Re: It's An Unalterable Sentence Extending Beyond Even Death, Not A Choice

1

It's straight up ghastly is right. Jeez.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 8:19 AM
horizontal rule
2

The husband just won in the courts -- there's an order requiring the hospital to take his wife's body off life-support. This is such a literally horrifying story: Stephen King horror, not how I usually think of it in a political context.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
3

My understanding -- based on the news stories I've read -- is that the court ordered her taken off life support because the fetus isn't viable. If it had been viable, her body would have been forced to bring the baby to term.


Posted by: jms | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
4

I haven't read the order, but courts usually (not always, certainly not always) avoid giving a definite answer to "what if" questions. I'm sure the nonviability made it a much easier call for them, though.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 9:07 AM
horizontal rule
5

Stephen King horror

I'm thinking David Cronenberg type body horror.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
6

One could hope (and be sorely disappointed) that this would serve a wake-up call as to the utter destructive idiocy of the terms of the current abortion debate. Medical science moves on and we are totally ill-prepared to have any kind of a sensible public discussion. See also some of the berserk positions with regard to stem cells. There's a lot more coming, and real soon now.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
7

Yeah, this is a total awful story. I was going to post it in tandem with that LA case where the girl dies during a tonsillectomy, the hospital pronounces her dead, and the court side with the parents who want to keep her on the ventilator.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
8

2,5: The underlying premise of The Matrix of was pretty dumb, but it does come to mind in this case. Maybe next they will put Google Glasses on the dead woman and play immersive videos of women playing with babies.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 10:00 AM
horizontal rule
9

Google Glasses

I guess probably half the people in the Bay Area have these now, but has anyone elsewhere been noticing them? The first time I saw someone wearing them was just this week.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 10:09 AM
horizontal rule
10

On rereading the NYT story, if they've got the order correct it didn't turn in the viability of the fetus. The judge ruled that the law didn't apply because Ms. Munoz was dead, and therefore wasn't a patient.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
11

I've never seen google glasses in real life.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 10:35 AM
horizontal rule
12

the law didn't apply because Ms. Munoz was dead, and therefore wasn't a patient.

Texas Woman Discovers Amazing Trick to Make Hospital Respect Her Wishes.


Posted by: torrey pine | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
13

9, 11- I see them pretty often, about half an inch in front of my right eye.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:04 AM
horizontal rule
14

Here's a link that has the order. It also has the story that the hospital had done the tests and pronounced her dead within a few days of admission. Grrrrr. They stonewalled the family on that.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:17 AM
horizontal rule
15

13: so you like them? What do you use them most for?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
16

I guess probably half the people in the Bay Area have these now, but has anyone elsewhere been noticing them? The first time I saw someone wearing them was just this week.

Nope, no Google Glass, no Tesla, no Ariel Atoms, none of that stuff.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:23 AM
horizontal rule
17

I think if I saw an Ariel Atom I'd mentally dismiss it as a kit car.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:29 AM
horizontal rule
18

I saw a Tesla dealership at Easton the other day, but I don't think I've ever seen one on the road.

Never seen Google Glasses. Until now I hadn't even heard of an Ariel Atom


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:41 AM
horizontal rule
19

The only thing that would have made this worse is forced enrollment in some evil overlord's plans.


Posted by: Grumbles | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:50 AM
horizontal rule
20

peep in 18:

Until now I hadn't even heard of an Ariel Atom

Me neither.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 11:51 AM
horizontal rule
21

I guess the Tesla is more common than the Ariel Atom or this, in places where the Tesla exists, but they fill similar roles in my mind.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 12:00 PM
horizontal rule
22

I probably see 4-5 Teslas a day. I've seen an Ariel Atom I think 3 times in the wild, possibly the same one, and I'm not sure it's street legal in California. Tragically I've only seen the Huayra on TV. Maybe 3 times someone wearing Google glass? Which is good because my view is that if you wear Google glass in public others should have a free license to beat the shit out of you.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 12:14 PM
horizontal rule
23

I've never heard of an Ariel Atom but I'm going to guess it's a car powered by either nuclear energy or oil extracted from mermaids.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 12:23 PM
horizontal rule
24

15- The developers on my team at work are supposed to be writing an app to connect it to our LIMS for sample management. But Google has this ridiculous EULA for their API that says any information passing through their API becomes their property, and the only way to get things to display on Glass is via their API, so we can't send any of our non-public info to it.
In general their API is very restrictive which limits the functionality because there are still very few apps for it. The coolest one is translate, which replaces the image of foreign language signs with English overwriting the original language.
So I mostly use it for email, videos, pictures, and at the conference last week there was some twitter discussion so it would notify me when I was mentioned. I've recorded first person videos of softball, hockey, tennis, and volleyball.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 12:28 PM
horizontal rule
25

Let's just pretend that I don't know the information revealed in 24. Anyhow, the great thing about Southern California is not just the opportunity to see new model fancy cars, which is pretty great but something you can do wherever there are ridiculous rich people, but that old cars don't rust out. There's a guy in my neighborhood who drives a Stutz Blackhawk, aka the greatest fucking thing on the road ever.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 1:50 PM
horizontal rule
26

Yeah, if I stream a movie through glass, does Halford kill a baby seal?


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 1:56 PM
horizontal rule
27

But Google has this ridiculous EULA for their API that says any information passing through their API becomes their property, and the only way to get things to display on Glass is via their API, so we can't send any of our non-public info to it.

That sounds pretty assholish on Google's part, but perhaps its an NSA requirement.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
28

The story is certainly grotesque, and I get that it sucks for the husband and family to imagine her body in the state it's in, but since the woman herself is dead and not suffering at all, it's not *that* bad, right?


Posted by: dz | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 2:56 PM
horizontal rule
29

I bet Halford loves this story.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 3:08 PM
horizontal rule
30

Seems like perfectly reasonable suspicion to me, plus it strikes a blow for public aesthetics. Win-win.

Anyhow, let's all take a look at the awesomeness that is this 1971 Stutz Blackhawk. Probably overpriced but check out the incredible Elvis "TCB" headrests. I'm philosophically committed to the notion that no material possession can make you a good person but let's be real, simply having this car would automatically make you awesome.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 01-25-14 3:12 PM
horizontal rule