definition the patient did not appear to be in active labor as she delivered 4 days after the initial evaluation. The patient was sent home and returned to Memorial Hospital where she delivered. Based on these findings the defense argument, that the patient was not transferred to another facility nor did they attempt to transferred the patient to another facility does hold some credence. According to Zibulewsky, (2001)The initial intent of EMTALA was to ensure nondiscriminatory access to emergency medical care. The mere fact that the physician recommended follow-up at an outside facility after adequately evaluated and treating the patient, would not be an EMTALA violation. However, refusing to see the patient back in the future when she was in active labor, clearly would be an EMTALA violation. Because of the distance to Galveston, it is unreasonable to assume that the patient could without exception make it to another facility for delivery. On reviewing the case and other associated evaluations performed by Memorial Hospital, it becomes clear that the hospital has established a pattern of not managing indigent patients and was involved in the practice of diverting them to other facilities. Based on these findings it appears that several infractions of the EMTALA have been committed by the facility. Whether the case in question falls strictly under these guidelines it is unclear. I believe part of the court's decision to find against the defendant was the result of the pattern of behavior that was established by the facility and the treating physician. Because there is clear violation of EMTALA, further action should be taken by the medical review board. The fines can include up to $50,000 against the hospital and physician for each violation as well as possible termination of the hospital and providers Medicare provider…
Procedural History: Mr. Schiavo requested the guardianship court to permit him to end the life-prolonging procedures that were supporting his wife, who was in a persistent vegetative state. Theresa Schiavo’s parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, opposed the motion and brought the case in to trial. After the court granted Mr. Schiavo to end the life-prolonging procedures, the case was brought to the appellate level which affirmed the decision. Although the guardianship court’s order was affirmed during the appeal, allowing Mr. Schiavo to stop the procedures, the litigation continued because Mr. and Ms. Schindler’s filed a motion for relief from judgment under Florida Civil Procedure and in civil division of the circuit court. The Second District agreed to review the evidence but ultimately affirmed the guardianship court’s decision in the end and gave Mr. Schiavo permission to remove Theresa’s nutrition tubes. However, six days later, under the Legislative enactment, Governor Bush sigh the Act of the Legislative into law and ordered Theresa Schiavo to continue staying on nutrition…
In the Cruzan case her family had to convince the courts that she would not want the tube feeding and hydration. They realized this would not cause her and pain and suffering due to her PVS. Here they had to fight with the Missouri courts. In this case they had to show clear and…
It troubled him that the Judge Teel described Nancy’s condition as “unresponsive and hopeless” with “no cognitive purpose for her except sound and perhaps pain.” If Nancy feels pain then she is not in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). We did not know what was going on behind the scenes, but later it would all come to light. Our case bypassed the appellate court of Missouri and headed straight to the Missouri Supreme Court, with a little assistance. Our case was scheduled for review in September, along with a case that has opposite opinions as ours. In other words, the parents of a young man named Phillip Radar, that was diagnosed as being brain dead, did not want to let their child go, but the hospital caring for him did. Phillip’s heart was beating even though he was brain dead. Both of the cases were scheduled to be heard on the same morning in September, but on August 31st Phillip’s heart stopped and the effort to revive him was unsuccessful. His death left our case as the only one to be…
After nine years, when cruzans lost all their hope for the recovery of Nancy, they asked the director of the Missouri Rehabilitation center to remove the feeding and hydration tube, so Nancy could die. The director refused to do so, because at this time, the law in the state of Missouri did not allow for the removal of life support for a patient who legally could not speak or care for himself ---unless there was “clear and convincing evidence” that this is what the patient wanted. The issue of this case was whether the State of Missouri had the right to require "clear and convincing evidence" in order for the Cruzans to remove their daughter from life support.…
In my opinion the two petitioners did not legally kill the victim in this case. I believe that the actual act of them removing the life support does not constitute a guilty act. To me it is more of an omission of modern medicine. The doctors had an obligation to help the victim with his health issues, but not a legal responsibility. Once the victim was in a vegetative state they could not do anything to bring him out of the coma, only continue his living in that state and taking care of him. They discussed the issue with the patient’s wife and children and were sure to explain that the chance of recovery was extremely unlikely if at all possible. The family gave the doctors consent to remove the victim from life support that would ultimately end his life. I also don’t see this omission of medical help as euthanasia as they did not induce his death. On the opposite side, if the doctors had given the victim a type of poison against the family’s wishes to keep him on life support, then I would consider that a murder. The facts of the case to me also show that the doctors and nursing staff did everything that they could to keep the victim alive and in…
"The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. The exercise of this right is as central to personal autonomy and bodily integrity as rights safeguarded by this Court's decisions relating to marriage, family relationships, procreation, contraception, child rearing and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment. In particular, this Court's recent decisions concerning the right to refuse medical treatment and the right to abortion instruct that a mentally competent, terminally…
In some ethical and legal respects a pregnant woman and her fetus can be considered separate. Both the woman and the fetus are ordinarily affected by the well-being of one another for as long as each of them live. The ethical and legal issues are challenged deeply in cases where the well-being of the fetus and the mother appear to be in conflict. Our society struggles with identifying cases where the pregnant woman’s interests and/or behaviors might put her fetus at risk. Criminal and/or civil commitments should be used to bar pregnant women from exposing their fetuses to risk.…
The Terri Schiavo case was a legal struggle involving prolonged life support in the United States that lasted from 1990 to 2005. The issue was whether to carry out the decision of the husband of Teresa Marie "Terri" Schiavo to terminate life support for her. Terri was diagnosed by doctors as being in a persistent vegetative state. The highly publicized and prolonged series of legal challenges presented by her parents and by state and federal legislative intervention effected a seven-year delay before life support finally was terminated (Baynews.com).…
“Between a Woman and Her Doctor” by Martha Mendoza is the author’s personal experience of a complex abortion while dealing with the difficulties of legal disputes and limited medical assistance during an emotional time in her life. Mendoza uses the expressive purpose as she writes her story to express her depressing and frustrating feelings she has during the death of her child as well as the challenging time as she tries to obtain a dilation and extraction procedure. Her secondary purpose is persuasive as she describes a change to be made in the set-in-stone policy regarding abortion and the need for more doctors to have the necessary training to perform abortions after sixteen weeks of pregnancy as doctors are becoming more obsolete to perform that type of surgery.…
New technological advances allow for patients to stay alive in situations that they normally could not survive. This causes an increasingly problematic conflict between medical and legal systems. The Uniform Declaration of Death Act allows for a somewhat reliable definition for death in both systems. However, some situations still challenge the universally accepted definition of death. Lia’s situation is a perfect example of how a medical definition of death conflicts with legal conditions. Lia’s complex medical situation showcases how death challenges both the medical and legal systems in America, making it very difficult to offer a concrete definition.…
My newspaper article was about a woman named Samantha Burton, a pregnant woman who was forced to be hospitalized. She was 25 weeks pregnant and forced on “bed rest”. Although Burton’s doctor confirmed that she was not in labor. Burton’s doctor took matters in his own hands and came back with an attorney forcing Samantha Burton to stay in the hospital against her will. The attorney was on line with the judge John C. Cooper. Ms. Burton wanted to obtain prenatal care somewhere else and the courts ordered her to stay. In the ruling, the judge said, “The state had a right to ensure that children receive medical treatment which is necessary for the preservation of life and health”. "Does the state own the inside of a woman's womb that it can kind of intervene at will”? No, I say in my personal opinion and believe in Pro-choice of the “fetus”. I know smoking cigarette’s is wrong while pregnant but I have heard and read about worse that mother’s do while pregnant.…
Until a pregnant single woman, by the fictional name of Jane Roe, challenged the Texas criminal abortion law, the decision whether or not to terminate the pregnancy was left entirely up to the State. Justice Blackmun, along with six other justices, argued that the decision to abort should be available to the woman-but only up to a certain point during the pregnancy. In order to decide when the decision should fall from the woman’s hands to the States, the court resolved to divide the pregnancy into three trimesters. During the first trimester, the State is not liable to regulate. The decision to abort is therefore left to the woman and her physician. This is so because until the end of the first trimester, morality in abortions is less than in normal childbirth. For the subsequent trimester, the…
Physicians take a hypocritical oath that says “Do no harm”, but are they really harming a patient that is already near death by letting them make the choice not to sustain what little life they may have left. After living on life support for fifteen years, Terry Schiavo’s husband was granted the right to take her off after a long legal battle. Upon her death an autopsy was performed and they found her brain to be a half of its normal…
“The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right”.[1]…