Pro-life legislators weigh in on medical ethics debate

Monday, March 27, 2017
 | 
Charlie Butts (OneNewsNow.com)

elderly patientTexas is trying to send a message that a patient's rights and family member's rights can't be overlooked in a dire medical situation.

Over the years, OneNewsNow has reported various cases in Texas in which a critically ill patient on life support, who didn't wish to die, was refused treatment and did die. Texas Right to Life Committee attorney Emily Cook explains how that came about.

"Since 1999, Texas has been home to a law that allows hospital physicians and what's called 'ethics committees' – because they're made up of persons employed by hospitals – to override patients' wishes regarding, specifically, life-sustaining treatment," she shares.

Cook

Effectively, that gives the committee the ultimate authority as to whether to continue treatment such as artificial nutrition and hydration, dialysis, and ventilators – "And we're seeing more and more lately [that it includes] different types of blood pressure medicine; things that without a person cannot live," Cook adds.

The opinions of legal surrogates don't matter either, the attorney explains. Desperate family members, after being notified the plug is going to be pulled on their loved one, must struggle to find an attorney to file suit – or find a medical facility that will care for the patient within ten days.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an opinion saying the "Futile Care Law" has constitutional problems, stating:

"The statute leads to the denial of a constitutionally protected interest – the right to life and the right to determine one's medical treatment. And it does so through woefully insufficient procedures – Section 166.046 [of the statute] not only denies patients sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard, it does not even afford patients with a neutral arbiter to decide their fate."

Proposals before both houses of the state legislature, if passed, would require the hospital to keep a patient alive and to find the alternative source to sustain the life until he or she can be transferred. The House bill is HB 4090; the Senate version is SB 1213.

Comments

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSBRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

VOTE IN OUR POLL

What's your reaction to California's new law restricting 'use of deadly force' by police officers?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Pentagon cancels billion-dollar missile defense project
Rust-belt China looks abroad as economy slows, tariffs bite
Reported illness among vapers reaches 150 possible cases
Texas executes man in 1998 slaying of college student
Hong Kong police in standoff with protesters after sit-in

LATEST FROM THE WEB

The left stokes racist flames, demonizes millions
A political party stupid enough to call you a racist is too stupid to govern
San Francisco board rebrands 'convicted felon' as 'justice-involved person,' sanitizes other crime lingo
A Michigan court case shows the right of armed self-defense is broader than you might think
Colorado teachers asked to take 'white privilege' survey

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day
NEXT STORY
Pro-lifers find great hope in Senate vote

Defund Planned ParenthoodA leading pro-life group believes that Thursday's Senate vote on former President Obama's executive order on Planned Parenthood funding offers a hint of hope for eventually defunding the nation's largest abortion-provider.