It requires 2 attendings to certify that additional care has no potential benefit.

The hospital must advise the family to try to find another facilty that thinks that caring for the patient is not futile and has to help them look for such a facility.

If none can be found (often the case), then the hospital must explain to the family that the hospital will stop the futile care (usually a ventilator) in 10 days unless the family is willing to go to court to try to stop this.

Only then does the case go to court.

It’s a rarely used law, and it almost never actually goes to court. It’s one way to force people ot actually stand up and say “no, I want my relative to continue to suffer even though all the medical professionals involved think it’s not possible for them to ever get better.”

She has been trying to make a name for herself and pro life is helping her out by referring a stream of potential litigants to her.

She has so far only accepted a couple cases and then immediately called on the media.

She misrepresents the medical findings and the statements of the doctors and nurses.

Quite safely I might add since federal and state law impose prohibitions on the release of patient information by the hospitals and doctors.

Essentially the hospitals and doctors are powerless to dispute the heinous lies and tortured half truths that this attorney is releasing to the press.

Anyway, GW Bush–Mr. Culture of Life–was governor when this law was passed. He’d forgotten all about it by the time Teri Schiavo came along (for his purposes, anyway), and his erstwhile Christian base appears to have forgotten about it now.

The entity in question, a hospital and its associated personnel, do not wish to provide, indeed, cannot in good conscience provide the care the family wishes.

There is nothing draconian about the arrangement as the Texas politician claims. Texas law merely balances the rights of the various parties. The hospital gave fair notice to the family that it could not continue to provide the care they demanded. It then becomes the family’s problem to find someone who can provide the services they desire. That even no ‘right to life’ like groups or other hospitals are stepping forward to service this family’s wants suggests that the hospital is not outside the mainstream in its position.

i do not see where this person has the right to demand servitude from fellow citizens to futilely and artificially prolobg the life of her child.

mike