https://people.com/health/tinslee-lewis-...e-support/

"Just a day after a judge decided a hospital can go through with plans to remove an 11-month-old baby from life support, Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton filed an appeal that could potentially give the child’s family more time.

Baby Tinslee Lewis has remained at Cook Children’s Medical Center since she was born in February 2019 with a rare heart defect called Ebstein’s anomaly, according to KTVT. The defect, which affects the tricuspid valve — the valve that sits between the two right heart chambers — has left Tinslee with lung disease and severe chronic pulmonary hypertension.

Doctors there believe Tinslee is in constant pain and she won’t be able to recover and have planned to remove her from life support, according to CNN....

“Today’s decision from Chief Justice Sandee B. Marion restores the ability of the Cook Children’s medical staff to make the most compassionate and medically appropriate decisions for Tinslee as she struggles in pain to survive each day. ..."

This is a difficult issue. But why does the hospital make the decision?
BTW, contrary to the left's talking points, the baby is Black.

But there won't be death panels. Thanks Obama

Patients of all ages live in pain and have no hope for recovery…
but hospitals aren't allowed to decide to withhold care that will end their life...
or at least they weren't in the past.

The hospital is advocating for post-birth abortion. Crazy.

Guessing whoever insures baby Tinslee wants baby Tinslee off their books.

(01-04-2020 04:47 PM)shere khan Wrote:  But there won't be death panels. Thanks Obama

(01-04-2020 04:56 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Patients of all ages live in pain and have no hope for recovery…
but hospitals aren't allowed to decide to withhold care that will end their life...
or at least they weren't in the past.

The hospital is advocating for post-birth abortion. Crazy.

Guessing whoever insures baby Tinslee wants baby Tinslee off their books.

Test test ... multiquote test.

Read more about this. Bad situation all the way around. My problem is the part where the hospital makes the decision.

I agree this is a very tough issue.

I also agree that ultimately this is an issue the parents should have the final say.

Giving it to anyone else is a slippery slope

The article talked about the child being in pain

Pain is a very slippery threshold to use when it comes to ending life against a parent's will

I agree with the sentiment that financial issues are likely coming into play. If the child is a Medicaid patient, the hosptial is getting extremely low reimbursement for the massive amount of services they are providing. If the child is a private insurance patient, while I dont know the exact contract detail, the reimbursement provided is likely decreasing as time progresses

Just think, if we had single-payer or single-provider, the plug would already have been pulled without the parents' input. That's how they save money.

Appeals court overturns judge
Enter the leftist pushing the death panels to decide.

(01-05-2020 01:37 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Appeals court overturns judge
Enter the leftist pushing the death panels to decide.

"The law stipulates that if the hospital's ethics committee agrees with doctors, treatment can be withdrawn after 10 days if a new provider can’t be found to take the patient."

So if the "ethics commitee" agrees with doctors?

That is some scary shite right there.

(01-05-2020 02:01 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 01:37 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Appeals court overturns judge
Enter the leftist pushing the death panels to decide.

"The law stipulates that if the hospital's ethics committee agrees with doctors, treatment can be withdrawn after 10 days if a new provider can’t be found to take the patient."

So if the "ethics commitee" agrees with doctors?

That is some scary shite right there.

This child is being killed because the insurance company doesn't want to pay any more for care. Period. The pain and suffering is just the excuse given.

Betting mom has Medicaid or Obamacare heavily subsidized insurance but it could be any insurance company with lifetime caps.

The decision to allow this child to be killed because she is expensive to care for should scare the crap out of everyone who relies on health insurance.
What is the threshhold for too expensive to care for???
#toooldtocover #toohandicappedtocover #toosicktocover
#logansrun

(01-05-2020 02:01 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 01:37 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Appeals court overturns judge
Enter the leftist pushing the death panels to decide.

"The law stipulates that if the hospital's ethics committee agrees with doctors, treatment can be withdrawn after 10 days if a new provider can’t be found to take the patient."

So if the "ethics commitee" agrees with doctors?

That is some scary shite right there.

i wonder what objective standards they base their decisions on.

Or do they make up their own as they go?

Ethics Committee is much happier sounding than Death Panel

Unfortunately the function appears to be the same

The question any judge needs to ask is simple:
If this were the President's or the Governor's child, would the hosptial be seeking a court order to end life against the family's wishes??

I would be willing to bet the answer in this situation would be no. Therefore the life should not be ended

(01-05-2020 02:41 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Ethics Committee is much happier sounding than Death Panel

Unfortunately the function appears to be the same

The question any judge needs to ask is simple:
If this were the President's or the Governor's child, would the hosptial be seeking a court order to end life against the family's wishes??

I would be willing to bet the answer in this situation would be no. Therefore the life should not be ended

Well, considering the ethics committee is probably morally bankrupt and perverse and given that the TX gov and the POTUS are both Republicans...

(01-05-2020 02:41 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Ethics Committee is much happier sounding than Death Panel

Unfortunately the function appears to be the same

The question any judge needs to ask is simple:
If this were the President's or the Governor's child, would the hosptial be seeking a court order to end life against the family's wishes??

I would be willing to bet the answer in this situation would be no. Therefore the life should not be ended

The baby is not just not wealthy or powerful she's a minority too.
Where's Black Lives Matter protesting for justice for Baby Tinslee?

There is no reason why a private organization (a hospital) should be forced to provide a service it isn't being paid for.

I highly doubt the mother has enough insurance to cover all of the baby's costs.

It's heartless, but this falls in the realm of charity. Other articles say that they've been trying (and failing) to find another hospital or charity to take the baby. So even the charities have decided that this child's live is a money pit that they don't want to enter. Sad, but then again the fact that such expensive life-changing technology even exists is a testament to the extreme amount of value our society places on every life.

(01-04-2020 04:47 PM)shere khan Wrote:  But there won't be death panels. Thanks Obama

This “death panel” gets its power from a Texas bill that was supported by Texas Right to Life and was signed into law by George W. Bush. So you can thank them.

(01-05-2020 05:48 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  There is no reason why a private organization (a hospital) should be forced to provide a service it isn't being paid for.

I highly doubt the mother has enough insurance to cover all of the baby's costs.

It's heartless, but this falls in the realm of charity. Other articles say that they've been trying (and failing) to find another hospital or charity to take the baby. So even the charities have decided that this child's live is a money pit that they don't want to enter. Sad, but then again the fact that such expensive life-changing technology even exists is a testament to the extreme amount of value our society places on every life.

Worst case scenario baby is on Medicaid.

Hosptial is being reimbursed

(01-05-2020 08:38 PM)HappyAppy Wrote:  

(01-04-2020 04:47 PM)shere khan Wrote:  But there won't be death panels. Thanks Obama

This “death panel” gets its power from a Texas bill that was supported by Texas Right to Life and was signed into law by George W. Bush. So you can thank them.

No problem. Frick them too

mptnstr@44

You've hit all sides of the argument for single payer/public option etc here

Whom is really making the call? Obviously not the parents... Is it the insurer? sort of, but with the compliance of the doctors and the 'ethics committee'... in part because like with the ACA and how it controls costs... each DRG has a contracted amount paid... and whether you actually use that amount or 10 times that amount, the hospital has been paid all they will ever be paid for those services.

So is the hospital supposed to just keep paying for this care forever? Obviously there are 'death panels' put in place to determine that they've done enough and they can over-rule the parents.

The weird thing to me is that when we speak of abortion (which is clearly different)... it's supposed to be a private decision between a woman and their doctor... yet this is a private decision between the doctor and their employer, without the child or parents consent.

It does seem odd (and driven only by money) that abortions are a decision for the parents, but life support is not.

This is one of the problems that the ACA said they would fix with the removal of caps (which is really cheap to do because they happen so rarely) and one of the things that 'single payer' advocates say would be fixed, ignoring the experiences in the rest of the world.

(01-06-2020 02:57 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  It does seem odd (and driven only by money) that abortions are a decision for the parents, but life support is not.

Youre not supposed to point out hypocrisy like that.

The left would be outraged if a woman was denied an abortion against her will but have no problem in ending the life of that same child against the will of that same women

You are 100% right that it comes down to money.

Abortion is cheaper then birth, delivery, and raising a child
Ending a life is cheaper than maintaining one