Anybody got the number of that truck that hit

[zbdent]

Texas - namely, the law that George W. Bush signed in 1999, saying that a hospital or Dr. could pull the plug on patients against the family wishes?

That would be a good sign to hold up: "Bush nnnn.nn-n - Thou shalt not breathe"

[Warpy]

1. I'd support that law, actually, if it weren't limited to indigent people

What it does is allow ethics boards in hospitals to overrule families who are clinging to false hope without the expense of petitioning the court. It puts medical decisions into the hands of the medical community along with the other members of the ethics panel, which, by the way, include clergy.

I've worked in neuro units enough to see how families cling to every twitch, every sigh, every involuntary posture as proof that their relatives are alive and trying to communicate. Families can cope with loss. They just can't cope with the partial loss that destruction of brain tissue represents. The patient looks normal for the first month or two, and families don't notice the changes over time. Nothing will convince them that the body in the bed, force fed fluid and nutrition, and even breathing only with the assist of a machine, is gone.

Undoubtedly this will need some fine tuning, as in the length of time a family will be given to come to terms with the fact that their relative is truly gone before life support is withdawn. However, the principle behind it is a good one, or would be if Bush hadn't limited it to the poor.

[HuckleB]

2. Link to story on this.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/217023_texas22.html