T*R
发帖数: 36302 | 1 哥给老王说得不学习就不是人，所以今天也当一回法律砖家，特别邀请某宗教人士和某
羊文砖家来学习一下：
Texas Advance Directives Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care
Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas
Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on
Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to
discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice
if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care
by the treating medical team.
Although it is often stated that the act is officially named as the 'Futile
Care Law' or the 'Futile Care Act', that is in fact incorrect and the
statute has never legally had that title.
Contents
1 The statute
2 Cases
3 Support
4 Criticism
5 Reform efforts
6 See also
7 Notes
The statute
For the hospital personnel to take advantage of legal immunity from
prosecution for this the following process must be followed:
The family must be given written information concerning hospital policy on
the ethics consultation process.
The family must be given 48 hours' notice and be invited to participate in
the ethics consultation process. Family members may consult their own
medical specialists and legal advisors if they wish.
The ethics consultation process must provide a written report to the family
of the findings of the ethics review process.
If the ethics consultation process fails to resolve the dispute, the
hospital, working with the family, must try to arrange transfer to another
provider physician and institution who are willing to give the treatment
requested by the family and refused by the current treatment team.
If after 10 days, no such provider can be found, the hospital and physician
may unilaterally withhold or withdraw the therapy that has been determined
to be futile.
The party who disagrees may appeal to the relevant state court and ask the
judge to grant an extension of time before treatment is withdrawn. This
extension is to be granted only if the judge determines that there is a
reasonable likelihood of finding a willing provider of the disputed
treatment if more time is granted.
If either the family does not seek an extension or the judge fails to grant
one, futile treatment may be unilaterally withdrawn by the treatment team
with immunity from civil or criminal prosecution.2
The bill was signed into law while George W. Bush was Governor of Texas.
Prior to the passage of this law, no protections or "grace period" existed.[
1] Critics have compared this law and its effects with Bush's response to
Terri Schiavo's situation, in particular his stated intent to sign the
proposed Incapacitated Person's Legal Protection Act.3
Similar legislation, modeled on the Texas law, was proposed in Idaho in 2009
, but was defeated.[citation needed]
Cases
Sun Hudson: On March 15, 2005, six-month-old infant Sun Hudson, who had a
lethal congenital malformation, was one of the first children to have care
withdrawn under the Texas Futile Treatment Law.[2] Doctors demonstrated in
the ethics committee reviews that keeping the infant on a respirator would
only delay his inevitable death. | T*R
发帖数: 36302 | 2 某宗教人士不是说美国不会拔孩子管吗？
这脸被打得啪啪的，痛吗? 打在你脸上，痛在哥手上。 | T*R
发帖数: 36302 | 3 发信人: Adrianne (阿德里安妮), 信区: USANews
标 题: Re: 英国刚被法院和医生强制拔管的两岁娃是这么惨死的
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Apr 29 13:01:27 2018, 美东)
美国本来最好的医院都是教会创立的慈善性质的，比如西雅图的瑞典医院，不但是非赢
利性质，它每年很大一部分的花消是由慈善捐款来cover的，人家本来就不是靠诊费和
政府拔款，美国大部分儿童医院都是同样性质，所以在美国不会有人敢强行拔小孩管子
，因为1）差额可以通过慈善捐款来cover,2)拔了管子一般法院肯定要判给小孩家长，
那医院就有的赔了。
感情我住的美国和你住的美国不是一个国家。或者你刚从火星回来，2005的case都不知
道。或者你从来就是个不懂装懂的人？ | T*R
发帖数: 36302 | 4 In Texas, a Hospital Ethics Panel - Not the Patient or Family - Decides
Whether to End Care
DIANNA WRAY | FEBRUARY 9, 2016 | 5:00AM
AA
She closes her eyes for only a second, but when Evelyn Kelly wakes up,
doctors surround her son’s hospital bed at Houston Methodist, and J.
Richard Cheney, the Houston Methodist Bioethics Committee chairman, looms
over her, holding out an envelope.
Kelly had been sitting alongside her son, David Chris Dunn, for hours every
day since he entered Houston Methodist on October 12, transferred from
Bayshore Medical Center in Pasadena. He’d been intubated for more than a
month, and the doctors had kept him sedated so he wouldn’t disturb the tube
in his throat. Dunn can’t respond, but he follows his mother’s movements
with his eyes.
ADVERTISING
Kelly stares at Cheney. He quickly delivers news no one likes to give: The
doctors have held a meeting and decided it’s time to end Dunn’s medical
care. The hospital ethics committee will meet in 48 hours to make its final
decision. The envelope contains the paperwork that gives them the right to
do so: the Texas Advance Directives Act.
Kelly refuses to take it.
This isn’t the first time Dunn’s medical team has brought up the subject
of ending his care. When Dunn was brought to the hospital by ambulance, the
doctor on call told Brittney Kelly, Dunn’s youngest sister, it would be a
miracle if the 46-year-old former Harris County sheriff’s deputy survived
the night. The mass on his pancreas was causing problems for the rest of his
organs; he was in renal failure, and his vitals were so weak that the
physician told Brittney the family needed to say their good-byes.
But he didn’t die that night. In the days that followed, the medical team
called a series of meetings with the family to discuss Dunn’s health, their
treatment plan and the choices that would need to be made. All but one of
these meetings were held in the hospital’s family room, a small, softly lit
area just off the main waiting room with boxes of tissue scattered around.
Kelly made it clear in each meeting that, as a born-again Christian, she
wasn’t going to take her son off life support. She pushed the doctors —
Dunn’s attending physician, Dr. Aditya Uppalapati, and the rest of his
medical team — to perform a biopsy on the pancreatic mass or to open him up
and remove it entirely. The physicians said Dunn was too weak for either
procedure. The relationship between Kelly and the physicians became so tense
that some of the doctors wouldn’t enter Dunn’s room.
From Kelly’s standpoint, every second her son lived was a reason for hope,
but for the doctors, it had meant weeks of treating a man who wasn’t
showing any signs of improvement beyond simply having a pulse.
But now, it seems, his time is up. A doctor specializing in “comfort care”
— Cheney gestures to a woman in a white coat standing next to him — will
remove all the machines keeping him alive and inject him with Ativan and
morphine. That will make the dying process less painful, Cheney tells Kelly.
When Kelly still won’t open her hand to take the envelope, he sets it down
next to her on the couch.
“Who gives you the right to do this, to do this to my son?” Kelly asks,
staring at Cheney.
“George W. Bush gave us the right,” Cheney replies.
Two days later, the hospital ethics committee meets, this time in a
nondescript conference room packed with at least 30 people. The meeting is
short. Uppalapati sums up his take on Dunn’s prognosis: that he will not
recover. The hospital ethics committee votes to approve the doctor’s
recommendation and end Dunn’s medical care.
Kelly’s only other option is to have her son transferred to another
hospital, and that has to happen within ten days.
Houston Methodist is required to help facilitate such a transfer, but Kelly
doesn’t trust that hospital officials will make a good-faith pitch to
another hospital. She and Dunn’s siblings make the calls.
“I mean, how do you even sell that one? ‘Hi, my brother is on a ventilator
and he can’t breathe on his own and this hospital won’t keep him anymore.
Do y’all want a crack at it?’” Brittney says now.
An official at another hospital asked Kelly why she was trying to move Dunn.
“Don’t you realize you’re at one of the best hospitals in the city?”
the administrator asked.
Kelly laughed and started to cry. “Yeah, but they’ve said they won’t help
him get better,” she said.
Chris Dunn didn’t have health insurance, and he had never filled out
advance directives or even talked to his mother and siblings about what they
should do if he ever got really sick.
It wouldn’t have changed anything anyway — not once his doctors decided to
convene a hospital ethics committee.
In Texas it doesn’t matter what instructions you’ve previously given or
what your relatives say: If you’re in critical condition, you’re dependent
on machines to survive and hospital officials decide it’s time to pull the
plug, you will die. And it’s completely legal. | a*********a
发帖数: 3656 | 5 “This extension is to be granted only if the judge determines that there is
a
reasonable likelihood of finding a willing provider of the disputed
treatment if more time is granted.”
英国小孩的例子，意大利已经同意给治疗了，还给了国籍，很明显既成事实的“
reasonable likelihood of finding a willing provider of the disputed
treatment if more time is granted”
likelihood = 100%, no more time needed.
Care
【在 T*R 的大作中提到】
: 哥给老王说得不学习就不是人，所以今天也当一回法律砖家，特别邀请某宗教人士和某
: 羊文砖家来学习一下：
: Texas Advance Directives Act
: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
: The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care
: Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas
: Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on
: Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to
: discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice
: if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care
| a******5
发帖数: 2062 | 6 哦，多谢法普，a mental note: 赶紧查查本州有没有类似法律！ | r*********t
发帖数: 4911 | | d******a
发帖数: 32122 | 8 拔管子那天给的意大利国籍 ...
精神赞助而已，意大利政府应该是没有给予金钱支持，否则会被国内骂死。
is
【在 a*********a 的大作中提到】
: “This extension is to be granted only if the judge determines that there is
: a
: reasonable likelihood of finding a willing provider of the disputed
: treatment if more time is granted.”
: 英国小孩的例子，意大利已经同意给治疗了，还给了国籍，很明显既成事实的“
: reasonable likelihood of finding a willing provider of the disputed
: treatment if more time is granted”
: likelihood = 100%, no more time needed.
:
: Care
| w*******2
发帖数: 2199 | 9 男护士终于也有站在右的角度上看问题的一次
可喜可贺
叔认为， 病人/保险公司/政府出钱继续维持生命， 医院没资格拔管子
三者都不出钱， 那医院按guideline拔罐子就无可争议
Care
【在 T*R 的大作中提到】
: 哥给老王说得不学习就不是人，所以今天也当一回法律砖家，特别邀请某宗教人士和某
: 羊文砖家来学习一下：
: Texas Advance Directives Act
: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
: The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care
: Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas
: Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on
: Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to
: discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice
: if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care
|
|
