouble fighting basic illnesses, because antibiotics etc can be so dangerous to them.

These poor doctors are being forced to maintain the "life" of the mother when they know that doing so will be actively damaging the foetus.

My greatest worry now in this case is how this impacts on the treatment of seriously ill pregnant women. It could once be argued that to save the mother is to save the child so doctors could feasibly give women treatment that could cause miscarriage because that gave her child a better chance at survival than no treatment at all. If we move to a situation where we sustain the mother's dead body for the sake of the foetus then it is no longer the best outcome to treat the mother, but to withhold treatment for the health of the foetus. It's very shaky ground indeed.

CheerfulYank. As I said, I could understand it in your position. However, I'd leave it up to my DH to decide what he would prefer to do, after all, he'd be the one having to cope with it (either way) not me.

I still don't understand why so many posters are saying that they'd want this for their 14 week off foetus.

She was irish and has family there. Her family should be respected / listened to more. It is not like there'll be agreement in the high court. Why go to high court for a higher level more important wrangle when her own parents say switch off life support machine.

Because Irish law as it stands gives the foetal life status pre-birth, Skud.

Because they have no choice Skud, the medical team that is. They'd be breaking the law if they did want the family want and no medical professional is going to do that with the potential ramifications for their licences etc.

I would not want to be kept alive artificially to support a 14 week old foetus to term.

If the pregnancy were much further advanced I don't think I would personally object to it for a short while if essential.

Chipping I know. But even if DH were not in the picture I'd still wan the many to have a chance if the doctors felt it would have a decent shot. But I live in the US where waiting lists to adopt newborns are years long, so that may be coloring my view as well.

want the baby Don't know what happened there!

She's not a human incubator, she is the baby's mother. If I die I am still the mother of my child

The father would like to raise the child, the mother wanted the child. If this had happened to me then I would want to be kept alive for my baby too.

It isn't about what we would want in this situation, is it? None of us can tell what the woman would want, and her parents, as next of kin have made their wishes clear.

If she was only 14 weeks pregnant when she died, that means that the baby will be in her lifeless body for at least 8 weeks (assuming they'd perform CS at around 22 weeks). We have no way of knowing if the baby will develop normally in that time.

If I remember rightly, after the death of Savita Halappanavar, and the changes to the law, campaigners said that there wasn't enough clarity in the legal situation, and that it was clear that another such case would occur.

It is questioning my thoughts on life and when a baby becomes a baby and the importance of recognising a baby as a foetus.

The Texas case about the mothers body smelling brought tears to my eyes and a great sadness to my heart for a family who will tragically never be able to loose that last experience of their loved one. To battle for the right to mourn is almost incomprehensible.

I listened to an expert in Irish medical law speak about this case earlier and just wanted to relay the two main points of what he said:

• The case will be decided ultimately by the High Court because it's a question of law due to the status of the foetus in Irish law.

• The family's wishes will be taken into account as well as the advice and input of medical staff who are caring for this lady.

It's an awful situation and (I believe) one which should not be decided in a court at all. However we still have a powerful portion of society here who lobby successfully for our abortion laws to remain strict and wholly inadequate.

Government after government have been loathe (scared) to address this issue properly because it remains so divisive in Irish society.

Mme, I think they would try to wait to 28 weeks at least; 22 weeks has almost no survival rate.

The UK principle is that ongoing medical treatment must be in the best interest of the recipient. Not of a foetus, not of her family members - in the autonomous person's best interests. It is hard to argue that in this case.

Oh and there really are very few details about this woman, her family or her wider circumstances in an attempt to protect her privacy.

Yonic
I was thinking of the earliest viable moment, but yes, they'd want to wait as long as possible.

Eagle
I can't think that it will stay private much longer. Someone will blab to the press.

I've just read something from livescience.com link to article about how the body shuts down on life support when you're brain dead. Hormone secretions stop after about a week which means kidney, gastric, immune system etc are effected.

Its moved me away from any fence and into this is barbaric camp. I cannot see any way for the foetus to become a viable baby, but I'd still love to be proved completely wrong.

Are they going to just pump her full of drugs to sustain some sort of weird suspension of reality? They can't really because it would harm the foetus but they can't not because it would harm the foetus. And what of the mental health of her existing children? How damaging will it be to them? First do no harm but harm has been done by extending the grief and devastation of two living breathing children.