« 'Living Wills' Dangerous to Health and Soul, Catholics Warn | Main | Charlotte Wyatt: The new fight »

April 28, 2005

Will Judge Decree Death for Teron? An Urgent Appeal

Topics: Action Items, Legal affairs

The New York Daily News reports today:

The family of a brain-dead [sic] Bronx boy said last night it has made the agonizing decision to officially end his life today.

Teron Francis, 13, is expected to be removed from a ventilator at Montefiore Medical Center's Children's Hospital after a noon court hearing to lift an injunction that has kept him on the machine, a judge in the case said.

"The family conveyed to me that they would like me to lift the injunction," Bronx Supreme Court Justice Douglas McKeon said after meeting with the family at Montefiore for 5-1/2 hours last night.

CURE has faxed the following appeal to Judge Douglas McKeon, that is, we have faxed it to the Bronx Supreme Court (718-590-4520). Repeated calls made to Judge McKeon's office (718-590-3748) requesting his direct fax in order to send him this critical information resulted in his staffer repeatedly hanging up after saying, "No one to help you here." It was acknowledged that Judge McKeon was in the building. Thus the Culture of Death again prevents the truth from reaching those in a position to stop the killing!

Read and act on CURE's appeal, which follows, by calling Judge Douglas McKeon's office at 718-590-3748.

URGENT: RE Teron Francis--Please Deliver to Judge McKeon
Prior To Today's Hearing!!!

April 28, 2005
The Honorable Douglas McKeon
Bronx Supreme Court
851 Grand Concourse
Bronx, NY 10451

Your Honor:

First, a belated but heartfelt note of appreciation for your ruling that has thus far prevented Montefiore Hospital from removing Teron Francis ventilatory assistance, thus causing his death. The respect you accorded him by visiting him in the hospital and the compassion you have shown his family are deeply appreciated as well.

The enclosed information was faxed to the offices of attorney Robert Genis on April 23 because they have direct bearing on Teron's medical status and could have led to the presentation of pertinent evidence in the hearing you conducted on Monday. I implore you to review them before ruling on any request to vacate your order.

The simple truth is that Teron Francis is alive and that after his ventilator has been removed he will be dead because death has been imposed on him. This tragedy is compounded by the irony that the loving family who understood that Teron is alive and had vowed to stand by him until his heart stopped will have consented to his being killed.

You had indicated that you felt towards Teron as a son. I have a son of my own, Thomas, who is 15, just a couple of years older than Teron. If he were to be murdered, it would break my heart, but if it were by my hand that his death was decreed, I would be inconsolable.

May God bless you for your consideration of our urgent appeal and grant you the wisdom and courage to defend his sacred gift of life.

Yours for Life,

Earl E. Appleby, Jr.
Director, CURE


Posted by earl at April 28, 2005 10:16 AM

Articles Related to Action Items, Legal affairs:


From the New York Daily News article cited above:
"Montefiore's medical director, Gary Kalkut, said Teron's kidneys already have begun to fail and his body has swollen "and taken on an unnatural appearance.""

I'm so sad for this boy, and his poor family... and very much afraid that he will die soon, with or without the ventilator.


Posted by: Mary in LA at April 28, 2005 5:21 PM

Brain Dead Bronx Teen Dies

From WABC website -

The judge in this case released an order saying 13 year-old Teron Francis should be taken off life support. The hospital has made it official: at 5:05 p.m. Francis' heart stopped beating

Posted by: Blogging Beth at April 28, 2005 5:26 PM

Thanks, Beth. I was just at the New York Daily News Web site, and they say the same thing.


Posted by: Mary in LA at April 28, 2005 6:24 PM

"With or without the ventilator," ah, there's the rub, Mary. Aside--and it is no small aside--from the question of whether Montefiore hospuital was combating Teron's death, i.e., actually practicing medicine, rather than simply maintaining his ventilator as previously ordered by the court, Teron could have died an increasingly rare "natural death" as opposed to having one imposed upon him.

As I wrote Judge McKeon in the appeal that his staff refused to permit us to send him before he passed his death sentence:

"You indicated that you felt toward Teron as a son. I have a son of my own, Thomas, who is 15, just a couple of years older than Teron. If he were to be murdered, it would break my heart, but if it were by my hand that his death was decreed, I would be inconsolable."

I am inconsolable.

Never surrender to the Culture of Death!

Posted by: Earl Appleby at April 28, 2005 6:25 PM

Earl, you are right...

Posted by: Mary in LA at April 28, 2005 6:48 PM

May God give all who grieve for Teron his most compassionate comfort. Amen

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 28, 2005 8:01 PM

It's about time.

Posted by: touche at April 28, 2005 11:18 PM

Earl, do not be disturbed by BloggingBeth.

She rejoices in death.

Posted by: juleni at April 28, 2005 11:52 PM

Or is that touche -

I too, am grieved tonight. And am praying for God's comfort on us all.

Posted by: juleni at April 28, 2005 11:58 PM


You are way off base. I post a NEWS item - updating a blog item and I am rejoicing in death! Obviously, you are the only small minded person with that opinion here as no one else made that comment - read Mary in LA's comment immediately after mine.

Hey - go attack the NY Post and WABC too - they are reporting the same thing!

Get a grip! A young man died under extremely tragic circumstances. ITS NOT ALL ABOUT YOU JULENI!

Posted by: Blogging Beth at April 29, 2005 7:21 AM

I'm sorry Beth. You're right, that was ungracious of me, and the Lord dealt with me on it during the night after I had written it. Please forgive me.

I was pretty emotional last night from both tiredness and grief. And in fact, you did only report what happened.

But would you please clear this up for me? Just from following your posts, I sense that you are not in support of keeping people on ventilators or feeding tubes, etc. Have I understood that correctly, or have I misunderstood you?

Posted by: juleni at April 29, 2005 8:52 AM

Your comment may have been ungracious, Juleni, although it has yet to be proven wrong. Certainly her comment was made with no thought to the feelings of the other Bloggers, as major media is prone to be. I don't think we need such reporting on Blogs any more than we need piranha in our midst.

But BloggingBeth's comment was vicious and utterly uncalled for. Which, in my opinion, is highly indicative of who she is and what she does. Bloggers are people with heart and right now they are vulnerable hearts, given that we have laid them on the line for others. This is not the place for callous and insensitive behavior.

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 29, 2005 9:16 AM

Juleni -

Apology accepted.

My belief is this - it is the person's individual wishes which should not be debated in public forums. I personally do not want artificial life support if there is no hope for my recovery.

If you want every effort made to prolong your life - that is your option and I hope you have made it crystal clear to your loved ones. I have made my wishes known as well.

I believe death is an extremely personal decision - one that has touched me much too personally in the last few years. My father passed away two years ago. He had a severe defect in his aortic valve. He could have chosen surgery - which would have been very dangerous. He came home 4th of July weekend and collapsed of a massive heart attack on July 19th. He "died" at home but after 911 was called - they managed to regain a pulse. He was rushed to an emergency room where life support was attempted. Fortunately, my mother intervened and stopped all heroic efforts.

Yes - he could have been put on ventilators and had his heart shocked. But I am comforted by the fact that he died on his own bed, in the bedroom he shared with my mother for 25+ years.

I don't mean to get preachy but I have a very strong opinion on this - that it is a decision to be made by families and families alone. I feel for the mother and family of Taron - to die so young and under such tragic circumstances. Unfortunately, the cold hard truth needs to be stated to families sometimes - that there is no hope. I believe Taron died several days before. Just like I believe that, even though they got my dad's pulse back, he had already died.

This is a problem that is going to continue to escalate - based on our improving medical technology. And yes - rules need to be established. But I still think that it is a personal decision - not one debated in the Congress, on talk radio, on TV or on the Internet.

I have tried to be respectful of all points of views but unfortunately I see issues of "right vs. left" polarizing this nation.

Posted by: Blogging Beth at April 29, 2005 9:28 AM

I believe that many people have made their life and death decisions with misinformation. It is a personal decision, but the Truth needs to be told and available. For example- "living" wills, organ "donating", brain "death" and "glob of tissue" (sorry for all the quotes). Terms are being redefined by the euthanasia movement. The media, pro-abortion people and medical schools only add to this problem. When we have Dr's like Cranford teaching at medical schools we have a problem. Life itself is redefined. All life is precious and a gift from God.
Genesis 2:7 "and [God] breathed into his [Adam’s] nostrils the breath of life".
We shouldn’t have a such a "people should stay out of it" attitude for those that are neglected, abused or misinformed. Life and death decisions are the most important decisions one can make. I believe, like President Bush, that "we should error on the side of life".

The root of the whole problem is really sin. But God’s love is so amazing. He can forgive the vilest of sinners. Jesus’s blood that was shed at Calvary covers all of our sins once and for all. His death pays for our sins in full and averts God’s wrath. God punished His own Son Jesus in OUR place. His resurrection from the grave proves that he is God. Anyone who repents and believes this Gospel, or Good News will be saved.

As a Christian, I persevere, I have hope and a bright future to look forward to
This place is not my home, I’m just a passin through….
(I’m done preaching now)

Posted by: kay at April 29, 2005 11:15 AM

Blogging Beth

With all due respect, YOU conradict yourself. Is the "right to die" a personal decision or not? You start with how personal the decision is. Then you move into a very moving story of pain- when faced with such issues with someone you love. THEN you change the language.

Teron was what? 13? So he had a "Living Will?" Did Terri?

Which one is it? It is a personal decision that people have the right to make? Or is it a "family decision?" Do others have the right to DECIDE FOR YOU?

Posted by: Straight Up with Sherri at April 29, 2005 11:28 PM

It saddens me to see the news that Teron has passed away. It would seem that once his organs began to fail that there was little chance of his improvement.

At 13 he had the world in front of him. The fact that he had some mystery illness means that there should have been an autopsy to find out what went wrong in the operating theatre.

As a result of Teron's case I am going on record as stating that I am against the donation of organs. I will have my driver's licence endorsed as an organ donor. To make that endorsement could serve as a death warrant in the future. I can see more clearly how organ donation is being abused and how doctors can manipulate situations to bring about a death of someone who might have the ability to recover in the future.

Right now I am faced with the mortality of my own sister. She is only 52 and she has a death sentence due to cancer. She has been given 3 months. Chemotherapy is not an option because of her fragility. The radiotherapy failed to bring about some relief. She has a 15 year old daughter, as well as two older daughters.

Posted by: Maggie4life at April 30, 2005 1:50 AM

Sheri is right on this one. There are two sides that need to be considered very carefully here. It is true that there is an element of personal decision. Beth's father made a personal decision that he would not undergo a risky operation. Many years ago my other sister and her husband had to make a similar decision for their two year old daughter (who is now thirty something). She had a heart condition that meant she could drop dead within a heartbeat. She had what is known as crossed veins of the heart and she needed a rare operation for the transposition of the veins. Because of it is a rare operation, there is a high element of risk that Maureen could have died, and in fact she did "die" during the operation, but she was revived.

There is nothing wrong with weighing up the risks of a tricky procedure. You have to decide whether or not the procedure is worth the risk or whether it is better to live out whatever time is left. My sister Maureen has been given a death sentence because she is too frail for chemotherapy. It is not treatable. I am not sure how I feel about chemotherapy after I saw how it affected my mother-in-law who died as a result of the spread of cancer from her breast to other parts of her body.

I think that it is crucial to distinguish between a patient who is definitely terminally ill and someone who is merely disabled. This is the problem that we had with Theresa Schindler. She was disabled because of an incident in her home on the morning that she collapsed. The abuse continued through 15 years of litigation before her rat of a husband was finally allowed to pull the plug by his own hand. He was not carrying out her wishes as he claimed. HE WANTED HER DEAD TO COVER UP HIS OWN SWINDLE OF THE LEGAL AND MEDICAL SYSTEMS.

I think that Teron's family have in fact made the right decision once they knew more about their son's condition. It sounds like the prognosis was not very good in the first place. I hope that there will be an autopsy and that we will read about the conclusions of that autopsy.

I want to commend the judge in this case. He made some very courageous decisions by deciding in favour of the family. In the case of a minor it is the parents who have the say.

Oh yes, it is very offensive for family members to hear others saying that they are praying for the death of a loved one. Yes, that happened in my family and it was very hurtful for my parents to hear that kind of thing, just as it was hurtful for the Schindlers to hear their son-in-law working so hard to put their daughter to death.

Posted by: Maggie4life at April 30, 2005 2:07 AM

I'm not sure where would be the right place to post this, but I wanted to point out this case in Australia, of Maria Korp who is in a coma after surviving attempted murder and being locked in the trunk of a car for 5 days.


Her husband and his lover tried to murder her and now her husband wants to keep her on life support (sounds like she's on a respirator and a PEG tube). He says she would not want to be taken off life support because of her Catholic beliefs. He also won't be guilty of murder if she stays alive, even in a coma.

The courts are (rightly, I think) not allowing him to have a say in what happens to her, but this case will bear careful watching to see what the courts and court-appointed guardian decide are in her "best interests."

This article at least makes it sound like she has a chance of surviving and maybe even recovering, saying she has a 50% chance of survival without the respirator but will die in a few weeks if the feeding tube is removed. It's disturbing that it's only been a month since her injury and they are already talking about taking her off the feeding tube.

Posted by: purple_kangaroo at April 30, 2005 3:03 AM

I guess it's been longer than a month . . . apparently if there has been no improvement within 3 months they can declare treatment futile.

According to this article, she is in a PVS and in Australia it sounds like once you've been diagnosed as in a persistent vegetative state for 3 months they declare it a permanent vegetative state and stop trying to help you.

We need to pray for this woman between now and the 3-month deadline, which will be May 13th.

If anyone wants to link the the info. on my blog, the URL is http://purplekangaroopuzzle.blogspot.com/2005/04/maria-korp-she-survived-attempted.html

Posted by: purple_kangaroo at April 30, 2005 3:23 AM

With all due respect Sheri - and all dissenters - perhaps my language confused you. With the use of the term "personal decision" - I was referring to a decision to be made by the individual and his/her loved ones. As opposed to a "public" decision - to be made by all of us here.

My father chose not to have the operation - HIS OWN decision in discussion with his wife and children. When he had his massive heart attack and was done for over 10 minutes without a heartbeat - my brother, mother and I chose for him not to continue any further. The hospital did not - Congress did not - the general public did not. Face it - these are gut-wrenching decisions. In fact, when I received the phone call at 7:00AM that morning - I knew that I would not get to the hospital in time and my mother and brother would need support in case this decision needed to be made. So my aunt met them there - and was able to be a stable force.

I think the danger here is that all of you are looking at this case as one issue - black and white. There is no "right" answer - there are still too many questions. I agree with some of what you say and disagree with others. If Baby Charlotte's parents can accept their daughter's fate - they should have every opportunity to care for their daughter. Terri Schiavo was a stickier matter. I believe she was in PVS but I also believe that more tests should have done - before the pulling of the feeding tube - to make that conclusive determination. Teron was brain dead - nothing was going to make him better. It is a shame but it happens in hospitals all the time.

And Maggie - I do not feel it is offensive for "pray for death" - especially a peaceful one. I watched a 45 year friend die of liver cancer - an extremely painful way to die. She turned yellow because her liver was not functioning. She lost over 60 lbs. She left two children orphaned because their father had died 7 years prior. But she was suffering, not going to get any better. I prayed for her peaceful death - which she achieved - surrounded by her family and friends.

There is a time to live and a time to die. My point will always be the same - you have a right to make this personal decision of what means to keep you alive and what means in which you die. No one else does. By personal again - I mean in consort with your family.

I have no right to comment on anyone's medical decisions of the past/present/future. And neither do you. I said that was the real shame of the TS situation - it was played out on the public stage. Unfortunately, we are all going to die at some point. It is not fun to think about. But we need to realize it and accept it - ALL OF US!

Posted by: Blogging Beth at April 30, 2005 9:12 AM

What is your sister's name Maggie? I will pray for her and for Maria. I wish we could get a prayer warrior group going, so we could have someone pleading before the throne of God 24/7

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 30, 2005 9:32 AM

Angela--I think B. f. T. should pick up on this Australia case. It doesn't look like a good prospect. I think it's sad the way they call food and water "life support." No one should be dehydrated to death. Period. Even for a person who deserves death, like a murderer, it is torture and I (who support the death penalty carried out humanely) oppose it. And for an innocent person it is sheer murder. And we certainly _should_ put it on the public stage. Absolutely. Terri was murdered foully and painfully by order of the court and it was much better that the light should be shed on it than that it should have been done in a corner, as so many such murders are.

So we should do the same for this Australian lady. The court is in a _sense_ right to say that her husband obviously doesn't have her best interests at heart. On the other hand, to give her food and water should be deemed in her best interests by _anyone_, and it is utterly creepy and perverse for a court to take away the right to make a decision like this from her husband _because_ he wants her fed. "Oh, how suspicious. You don't want your wife dehydrated to death. Well, we know what _you're_ up to. You're just trying to save your own skin. Ha! We'll put a stop to that. We'll appoint a court official to have your wife dehydrated to death and then we'll charge you!" However selfish the husband's motives, what he is asking for is objectively right.

This case (in the reasoning of the court) resembles that of Aidan (Aiden?) Stein in Ohio. Aidan's case appears to be ending happily, because he was a baby, and the Ohio Supreme Court wouldn't let him be "terminated" unless his parents' parental rights were "terminated." I suspect this lady in Australia may not be so lucky.

Posted by: Lydia at April 30, 2005 10:08 AM

I hope you're wrong, Lydia, but these days such hopes seem to hang on a miracle. You have aptly summed Maria's case up; sheer perversity.

Is Maggie's sister's name Angela, or were you addressing someone else? At the moment my prayer list is Baby Charlotte, Clara, Maggie's sister, Juleni's mom, Marta and all the bloggers and blog hosts. Am I missing anyone?

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 30, 2005 11:28 AM

I was addressing "Purple Kangaroo" who posted the story about Maria. I _think_ the Kangaroo sometimes goes by "Purple Kangaroo Angela," at least as I recall.

We probably shouldn't forget Mae Magouirk. I know Ken Mullinax is lying low and not antagonizing the other side of the fam., but when Mae is discharged from the hospital she'll have to go somewhere. That will, I suspect, be the moment of truth, as it were.

Posted by: Lydia at April 30, 2005 11:34 AM

Yes, I'm Angela. I would like to see blogsforterri take up Maria's story too.

Posted by: purple_kangaroo at April 30, 2005 1:01 PM

BloggingBeth, thank you for writing me back. Thank you, too, for sharing such an intimate and personal story concerning your father and of your own pain. I am so sorry about the loss of your father.

I guess I would have to say that there are a few areas where I believe differently from you. But first I want to say that my own parents who are pro-life would also want to die at home, if possible, so would I, and we all watched Pope John Paul II make that very same decision. People often choose not to try a risky procedure, just as others decide to go ahead and take that risk. There is nothing wrong in that, as long as it is the person themselves making that choice. And in that way I do agree with you that death is a very personal decision.

However I believe that there is a kind of death which is not personal, and that is the taking of another's life. All of the cases which have been discussed here - Terri's, Mae's, Clara's, Teron's, Charlotte's - are instances where a person has most definitely not stated any personal decision regarding death, and someone has been wanting to speak for them in taking away their life, and even against the family's wishes, as Sherri also pointed out above. And the families did want help, and asked for help, which is why it even came to the attention of the blogs.

There is another way in which I believe that death is not a personal decision, and that is that none of us know when we are going to die. I believe that it is God's decision, not ours, and he can guide our hearts when our hearts belong to Him. I do not believe our hearts (our wills) automatically belong to Him because we are human beings. I believe we must choose as individuals to give our hearts to Him.

I believe that God is in charge of our lives, and knows already when we each will die, and is the author of our life and our death. If we make peace with him and trust in Him we never need to fear death, nor worry or wonder about when or how we shall die.

I don't myself fear passing over into death *at all*. I get scared of the pain of dying sometimes, if that should be my lot in the future because I'm a bit of a whimp about pain, but death itself holds no fear for me. I look forward to being with God, when it is time (because I've experienced his love so much on this earth!!).

I don't think anyone here is in denial of death, or of dying. And I don't fear it, because I believe that God sent a saviour as He promised in over 600 prophecies of that saviour hundreds of years before he came, as Kay stated so beautifully above.

Jesus, who died for us, according to the law of God which required a sacrifice of blood for forgiveness of sins, overcame death and rose from the grave. I believe we can have our sins forgiven if we tell God we accept that sacrifice, and can have absolute trust that we can be with God after death because of Jesus' death and resurrection.

So fear or denial of death is not a factor, here.

I believe differently from you, in that I believe we should always err on the side of life, not death. Not giving in to death, as Earl has also stated. When we have no idea of a person's wishes, we should always try to help them stay alive.

I believe as Kay also stated that there are many misstated terms. 'Living' Wills are worded to only be helpful for removal of life support. Brain 'Death', seems to only be helpful to the donation of those organs dependent upon a still beating heart, to be of any good for donation. 'PVS' is still an unclarified term. In a major study, 40% of those diagnosed PVS were in fact, not. They were usually misdiagnosed due to poor vision. Not seeing well (often brought on by trauma or loss of oxygen for a time), they wouldn't follow an object with their eyes because they just couldn't see it well, and that one of the major tests for 'PVS'. Just as with Terri, she couldn't see someone well, to respond to them, until they were close up to her.

I also believe differently from you that Terri was PVS, at least as defined by many. I believe it was clear just from video of her that she definitely responded to her mother's attentions, she smiled, she laughed at her dad's joking with her about her lazy eye, and so, so much more. But I do believe as you do, that she should have had further tests, which were not done.

I believe that miracles happen all the time, and people do come out of comas, and it is worth waiting with them for that chance. I also believe that, just as they often tell us (those who come out of PVS states or out of comas), that there are many times when they can hear and understand all that is going around them, when they are in a 'locked in' state, or also when they are diagnosed PVS, without being able to respond as they actually hope to.

I do know that even when kept on a ventilator, that if they are truly terminal, they will die within about two weeks and their heart will stop - on the ventilator - without removing it, as we have all been studying and reading about. And so there is no reason to remove them, unless they have gotten better, and it is only for a test try to see if they will go on breathing on their own if the ventilator is removed - and if they don't allowing them to retain the ventilator. Because we do not know that they will not recover.

I believe differently from you, that anyone has already died until they have actually died as I stated, before.

With Maggie, I do believe it is absolutely crucial to distinguish between a terminal person and someone who is just disabled. Very, very crucial.

I do definitely believe as you do that there is a time to live and a time to die. As Ecclesiastes said. That Solomon, who wrote it, was a wise man.

But that time to die is not one minute before actual death, and no person should make it so, because there is so much hope for anyone who is still actually alive, in so many ways.

Posted by: juleni at April 30, 2005 4:46 PM

Maggie4Life, I am praying for your sister. Thanks for telling us.

Mary et. al., yes, I want to get a 24/7 prayer group, too...

And purple kangaroo, I am going to pray for Maria, too. We need to try to get her up on the blog articles for intercession and anything else we can say or do.

Posted by: juleni at April 30, 2005 4:49 PM

Lydia, and all, here is the latest letter from Ken Mullinax, which was sent by email to the editor of Olive Branch Press at www.olivebranchpress.org, and that I tried to get Tim or Richard to put up on the Blogs here using the Contact Us button yesterday. I think they may not have seen my note. Please keep an eye on Olive Branch Press for further news from Ken, as he is going to call the editor there this weekend, to update her. There IS need for further prayer for him and for Mae, but LOOK AT HOW GOOD MAE IS DOING, SITTING UP AND EATING, WHEN THEY ALL WANTED TO CALL HER DEAD AND END HER LIFE!!!

(I'll post Ken's letter in the next post.)

Posted by: juleni at April 30, 2005 4:57 PM

From Ken Mullinax:

WE NOW HAVE A NEW HURDLE AND WE MUST INSURE THAT Dr. Robert Stout, (the doctor who was the proponent of placing Mae Magouirk in Hospice-LaGrange, Ga. and not ensuring that she receive a feeding tube/IV fluids since she was unable to feed herself WITHOUT HER BEING TERMINAL, comatose or vegetative and who ignored the provisions of Mae's Living Will)
stay away from her when she returns to Georgia!!!!!

(Remember, the 3-doctor panel evaluated my Aunt Mae ( AFTER Dr. Stout sent her to Hospice to die) and these doctors deemed her fine to receive treatment for her aorta and that she WAS NOT terminal therefore we are not pleased with Dr. Stout's recommendation of diagnosis/prognosis of my Aunt.)

My Aunt may be moved back to Georgia soon (an OK move and Dr. Aqel "my Doctor" has mandated no Hospice and he must approve the hospital and regimen of care) to a hospital near her home and it is our intent that Dr. Robert Stout be in NO WAY ASSOCIATED WITH GIVING medical CARE TO Mae Magouirk.

Please help us contact Dr. Robert Stout (in a respectful manner) and convey to him that THE WORLD IS WATCHING HIM and that because of his past actions, it would best if he (Dr. Robert Stout) stay away from Mae Magouirk's care and thus disassociate himself with her medical care in ANY AND ALL WAYS.

I am afraid Beth Gaddy will try to associate him in my Aunt Mae's medical care BEHIND OUR BACK.

Mae's condition is GREAT...My aunt is well today; sitting up in a chair; eating food; her aortic dissection is now contained; she is neurologically intact yet it will take 2 more weeks of hospital care and another month or two of nursing home care BEFORE she is totally able to be independent and be responsible for herself again (because of ALL the morphine and malnourishment.)


God bless you and thanks again for saving Mae!

Call him Today or write him (please be respectful) and leave him as many messages as you feel appropriate (forward this request to the friends of life/to media that supports our cause, call it in to our radio friends and to anyone who will help us) and let Dr. Stout know that the world is watching him and we know what he did in her case and he should stay away from Mae Magouirk!!!

God Bless you....Dr. Robert Stout's phone and address is below:

Robert M. Stout, M.D.
301 Medical Dr.
La Grange, GA 30240-4144

Posted by: juleni at April 30, 2005 4:58 PM

Do you guys think telling Dr. Stout, however nicely, to please not become Mae's doctor, is going to have any good effect? Might it not make him all the more determined to do exactly that if Beth Gaddy asks him?

The problem here as I see it is that Beth Gaddy remains the guardian without joint guardianship from the other side of the family. Ken's fears may be well-founded. I'm not sure his plan is practically the best one, however.

I'm very glad that Aqel is requiring that she not be sent to hospice, however. That's a big step in the right direction.

Posted by: Lydia at April 30, 2005 8:55 PM

Lydia, when was Beth Gaddy's temporary guardianship supposed to end? Do you remember? I can't remember right now. I think it was 30 days, but not sure..

At that time, was it supposed to be up in the air as to who the guardian would be?

Posted by: juleni at April 30, 2005 10:19 PM

Juleni--It was 45 days, and I don't remember the exact date that came to, but only that it was in May. Yes, I think it _was_ going to be up in the air then, and that it would have to go back to court.

The Mullinax side people (brother and sister to Mae, plus Ken) _were_ planning to get involved at that point in an actual guardianship hearing to try to gain at least joint custody. I hope they haven't given up on that idea, and I hope they have all their ducks in a row for it, legally.

Hey--check out the thread up above about Knya, the little girl in Texas. I really don't think there's quite enough alarm there that the hospital might be planning to stop feeding her, but I can't get information as to whether she needs a tube, a ventilator, or what. At a minimum they're going to stop treating a skin infection, but the wording of the letter quoted in the article seems to me to imply a total cessation of nutrition and hydration as well, at least if she has a tube of any kind. One well-meaning commentator (and I mean this, I'm not being sarcastic) has suggested that I'm lowering the credibilit of Blogs for Terri by suggesting this interpretation of the hospital's intentions, but I think there's no time to lose, that the parents need to get on the ball right now and find out exactly what the hospital means by "stopping all treatment other than to ease pain and suffering."

Posted by: Lydia at May 1, 2005 2:25 PM

Lydia - no way are you lowering the credibility of blogsforterri in what you are saying above about cessation of food and water. Actually, the contrary. We need to voice that there is an incredible danger of this very thing happening whenever hospitals/hospices begin to speak of "stopping all treatment other than to ease pain and suffering". I think that is exactly the 'code words' being used for cessation of everything including hydration/nutrition. "only ice chips now" might be exactly what that means.

Posted by: juleni at May 2, 2005 1:06 PM