Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott
This is a call to action on the Munoz case in Fort Worth. Bottom line – please call Attorney General Greg Abbott’s campaign office number at 512-477-2002 and POLITELY and RESPECTFULLY ask him to intervene in the Munoz case in Fort Worth (which he has a right to do) to defend this provision of the law that mandates continuation of medical care for a pregnant patient. They may tell you that they don’t get involved in that that you have to call the AG’s office directly. Then please do that at 512-463-2191 or 512-465-4413 and ask them the same thing, being nice and polite. This is not a slam or criticism. This is a request that the law be enforced here and applied correctly by the agency best suited to do so. Now, I’ll tell you why I’m asking you to do this in the midst of so much confusion about this case which has implications for both the beginning and end of life.
I know there are differing opinions about the Munoz case and that is unfortunate. Let me run this by you. There is a husband/father trying to have life support pulled from his 22 wk. pregnant wife who is alleged to be brain dead. He says that they talked about this and neither wanted to be on life support. However, what he does not say is that this is what she would have wanted if she were pregnant and in this condition. Importantly, there is, so far, no one advocating for the baby here.
As Catholics and Christians, we are morally obligated to try to save a baby. This is why we have crisis pregnancy centers, this is why we have sidewalk counselors. This is why we talk to pregnant women and try to discourage them from doing this even when being pressured by their families or husbands or boyfriends – or vice versa.This case is not really different than one who is attempting to procure an abortion bec. of some alleged “deformity” of the “fetus.” We do not abort babies. We do not. Whether they are actually or allegedly “deformed” we do not abort them. If they have medical problems, we do not abort them. Withdrawing life support from the mother will most assuredly kill this baby. While not a surgical abortion, it will yield the same result and is intended to – the death of a baby. This baby may or may not survive. But that is not how we analyze this issue. Just as that is not how we analyze end of life issues. We do not prematurely take the lives of people or babies at the beginning or end of life.The mother, I understand, is receiving extraordinary care. Under most circumstances, withdrawing that from her would not be violative of our morality. We do not withdraw ordinary care under any circumstances (that is, food and water), but extraordinary care (ventilators, dialysis, etc.) is not required. Here, however, the continuation of that care provides this baby a chance at survival. Withdrawing it ensures the baby’s death prematurely. If we must risk erring, then we should err on the side of life.Furthermore – and this is important for all of us – this is an attempt by the attorneys representing the dad to undermine and give no credence to a very clear provision in the Texas Advanced Directive Act that requires life-sustaining care to be given to a pregnant patient. (This may be the only redeemable provision of the Act.) This could very well nullify this part of the law and set a very dangerous precedent. We cannot have that. The rest of TADA is a problem. But right now this is the only thing that has prevented this child’s premature death so far. Please think and pray about acting on this. The hearing is Friday. Time is running short. We have a saying in the law, “Bad facts make bad law.” Let’s try not to let that happen here.
Kassi Dee Patrick Marks, JD