[Editor's Note-- representatives of St. Luke's are being contacted and offered an opportunity to submit their perspective on this issue for publication on LST.]
This is all very strange and extremely troubling. It is happening right here in Houston, Texas.
Andrea Clarke is a patient at St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital in the Medical Center. She went in there for surgery on a heart condition. After surgery, she developed complications (an infection) and was put on a respirator to help her breath. In order to treat her pain, they have given her enough pain meds to make her unconsciousness.
To make a long story short, the powers that be at St. Luke’s has declared her condition to be "medically futile". Andrea’s family has 10 days to move her or they "pull the plug".
Now comes the strange part; the case came to light via a post on Friday, April 21, on the Democratic Underground ("DU"). That’s right, the "fever swamps" of left wing politics, the DU. Why? Because the poster is the sister to the patient, Andrea Clarke.
Here is what the sister, Melanie Childers, a life-long Democrat, wrote about the situation concerning Houston hospitals:
Houston hospitals have a policy in that once the medical treatment of a patient has been deemed "medically futile" no other hospital in the area will accept transfer of that patient to their facility. This means that the patient, who is usually in a very delicate condition anyway, has to be transported over a long distance, in order to receive care.
We received notice of the ethics committee decision the day before yesterday and we are organizing a protest to take place tomorrow, at 2-2:30pm outside St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital. Our family members number four and we will all be there, but we need more people. Please help us.
-snip-
Many, many people, even some medical professionals in Texas, and other areas, don’t know about this law. They have no idea that this can be done, and it is is being done every day in Texas hospitals, but is not covered by the news media. This needs to become common knowledge and this law needs to be overturned, of course, but we are fighting for the life of our sister. We are fighting to see that her wishes about how she lives, and how she dies, are honored. Perhaps these kinds of battles are fought in just this way, one by one, out of love, and this is how the war is won, in the end.
Right Wing News has been all over this. They have communicated with the sister, Melanie Childers and others concerning this case and has verified the facts. Please read the entire post; there is a lot going on.
I called Melanie late on Monday, April 24 myself. She is currently in California trying to perform her job. Needless to say she is completely at wit’s end. I had a great conversation with her and explained to her that we were most probably political opposites. She told me she didn’t care she would take help from wherever it came in order to save her sister.
She explained to me how her sister, Andrea, has a very strong will to live that needs to be honored. (She is only 54.) Melanie believes that taking her sister’s life is wrong and that it would be murder.
Melanie also told me that in the "committee" meeting held last week, an Episcopal priest was present. His input into the situation was that "it’s wrong to keep Andrea alive, she is suffering". One of the other sisters (not Melanie the one I was speaking to) asked the Priest later if he had spoken to Andrea or visited her. His reply was "no", he did not have any contact with her. How would he know her "will" if he did not have any contact with her?
Melanie also asked that we don’t let politics separate us. She told me the most lovely thing:
Some on the left or right can be jerks; but those of us that have the love of God in us need to come together.
I agree.
What we can do to help:
Call St. Luke’s: 832-355-1000
Let them know politely and calmly that you believe it is wrong to disconnect Andrea Clarke from the respirator.
I would also like to add that we need to pray for Andrea. Melanie said Andrea is very scared right now (who wouldn’t be!) We also need to offer prayers for this entire family; all of the siblings are working together the best they can to help their sister.
One of the comments to Melanie’s post on the DU asked "where the hell are the "pro-life" people".
Right here! Front and Center! Ready to aid our "sister"
Let’s not let Andrea down!
Update: Here is a link to KHOU coverage of the family’s protest in fron of St. Luke’s on Saturday.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
33 Responses to “The Troubling Case of Andrea Clarke of Houston, TX”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
Dang Ree-C! I already had my post up and you somehow snuck yours in under me! Oh well, yours was more in depth anyway so I killed mine, no point duplicating effort..
I’m not sure if its a policy or a law
These decisions are not easy, my heart goes out to the family
The controversial portion of the law in question, the Texas Advance Directives Act of 1999:
§ 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR
TREATMENT DECISION. (e) If the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient is requesting life-sustaining
treatment that the attending physician has decided and the review process has affirmed is inappropriate treatment, the patient shall
be given available life-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-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).
My heart and prayers go out to all the family members. What really angers me in this is the priest. Seriously, how can he claim that she is suffering when he hasnt even seen her? That’s ridiculous.
“Where are all the prolifers?” ?!?
Get real, Where are all those who kept shouting let the family decide as poor Terri Shiavo was starving to death?
The culture of death is real.
It’s always about money.
Jesus needs to get back down here soon. This world is going to s**t.
Never let politics get in the way of doing the right thing. Life is precious, let us never forget that. Only God knows the number of our days. In or out of the womb, God loves us and it is for Him and only Him to decide. I pray for Andrea, and for the priest.
“It’s always about money.”
Unfortunately you are right Shakey… I pray we never go to a public healthcare where beaurocrats make decisions for us. I would rather my family decide whether or not to continue my treatment. My family would seek God’s counsel for that decision.
“the powers that be at St. Luke’s has declared her condition to be “medically futile”. Andrea’s family has 10 days to move her or they “pull the plug”.”
So much for the hippocratic oath.
Here’s the classical version of the Hippocratic Oath:
I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:
To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art - if they desire to learn it - without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.
I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.
Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.
What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.
If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.
Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html
Here’s St Luke’s main email add:
generalinformation@sleh.com
fast,
I’m just disgusted with society, not only here but around the world. Life is the most precious gift, and it’s so sad that oftentimes it’s taken away because of money and greed.
People’s priorities are screwed up. Even those who call themselves Christians. I guess I have a much different view of “what Jesus would do” than a lot of people.
I can relate.
Shakey, I believe we know what Jesus would do in this case. He certainly would not pull the plug against this woman’s wishes or that of her family.
This is the same culture that kills an unborn child for simply existing. In their mind, there is no problem withholding care to one more old sick woman. I don’t know the entire medical history here, but this doesn’t look good on St. Luke’s part, IMO…
#12 jimb - I agree. But I’m a socialist commie liberal around here.
Oh, my. This is so sad.
Let’s try to look at it from St. Luke’s point of view. It has been determined that Andrea won’t get better, and St. Luke’s would prefer to use their limited resources to help patients who CAN recover.
They’re not going to “pull the plug”, they just have asked that the family take her elsewhere.
Hospitals often must ask patients to leave. I’ve been there: my father was on a respirator, the hospital was unable to wean him off, and asked us to move him to another facility so they could have the intensive-care bed for post-surgical patients.
From experience, I know that such a move can be beneficial to the patient and family. It’s impossible for patients to sleep in a busy intensive care unit - a move to the right chronic care facility can provide better care for the patient as well as emotional support for the family.
The chronic care facility to which we moved my dad (he had exhausted the number of days Medicare would pay for hospitalization) was able to wean him from the respirator. We had two more years together before he died.
I believe Andrea can have a good outcome, too. That may mean she lives; it may mean God grants her a good death - it’s all in His hands. Let’s pray for her, and stop castigating St. Luke’s for a necessary decision.
As a very disgruntled Episcopalian, I can assure you that the behavior of the priest is not atypical. That entire denomination has been taken over by the extreme left, thus his attitude has to be anti-life.
HeadShaker
#10
You are absolutely right. Society today trivializes living human beings. Nothing happens without a reason and maybe she will get better if she were moved. I’ll pray for her and her family.
#16 neo - this is why I have a problem with guys like sarge when he says we need to go on these killing sprees to wipe out our “enemies”. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t kill terrorists trying to kill us, but I’m against just random killing with the so-called accepted “casualties of war” who include innocent human beings (adults and children). I guess there’s no real answer, just personal points of view.
#14 - mrygill2:
Don’t forget, though (from the post):
If true, it will be difficult and expensive to find a facility to care for Andrea and transport her there. Is this really about patient care and triage, or is it about the almighty $$$ on St. Luke’s part? I sort of lean towards the latter explanation…
Headshaker
#17
I have never “heard” Sarge say he wanted “random killing sprees.” I, too, am for killing the terrorists before they kill us. Yes, it is unfortunate that we have civilian casualties of war, but I believe the military is doing an outstanding job, considering the circumstances. We are dealing with an enemy who do not wear uniforms and that is what makes it very hard.
17
Peoples feeling about terriorist ho murder innocent women and chidren and parents has nothing to do with St. Lukes
Also, where are these casualties where are the My Lai’s in Iraq
We take great great care in identifying good from bad
I wish our enemies both here in the media and there did the same
#18
Another full service hospital is what I think they are referring to. Long-term care for patients in her condition would need to be done in some time of “interim” healthcare facility — nursing home which has ICU capabilties. There are not many of these that are available in the Houston area — and many that are here stay at capacity.
First what does the person want? I just had to make this decision with my sister and follwed her wishes not mine. It should not be any other person, religon or lawyer/judge makeing it.
Second if hospital space and resources were resticted to legal people this would not be a issue. If someone is here illegaly send them back to their country and let them take care of them after all it is their responsability not ours. We have more than enough ill people here we need to take care of first.
Dragonsbreath, the woman wants to live, she has made that directive clear both to her physicians and to her family. The doctors and the hospital are the ones wanting to pull the plug. I find it morally reprehensible that a physician would give up on a patient before the patient gives up on herself.
I’m just thinking out loud here, this is in no way an incitement for anyone to do this or anything. It is merely a thought experiment. Doesn’t state law allow for the use of force up to and including deadly force to protect the life of another human being? I wonder how that would sort out in court if someone were to guard the woman with the intent of preventing the disconnection of the ventilator or the dialysis machine.
Rorschach (#24)
Don’t be ridiculous - they aren’t actually going to disconnect her. The threat of doing so is a necessary tool to make the family find a critical care facility and move her.
If only because it would be a public relations nightmare, the hospital won’t follow through.
Other than complaining, is the family doing anything to help? Are they actively seeking long-term care? Or just hollering and protesting that it isn’t fair?
#25, I’m not so sure that they won’t disconnect her. St. Lukes has done this before you might recall.
I talked to the other sister today and posted it over at Chron.com if you want to take a look:
http://blogs.chron.com/texassparkle/
TO:
“mrygill2 Says:
April 25th, 2006 at 9:22 am
Oh, my. This is so sad.
Let’s try to look at it from St. Luke’s point of view. It has been determined that Andrea won’t get better, and St. Luke’s would prefer to use their limited resources to help patients who CAN recover.
They’re not going to “pull the plug”, they just have asked that the family take her elsewhere.”
Apparently you do not grasp the seriousness of this situation. They WILL pull the plug if they don’t find a facility that will care for her. If you pay attention to what is going on you will see that she is on a respirator and dialysis, there have been a number of reports about this because many facilities don’t do both. Plus St. Luke’s is discouraging other facilities from taking her.
They WILL take her off the respirator on the 30th if nothing is done, this is not a threat!
You really need to read a little more before making such comments!
This family is running themselves ragged trying to find a place for her. Don’t ever doubt that, any of you.
This is not the first time St. Luke’s has done this. I remember a man that was in a similar state at St. Luke’s last year and the wife and son were looking for a critical care facility. It all ended up in court, of course. The man was eventually moved to a facility in San Antonio and, if I remember correctly, did eventually pass away, but not at the hands of someone disconnecting life support.
With insurance companies running medical practices, there are very few places that are willing to administer this type of long-term care. Insurance companies & HMOs — these are the reason for the downfall in our medical care system. Doctors are not the ones practicing medicine, the administrator at the insurance company (without MD next to his name) is telling the doctor and hospital how to practice medicine. Its sad, but true –
Hey David, has anyone stuck an elbow in Dan’s ribs and told him that this might be a good law to look at revising?
#28 - d_lyne,
I DO grasp the seriousness of the situation - have YOU ever been told to take a ventilated relative out of a hospital??????
Yes, the hospital has given them a deadline. But in MY experience with another hospital, the administrators worked with us: we found a facility which would have a bed for my father later than hoped, and we moved Dad THEN. No reputable hospital will disconnect a patient on day 10 when they know there’s a place for them to go on day 12.
Those of you hollering for the hospital to keep her indefinitely should be glad we have private medical care in this country. I’ve lived under socialized European medicine, and government funds turn out to be even more limited than insurance company funds. Do you want Congress legislating how many days you get in hospital for each ailment? Or how many respirators are available in each city?
The family will find a facility for her if they keep looking. In the meantime, we should pray for both Andrea and St. Luke’s.
Rorschach: You are such a gentleman! I had no idea you posted until I read your #1 comment.
You have been all over this today. You have been the very definition of the word “gentleman” by defending this poor woman, Andrea Clarke, when she couldn’t defend herself.
d_lyne is related to Andrea Clarke. When she says the family is running itself ragged trying to find a facility, she is not lying. Because of the bureaucracy involved, finding her a new facility is a slow-going process, and yes, if the hospital knows she’ll be moved a few days after the fact, they may keep her supported for those few days. But if there is no facility in site, they will definitely remove her. You can read more about the specifics of the situation (including Houston hospital policies regarding “futile care patients” and transportation to other facilities) at the Democratic Underground site.