Clinically brain-dead pregnant woman kept alive to save baby against parents wishes

@al66pine ....
I don't know whether there are a whole host of failed attempts at maternal somatic support that aren't reported in the literature or whether there are so few case reports simply because it's such a rare set of circumstances, firstly for a pregnant mother to suffer an injury that leads to brain death, for this to be from a cause that doesn't immediately profoundly compromise the baby, for this to occur in a country with a healthcare system that can offer long term somatic support, for the care team to not automatically be scared off by the seriousness and lack of precedent, and for the family to agree.

In any case, what I draw from this is that there is a limited body of evidence from which to be making hard and fast pronouncements about prognosis.....
bbm sbm

Supernovae,
Thanks for your post here and your thoughtful analysis about the ltd body of evd.
Sums it up appropriately, regardless of whether the cause is failed attempts not reported in med lit
or whether cause is simply the low, low, low # of BD pregnant women.
Thank goodness for the low #.
 
Thank you for posting the full report of the court proceedings, Supernovae. Quite an interesting read.

The expert testimony is very disturbing, the extent to which this poor woman's body was forced to decay while legal debate raged on about "saving" the very immature fetus who clearly didn't have any chance of survival.

I am very glad that the court quite carefully explained how this case has nothing to do with elective abortion, and made that point at least 3 different times. I'm also glad the distinction was made between "experimental" treatment and "pioneering" treatments. For the sake of future cases, and the ambiguity in the wording and interpretation of their 8th amendment, I think it was very important to publish the legal opinion of the differences between this kind of case, and elective abortion. I'm also glad that there was such unanimous agreement by all the experts and counsel for the woman, her family, and the fetus, so that there was no further legal challenge, appeal, or emergency motions or injunctions.

The only "good" thing, IMO, that could occur from this tremendously tragic case has happened-- the setting of precedent for Ireland, with a well written legal judgment, and for that there can be some comfort that perhaps future unfortunate cases will not have to be taken to these extremes.
 
Having done a bit more googling around the "Heidelberg paper," I note that the Anstotz case (real name Marion Ploch) was the source of a significant public controversy in Germany at the time:

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-09-01/news/1993244122_1_fetus-ploch-life-support

This opens with the intriguing paragraph:

IS IT morally right to keep a dead woman who is pregnant attached to life support machines in order to let her fetus live? A recent case in California shows that such a question is not hypothetical.

Trisha Marshall died of a gunshot wound to the head on April 21 while she was 17 weeks pregnant. David Smith, the father, asked hospital officials to do whatever they could to save the fetus. Marshall's body was kept on life support machines at Highland Hospital in Oakland in the hope that her fetus would develop to the point where it could live.

On Aug. 4, a 4-pound, 15-ounce baby boy was delivered four weeks prematurely by Caesarean section. Dr. Richard Fulroth, who headed the team that delivered the child, called him "a miracle baby."

Now, this wasn't one of the cases with an outcome listed in the Heidelberg paper, although it may be one of the Suddaby cases.

http://articles.mcall.com/1992-11-01/news/2889311_1_fetus-ethics-panel-unborn-child

"The chances for survival are about 50-50, Scheele said. In the most similar case, in Champlain, Vt., in 1988, Conally Hilliker was born in the seventh month of his dead mother's pregnancy.

Connie Hilliker died in a car crash when she was 15 weeks pregnant. Her son was born with diabetes, pneumonia and heart problems, but today, at age 4, is healthy and happy, his father told German reporters. The boy lives with his father, stepmother and two photos of the mother he never saw."

This must be the Bernstein case. From what I can find, he seems to be alive and well, married, with his own child and on Facebook (although I won't link).
 
Thank you for the research, Supernovae.

What I'd like to see is some professional medical consensus about how to proceed in these cases. A consensus conference of world class obstetricians and neonatologists and ethicists, who would develop guidelines and protocols for when prolonged somatic support is clearly beneficial and should be pursued, and recommendations for when it should be withdrawn and abandoned.

We (in industrialized nations) are in desperate need of prospective clinical studies and consensus opinions that are well designed and have scientific foundations for the use of specific methods and drugs. Right now, every single case is "winging it" opportunistic experimentation, which is not the proper or ethical framework for "pioneering" medical research. Leaving this decision to legislatures to define is pure folly, IMO-- but the medical profession has avoided taking the reigns and scientifically and systematically studying these tragic situations in the same way that diseases and trauma have been studied.

I'm not at all opposed to trying to save fetuses of brain dead mothers that have a realistic chance of survival to birth, and beyond the neonatal period. I would define that as at least 20 or more weeks gestation at the time of maternal death, but that's my own personal opinion. Certainly at 28 weeks or more we should aggressively try to save the fetus, if it is clear the fetus is undamaged enough to survive.

But I just don't think the science is there yet for experimentally gestating profoundly immature fetuses in brain dead mothers. The risks and costs balanced against the extremely minuscule potential for a miraculous outcome are just not convincing enough to me that we should be doing this without the explicit consent of the woman and her next of kin, and the approval of institutional review boards, as well as the consensus of expert physicians and scientists. I believe it's quite unethical and highly experimental at this point in time to even try to save these fetuses that are less than 20 weeks gestation.

And honestly, I'm really weary of the comparison in the media and by pro-life activists and groups of these horribly tragic cases of pregnant brain dead women, to elective abortion. It's an ignorant and insulting comparison, IMO. I feel it's very disrespectful and exploitative of the woman and her family for these tragedies to be compared to elective abortion.

I recognize how very difficult it is to remove the religious and political ideologies from any discussion like this. Religion and politics drive these discussions, not science and medicine. I'd like to see the conversations moved back to the realm of science and medicine, and have science and medicine assertively take charge of the research and consensus building.
 
The background to the Marshall case is an interesting one:

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-08-04/news/1993216221_1_baby-boy-brain-dead-woman-healthy-baby

OAKLAND, Calif. -- In what doctors are calling a medical miracle, a healthy baby boy was born yesterday to an Oakland woman who had lain brain-dead in a hospital bed for 3 1/2 months.

Doctors at Highland Hospital delivered the 32-week-old infant by Caesarean-section at 12:20 p.m. yesterday, about two hours after Trisha Marshall's blood pressure dropped precipitously, threatening the baby's safety. But there were no complications during the surgery and the 4-pound, 15-ounce infant came out kicking and screaming.

"It's a bouncy baby boy," Dr. Richard Fulroth, a neonatologist, announced at a packed afternoon news conference. "The baby had a cute face. There's nothing to prevent this baby from having a complete life."

Doctors disconnected Ms. Marshall's ventilator after the delivery and her heart stopped beating a short time later.

The child's birth capped a tumultuous few months for the hospital, which unexpectedly was thrust into the medical limelight April 19 when the 28-year-old Ms. Marshall was rushed into the emergency room after she had been shot in the head during a botched robbery attempt. Police said Ms. Marshall had tried to rob an amputee and had threatened him with a meat cleaver; he fired at her.

When doctors discovered she was 17-weeks pregnant, they put her on a respirator and hooked up a feeding tube to try to prolong the life of the fetus, a rare and risky procedure.

At the time, doctors said it was unlikely the child would survive because they expected Ms. Marshall's heart and lungs to give out within two weeks. But the woman's stamina surprised medical experts. She carried the infant for 104 days after being declared brain-dead, just shy of a 1989 record set by a brain-dead woman in Vermont.

"There were a number of times we nearly lost her," said Dr. James Mittelberger, an internist who chairs the hospital's ethics committee. "There were many times we had to react quickly to changing situations."

Shortly after his birth, the baby went into respiratory distress, which is "not unexpected" in a 32-week-old premature infant, Dr. Fulroth said. The boy was put into an incubator and transferred to Children's Hospital in Oakland, which is better equipped to care for medically fragile children.

The decision to try to save the fetus sparked an ethical debate because the hospital run by Alameda County was facing a budget deficit and Ms. Marshall apparently had no health insurance. But doctors repeatedly said they could not consider the cost of treating a patient. They were morally obligated to try everything to help the fetus.

Ms. Marshall's hospitalization cost about $200,000, hospital officials announced yesterday, although they declined to say who would pay the bill.

As the medical battle ended, a new one began brewing: Who will receive custody of the baby?

Although David Smith, 32, of Oakland, maintained throughout the ordeal that he is the baby's father -- he and Ms. Marshall had two other children together -- Alameda County officials have doubts about the paternity. The hospital drew samples of the infant's blood to determine whether Mr. Smith is the father, said Dr. Floyd Huen, Highland Hospital's medical director.

The newborn boy -- whom Mr. Smith has named David Jr. and whom hospital workers call Baby Marshall -- officially was released into the custody of the county's Children's Protective Services.


Cathy Smith Rivers, Mr. Smith's sister, said she fears the hospital and social workers are challenging Mr. Smith's paternity because he was not cooperative and communicative with them during Ms. Marshall's hospitalization. Mr. Smith apparently procrastinated before submitting to tests to prove his paternity. He also refused counseling, she said.

In fact, relations are so frosty, no one alerted Mr. Smith yesterday about the C-section, forcing him to go to Children's Hospital on his own to try to see the boy, Ms. Rivers said.

"They didn't even call him or even let him know the baby was delivered," she said. "He may really have an attitude problem now."

Karen West, a Highland Hospital medical social worker, said both sides of the family had been notified of the operation and Ms. Marshall's mother and sisters were the only ones who chose to come to the hospital. Ms. West said she could not say more about the case.

Neither Mr. Smith's nor Ms. Marshall's mothers could be reached for comment.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...9kzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=RTIHAAAAIBAJ&pg=7335,6654459

Oakland- A baby born to a brain-dead woman is thriving and will be ready to go home soon, doctors say.
But it is not clear where that home will be.
The man who claims to be the child's father wants to take custody of the baby boy, who was born earlier this month. But child welfare workers have requested that he take a paternity test first.
The issue went to an Alameda Juvenile court hearing Thursday, but the hearing was closed and a gag order imposed on participants. Lawyers for the father and the baby said only that an interim placement arrangement had been reached, with a final decision to be made later. The baby, named Darious, was born Aug. 3, 104 days after his mother was declared brain dead. Doctors called the birth a miracle and said they knew of only now other case where a fetus had been kept alive longer in a brain dead mother.
The mother, Trisha Marshall, was shot while allegedly trying to commit robbery. She was about 17 weeks pregnant at the time.
The infant boy was born about eight weeks premature and weighed only 4 pounds, 15 ounces. He was moved from Highland hospital to Children's Hospital Oakland and has thrived. Doctors say he could go home this week.
"He's a fine little boy" says Louella Smith, whose son, David, believes he is the father. "He's got a pretty head of hair and pretty eyes. He seems like a normal little boy."
Mrs. Smith is already raising two children for Marshall and her son.
Laurel Prager, the attorney representing the bag, said paternity tests are being conducted, but will take several weeks.

http://litmed.med.nyu.edu/Annotation?action=view&annid=11828

In Rethinking Life and Death: The Collapse of Our Traditional Values, Peter Singer argues that "the traditional western ethic has collapsed" as we enter "a period of transition in our attitude to the sanctity of life" (pp. 1). The book begins with the tale of Trisha Marshall, a twenty-eight year old woman, who in 1993 was seventeen weeks pregnant when a gunshot to her head left her in an intensive care unit, her body warm, her heart beating, a respirator supporting her breathing. However, she was brain dead.

Her boyfriend and her parents wanted the hospital to do everything possible so that the baby would be born. The ethics committee of the hospital supported the decision. For the next 100 days, Trisha Marshall continued to be supported in the ICU until her baby was delivered by cesarean birth. After a blood test showed that the boyfriend was not the father, and after three weeks in the intensive care unit, the baby went to live with Marshall's parents.

It seems that the unusual medical circumstances surrounding his birth were far from his greatest problem.
 
Supernovae, I appreciate the research you have done, compiling the very few anecdotal cases that exist of gestations of less than 20 weeks in brain dead women, which have resulted in live births. I am inferring from your posts that you are supportive of these efforts in all circumstances, but if I have made a wrong conclusion about that, I apologize.

So, here is a thought experiment. Many people have compared withdrawal of life support from brain dead pregnant women to elective abortion. In effect, intentionally "killing" the fetus. (A very erroneous comparison IMO, but I'll move past that.) So, if it is "wrong" to withdraw support from a brain dead woman because her fetus will surely die also, and that is comparable to elective abortion, does it then stand to reason that to create and sustain human life by any method is "good"?

For example, many women are unable to become pregnant or carry to term, for a variety of medical reasons. Gestational surrogates have become an option for some of these women, but there have been quite complex and ethically thorny legal and other difficulties with both domestic and international human surrogates. Two species of primates, gorillas and orangutans, have similar gestation periods to humans. Would it be good and ethical to pioneer/ begin experimentation with primate surrogate gestation of human embryos, to alleviate the issues with using human surrogates? After all, these would be animals, with no rights as humans, and we as humans commonly use animals for food, medicine, xenospecies transplantation of things like pig heart valves, etc. What do people think about this?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
3,361
Total visitors
3,493

Forum statistics

Threads
592,295
Messages
17,966,780
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top