In '99 GWBush sighed into law a"cut off life support over family obj."bill

Q: Who signed a Texas law allowing hospitals to cut life support over a family's objections? A: GWB.

Why does the media not discuss this Hypocrisy. Is this supposed to be a state secret or is it just more of our RW GOP controlled media?

In 1999 then governor Bush signed a law which allowed hospitals to withdraw life support from patients, over the objections of the family, if they consider the treatment to be nonbeneficial.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3073295

Hospitals can end life support
Decision hinges on patient's ability to pay, prognosis
By LEIGH HOPPER
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Bill Olive / Chronicle
(L-r)Mario Caballero, Spiro Nikolouzos Jr. and Jannette Nikolouzos. St. Luke's notified Jannette Nikolouzos in a March 1 letter that it would withdraw life-sustaining care of her husband of 34 years, Spiro Nikolouzos, in 10 days.

A patient's inability to pay for medical care combined with a prognosis that renders further care futile are two reasons a hospital might suggest cutting off life support, the chief medical officer at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital said Monday.

Dr. David Pate's comments came as the family of Spiro Nikolouzos fights to keep St. Luke's from turning off the ventilator and artificial feedings keeping the 68-year-old grandfather alive.

St. Luke's notified Jannette Nikolouzos in a March 1 letter that it would withdraw life-sustaining care of her husband of 34 years in 10 days, which would be Friday. Mario Caba-llero, the attorney representing the family, said he is seeking a two-week extension, at minimum, to give the man more time to improve and to give his family more time to find an alternative facility.<snip>

That is just cruel

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL)
billnelson.senate.gov
Phone: (202) 224-5274
Fax: (202) 228-2183

Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL)
martinez.senate.gov
Phone: (202) 224-3041
Fax: (202) 228-5171
?
Representative Jeff Miller (R-FL 1st)
jeffmiller.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-4136
Fax: (202) 225-3414
?
Representative F. Allen Boyd, Jr. (D-FL 2nd)
www.house.gov/boyd
Phone: (202) 225-5235
Fax: (202) 225-5615

Representative Corrine Brown (D-FL 3rd)
www.house.gov/corrinebrown
Phone: (202) 225-0123
Fax: (202) 225-2256
?
Representative Ander Crenshaw (R-FL 4th)
crenshaw.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-2501
Fax: (202) 225-2504
?
Representative Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL 5th)
www.house.gov/brown-waite
Phone: (202) 225-1002
Fax: (202) 226-6559

Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL 6th)
www.house.gov/stearns
Phone: (202) 225-5744
Fax: (202) 225-3973
?
Representative John Mica (R-FL 7th)
www.house.gov/mica
Phone: (202) 225-4035
Fax: (202) 226-0821

Representative Ric Keller (R-FL 8th)
keller.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-2176
Fax: (202) 225-0999
?
Representative Michael Bilirakis (R-FL 9th)
www.house.gov/bilirakis
Phone: (202) 225-5755
Fax: (202) 225-4085
?
Representative C.W. Bill Young (R-FL 10th)
www.house.gov/young
hone: (202) 225-5961
Fax: (202) 225-9764
?
Representative Jim Davis (D-FL 11th)
www.house.gov/jimdavis
Phone: (202) 225-3376
Fax: (202) 225-5652
?
Representative Adam Putnam (R-FL 12th)
www.house.gov/putnam
Phone: (202) 225-1252
Fax: (202) 226-0585
?
Representative Katherine Harris (R-FL 13th)
harris.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-5015
Fax: (202) 226-0828
?
Representative Connie Mack (R-FL 14th)
www.house.gov/mack
Phone: (202) 225-2536
Fax: (202) 226-0439
?
Representative Dave Weldon (R-FL 15th)
www.house.gov/weldon
Phone: (202) 225-3671
Fax: (202) 225-3516
?
Representative Mark Foley (R-FL 16th)
www.house.gov/foley
Phone: (202) 225-5792
Fax: (202) 225-3132
?
Representative Kendrick B. Meek (D-FL 17th)
kendrickmeek.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-4506
Fax: (202) 226-0777
?
Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL 18th)
www.house.gov/ros-lehtinen
Phone: (202) 225-3931
Fax: (202) 225-5620
?
Representative Robert I. Wexler (D-FL 19th)
www.house.gov/wexler
Phone: (202) 225-3001
Fax: (202) 225-5974
?
Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL 20th)
www.house.gov/wasserman-schultz
Phone: (202) 225-7931
Fax: (202) 225-8456

Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL 21st)
diaz-balart.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-4211
Fax: (202) 225-8576
?
Representative E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL 22nd)
shaw.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-3026
Fax: (202) 225-8398
?
Representative Alcee L. Hastings (D-FL 23rd)
www.alceehastings.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-1313
Fax: (202) 225-1171
?
Representative Tom Feeney (R-FL 24th)
www.house.gov/feeney
Phone: (202) 225-2706
Fax: (202) 226-6299
?
Representative Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL 25th)
www.house.gov/mariodiaz-balart
Phone: (202) 225-2778
Fax: (202) 226-0346

HARD!!!!

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/healthscience/stories/031605dntexbaby.bc467.html

Hospital ends life support of baby
1st U.S. case of its kind is against mom's wish, in accordance with law


10:37 PM CST on Tuesday, March 15, 2005


By BRUCE NICHOLS / The Dallas Morning News



HOUSTON – In what medical ethicists say is a first in the United States, a hospital acting under state law, with the concurrence of a judge, disconnected a critically ill baby from life support Tuesday over his mother's objections.

The baby, Sun Hudson, who'd been on a mechanical ventilator since his birth Sept. 25, died quickly afterward, his mother said.

"I held him ... I talked to him. I told him I love him," said the child's mother, Wanda Hudson. Then doctors took the mechanical breathing tube out, the child took a couple of breaths, struggled briefly in her arms and it was over, Ms. Hudson said.

The hospital acted under a Texas law passed in 1999 that allows attending physicians, in consultation with a hospital bioethics committee, to discontinue life support when a patient's condition is hopeless. The law gives a parent or guardian 10 days to find another hospital or institution. After that, the hospital is free to act

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3079622

March 10, 2005, 10:49PM



Right to Life backed law that irks wife
By RICK CASEY
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Judge Tony Lindsay expressed "most sincere sadness and apologies," but said the law required Nikolouzos show a reasonable expectation of finding an alternative facility before Lindsay could order the hospital to continue treatment it did not feel was advisable.

It's the same law under which another judge denied Wanda Hudson's request to force Texas Children's Hospital to maintain Sun Hudson on life support.

The law was passed in 1999 and amended two years ago. Acting as a negotiator for Houston-based Texas Right to Life, Burke Balch flew in from Washington "20 to 25 times" to sit at a table with represent-
atives of the Texas Hospital Association and other parties to negotiate the law and its amendment.

Balch is director of National Right to Life's Robert Powell Center for Medical Ethics.

Right to Life was at the table partly because then-Gov. George W. Bush had vetoed a similar bill two years earlier (1997) at the request of some members of the religious right, according to its sponsor, then-Sen. Mike Moncrief, now mayor of Fort Worth.<snip>

After new negotiations, the bill went before a Senate committee without opposition. Balch testified in favor, as did representatives of the Baylor Health Care System and the Texas Conference of Catholic Health Facilities.<snip>

Two years later, his group won an Internet registry of doctors and institutions willing to consider accepting patients under the bill in order to make it easier to find them.

"Before this bill there was no legal requirement to provide treatment in these circumstances at all, so we found it an advance to provide this opportunity of a transfer," Balch said.

Before the bill, however, judges had little guidance from the law when families went to court to challenge the decision of hospitals, or of some family members pitted against others. Boston College ethics professor John Paris, a leading medical ethicist, said judges were extremely reluctant to allow life support to be removed.<snip>

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3073295

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/healthscience/stories/031605dntexbaby.bc467.html

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3079622

And here's a copy of the state statute:

Texas Health & Safety Code - Chapter 166

§ 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR
TREATMENT DECISION. (a) If an attending physician refuses to
honor a patient's advance directive or a health care or treatment
decision made by or on behalf of a patient, the physician's refusal
shall be reviewed by an ethics<0> or medical committee. The attending
physician may not be a member of that committee. The patient shall
be given life<0>-sustaining treatment during the review.
(b) The patient or the person responsible for the health
care decisions of the individual who has made the decision
regarding the directive or treatment decision:
(1) may be given a written description of the ethics<0> or
medical committee review process and any other policies and
procedures related to this section adopted by the health care
facility;
(2) shall be informed of the committee review process
not less than 48 hours before the meeting called to discuss the
patient's directive, unless the time period is waived by mutual
agreement;
(3) at the time of being so informed, shall be
provided:
(A) a copy of the appropriate statement set forth
in Section 166.052; and
(B) a copy of the registry list of health care
providers and referral groups that have volunteered their readiness
to consider accepting transfer or to assist in locating a provider
willing to accept transfer that is posted on the website maintained
by the Texas Health Care Information Council under Section 166.053;
and
(4) is entitled to:
(A) attend the meeting; and
(B) receive a written explanation of the decision
reached during the review process.
(c) The written explanation required by Subsection
(b)(2)(B) must be included in the patient's medical record.
(d) If the attending physician, the patient, or the person
responsible for the health care decisions of the individual does
not agree with the decision reached during the review process under
Subsection (b), the physician shall make a reasonable effort to
transfer the patient to a physician who is willing to comply with
the directive. If the patient is a patient in a health care
facility, the facility's personnel shall assist the physician in
arranging the patient's transfer to:
(1) another physician;
(2) an alternative care setting within that facility;
or
(3) another facility.
(e) If the patient or the person responsible for the health
care decisions of the patient is requesting life<0>-sustaining
treatment that the attending physician has decided and the review
process has affirmed is inappropriate treatment, the patient shall
be given available life<0>-sustaining treatment pending transfer
under Subsection (d). The patient is responsible for any costs
incurred in transferring the patient to another facility. The
physician and the health care facility are not obligated to provide
life<0>-sustaining treatment after the 10th day after the written
decision required under Subsection (b) is provided to the patient
or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the
patient unless ordered to do so under Subsection (g).
(e-1) If during a previous admission to a facility a
patient's attending physician and the review process under
Subsection (b) have determined that life<0>-sustaining treatment is
inappropriate, and the patient is readmitted to the same facility
within six months from the date of the decision reached during the
review process conducted upon the previous admission, Subsections
(b) through (e) need not be followed if the patient's attending
physician and a consulting physician who is a member of the ethics<0>
or medical committee of the facility document on the patient's
readmission that the patient's condition either has not improved or
has deteriorated since the review process was conducted.
(f) Life<0>-sustaining treatment under this section may not be
entered in the patient's medical record as medically unnecessary
treatment until the time period provided under Subsection (e) has
expired.
(g) At the request of the patient or the person responsible
for the health care decisions of the patient, the appropriate
district or county court shall extend the time period provided
under Subsection (e) only if the court finds, by a preponderance of
the evidence, that there is a reasonable expectation that a
physician or health care facility that will honor the patient's
directive will be found if the time extension is granted.
(h) This section may not be construed to impose an
obligation on a facility or a home and community support services
agency licensed under Chapter 142 or similar organization that is
beyond the scope of the services or resources of the facility or
agency. This section does not apply to hospice services provided by
a home and community support services agency licensed under Chapter
142.

Added by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 450, § 1.03, eff. Sept. 1,
1999. Amended by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1228, § 3, 4, eff.
June 20, 2003

The I Hate Bush fan Club (Google version)

http://babyurl.com/GtLlSs

Kick :kick:

was strengthening the rights of the dying by signing this bill.
Still highlights the outrageous hypocrisy of these shameless fucks...