Marlise Muñoz, 33, was finally taken off life support Jan. 26 after suffering from a pulmonary embolism, a medical condition in which there is a sudden blockage of a major blood vessel in the lungs. She was found lying unconscious on the kitchen floor by her husband Erick in late November last year and had not woken up since. She was later declared brain dead by doctors at the John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth.
Muñoz was kept on life support, in spite of her wish not to be kept on it — a wish her husband and family had publicly expressed.
So, if Muñoz had lost all activity in her brain and brain stem, why did the hospital keep her on life support? When she was admitted to the hospital, she was 14 weeks pregnant. The hospital claimed it could not take her off for the safety of the baby inside her. They wanted to wait until the fetus was developed enough to be delivered and still be a healthy baby.
They referred to the Texas Advance Directives Act, which states: “A person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment under this subchapter from a pregnant patient.” The hospital seemed to have good intentions. They were trying to save a life, as a hospital should strive to do.
Still, there are those who don’t think this claim is accurate. Tom Mayo, an associate professor of law at Southern Methodist University, said this part of the Advance Directives Act did not apply in this case because Muñoz was technically dead. He went on to say that the hospital has a choice “to either act in a way that preserves its legal immunities or act in a way that respects the wishes of the patient and/or her surrogate decision maker.”
So even if Muñoz was not dead, just in a vegetative state, and the Advance Directives Act applied, the ultimate decision can be whatever the family and hospital agrees is the best solution for the patient.
Muñoz’s family had been fighting with the hospital to let her go to the point that Erick Muñoz filed a lawsuit against the hospital on the grounds that keeping Muñoz on life support violated the 14th Amendment of Texas law, which says “a competent person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in making decisions regarding their own body.”
They, with the help of their attorneys, were able to determine that it was too late to save the baby. They found that “the fetus (had) suffered deformed lower extremities, hydrocephalus and other abnormalities, including a possible heart problem,” according to a Dallas Culture Map article. Judge R. H. Wallace issued a court order for Muñoz to be removed from life support, which the hospital followed.
This information brings another view of the situation into play. Ernest Machado, Muñoz’s father, said, “All we want is to let her rest, to let her go to sleep.” Instead of trying to save a life, why not let it go peacefully? Should Muñoz ‘s dead body be kept around and not properly laid to rest to save the baby with such a condition?
Muñoz and her baby, whom the father had named Nicole, were finally put to rest, but the controversy still exists as to whether a pregnant woman who has been medically proven dead should be kept on life support for the sake of the baby. In Texas, more weight and importance is given to keeping a person alive, especially when it comes to an unborn child.
Some of the Republican candidates running for Texas lieutenant governor have even stated that Judge Wallace was wrong to have let Muñoz be taken off life support and promised to, if elected, “tighten state law” to not let something like this happen again.
But is it prudent to make a fixed ruling in such matters — to tie the hands of hospitals and families? In the background description of the Advance Directives Act, the Texas Hospital Association said, “the state’s Advance Directives Act attempts to balance the rights of patients and providers and relies on medical knowledge and judgment to make appropriate treatment decisions based on the patient’s condition.”
Each case is different, so to use a strict cookie-cutter rule would be pointless. That is why the state has made a law that allows people to make a choice and provides guidelines for them to follow to help make the best choice. It is hard to make a decision regarding the life of a loved one, and it can cause a lot of stress for the family. Unfortunately, in Muñoz’s case, she and her baby could not be saved, but that doesn’t mean all similar cases will end the same way. In the end, it all depends on what is best for that family at that time.
Opinion columnist Zehra Abbas is an English sophomore and may be reached at [email protected]
Let the babies die! Governments should have virtual control over us unless it has to do with our rights to kill our babies or smoke weed because that would cross the line!