BTW, closer reading of this shows that Jason Strickland was not the adoptive father, but the stepfather. Doesn't really change any of the facts otherwise, just wanted to be clear.
Should the mother who gave the kid up for adoption have any role in this whatsoever?
I don't know. It sounds as if the natural mother had some degree of an active role in her daughter's life and that the adoption may have in at least a small degree, been a result of "coersion" for lack of a better word and/or because the daughter had already been with the sister for so long that it may have seemed in the best interest of the girl to leave her where she was. Frm what I read, the natural mother and her boyfriend were eventually cleared of charges of wrongdoing. However, I do not feel I know enough about these circumstances to form a definitive opinion.
Should the state have any role in this whatsoever?
Absolutley. If not the state then who? The man who at least passively, if not actively paricipated in harming the girl in the first place. My only question here is whether the state should allow the natural mother a say or not, but at this point they are in agreement anyway, so the point is somewhat irrelevent.
Should the father have any role in this whatsoever?
(I ask the above because it seems like there should be a none-of-the-above selection here)
By father, here I am assuming you mean the step-dad? Absolutely not. The bio-dad, nope, he doesn't know her at all.
Should the kid's ventilator be removed?
I don't know. I have mixed feelings on these issues.
Should the kid's feeding tube be removed?
I don't know. I have mixed feelings on these issues. I lean toward yes, turn them off. But there is apart of me that is uncertain.
As much as I hate to allow the state to have authority over children in ANY situation, I guess I have to grudgingly agree that it should be the states call.
Better yet, the medical professionals call. Let the doctors decide. The parents/step parents have no moral authority in this.
All my opinions about that sort of thing were dashed last year when a local Mountain View boy, Terry Wallis, came to after being in a "vegetative state" coma for twenty years. He has speech problems and some other problems, but I hear he no longer thinks Reagan is president and is coming to terms with the idea that his infant daughter is really a grown woman. Poor guy was knocked cold in a bad car wreck at age 19 and woke up in time for his 40th birthday.
Should the mother who gave the kid up for adoption have any role in this whatsoever?
Should the state have any role in this whatsoever?
Should the father have any role in this whatsoever?
(I ask the above because it seems like there should be a none-of-the-above selection here)
Should the kid's ventilator be removed?
Should the kid's feeding tube be removed?
There is a lot in the story about the extremely dysfunctional family dynamics, which is screwed up beyond belief, but I dont necessarily think that the surviving family members should be excluded from the process just because they seem somewhat reprehensible in the way that they are portrayed in the story.
I would hate to have to be the Solomon that sorts it all out, but I think that they should be at least given their say and have it weighed into the decision process.
There is not enough information on the exact condition of Haleigh for me to answer whether or not the ventilator or feeding tube should be removed or not. She has been in this condition only three months and the focus of the article was more on making the family members the story than her exact condition
The Schiavo case had been stretched out so long, tried and retried in so many courts, that every last angle had been covered as amatter of public record.
I am not against giving people the right to die but, I couldn't and wouldn't make a decision based on the scant info in this article.
I cant find the story online but read it in the local paper----FYI The little girl in question started breathing on her own yesterday a day after the state said that she could be taken off life support.
A day after the state's highest court ruled that the Department of Social Services could withdraw life support from a brain-damaged girl, the agency said yesterday that Haleigh Poutre might be emerging from her vegetative state.
DSS also said it has no immediate plans to remove her feeding tube.
''There has been a change in her condition," said a DSS spokeswoman, Denise Monteiro. ''The vegetative state may not be a total vegetative state."
Monteiro said Haleigh is breathing on her own, without the ventilator she has depended on for four months. Monteiro also said that doctors at Baystate Medical Center in Springfield elicited responses from Haleigh during tests performed yesterday.
They will begin more medical tests today to determine her neurological activity. Further tests, Monteiro said, could show whether Haleigh is going to be ''a miracle child."
Monteiro said that doctors did not tell DSS, which has custody of Haleigh, that her condition had changed until yesterday afternoon. She also said the agency's decision to seek court approval to remove life support was based on the ''best diagnosis that we thought we had at the time."
Monteiro declined to give further details about the condition of Haleigh, an 11-year-old Westfield girl who had been on breathing and feeding tubes since she suffered a beating last September, allegedly by her adoptive mother and stepfather.
Last fall, doctors described Haleigh as being in a persistent vegetative state and ''virtually brain dead," district court records said. Physicians said her brain stem was severely injured, leaving her unable to think or feel and in an ''irreversible coma," according to an opinion Tuesday by the Supreme Judicial Court.
Many neurologists say it is rare for a patient with severe brain-stem injuries to fully recover from a persistent vegetative state that lasts for more than a month. Sometimes, patients can partially recover, such as showing increasing responsiveness to touch by frowning or moving their hand, said Dr. Steve Williams, chief of rehabilitation medicine at Boston Medical Center.
But rarely do these patients fully recover so they can communicate, feed themselves, and live ordinary lives, he said.
He added, however, that the recoveries, when they happen, are more likely with children than adults. ''There's more plasticity to their brain," he said. ''There's potentially other areas of the brain that can take over."
Allison Avrett, Haleigh's biological mother, said yesterday that she saw improvements in a hospital visit last week, but was convinced by doctors and DSS workers that hand movements that she had seen were involuntary.
When Avrett visited Haleigh yesterday morning, Avrett said she again observed movement that caused her to reconsider her previous view that Haleigh was better off if allowed to die.
Avrett said she cannot give any more details about Haleigh, because the DSS has told her not to discuss the case.
John Gamelli, a family friend from Westfield, said he was told by Avrett yesterday that Haleigh was able to respond to commands, such as releasing an object from her hand when she was asked.
Gamelli said he is holding back from celebrating this as a sign that Haleigh will fully recover.
But he expressed frustration that DSS, which acknowledges missing signs over the past few years that Haleigh was being abused, had now possibly made the wrong call about the removal of life-support systems.
''Right now, things just don't make sense," he said.
In the Western Massachusetts town where Haleigh was raised, some had compared her case to that of Terri Schiavo, a Florida woman who was on life support for 15 years before a court ordered her feeding tube removed last spring. She died 13 days later at the age of 41. Schiavo was deemed by doctors to be in a persistent vegetative state, breathing on her own with her eyes open, but unconscious. Her parents, who sought to keep her alive, had insisted she sometimes responded to stimulation. Her husband said she would have wanted her feeding tube removed.
Before yesterday's disclosures, Haleigh was thought to have more serious brain damage than Schiavo, in part because she was not breathing on her own. Haleigh was brought unconscious to Noble Hospital in Westfield last Sept. 11.
Afterward, doctors diagnosed traumatic brain injuries and many bruises in various stages of healing. In the past few years, the DSS had received more than a dozen complaints from people whom the agency has declined to name, saying Haleigh was being neglected or abused, but social workers said many of the injuries were self-inflicted or childhood mishaps.
On Sept. 20, Holli and Jason Strickland, the girl's adoptive mother and stepfather, were arrested on child abuse charges. The adoptive mother was released two days later, and within hours, was found dead with her grandmother. Police continue to investigate the deaths, but say it seems to be a murder-suicide.
In October, DSS officials, saying that Haleigh's medical condition was hopeless, won a juvenile court order to have her ventilator and feeding tube removed. Jason Strickland, who could face murder charges if Haleigh dies, filed a motion to keep her on life support.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Judicial Court rejected Strickland's claim to be a ''de facto" parent, saying it was ''unthinkable" to give a say to someone who allegedly helped put Haleigh in a coma. The justices also gave DSS authority to remove Haleigh's breathing and feeding tubes.
Jack Egan, a Springfield lawyer for the girl's stepfather, said yesterday's medical news confirms their view that DSS was too hasty in determining that Haleigh's condition was irreversible. He noted that DSS asked the courts to withdraw life support after Haleigh had been in the hospital for less than a month.
Recommended Posts
markomalley
BTW, closer reading of this shows that Jason Strickland was not the adoptive father, but the stepfather. Doesn't really change any of the facts otherwise, just wanted to be clear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
mark
another question to ask
did the natural father pay child support?
if he did he should have a say
if not back off
Edited by coolchef1248 @adelphia.netLink to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
So far as what I can gather, the natural father was in prison.
"She was born in 1994, when Avrett was 17. Haleigh's father had just been sent to prison and never met his daughter."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
Should the mother who gave the kid up for adoption have any role in this whatsoever? No
Should the state have any role in this whatsoever? Yes, they should have all the say at this point
Should the father have any role in this whatsoever? No, not the adoptive father, step father or bio father.
(I ask the above because it seems like there should be a none-of-the-above selection here)
Should the kid's ventilator be removed? Yes
Should the kid's feeding tube be removed? Yes
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morgan
Should the mother who gave the kid up for adoption have any role in this whatsoever?
I don't know. It sounds as if the natural mother had some degree of an active role in her daughter's life and that the adoption may have in at least a small degree, been a result of "coersion" for lack of a better word and/or because the daughter had already been with the sister for so long that it may have seemed in the best interest of the girl to leave her where she was. Frm what I read, the natural mother and her boyfriend were eventually cleared of charges of wrongdoing. However, I do not feel I know enough about these circumstances to form a definitive opinion.
Should the state have any role in this whatsoever?
Absolutley. If not the state then who? The man who at least passively, if not actively paricipated in harming the girl in the first place. My only question here is whether the state should allow the natural mother a say or not, but at this point they are in agreement anyway, so the point is somewhat irrelevent.
Should the father have any role in this whatsoever?
(I ask the above because it seems like there should be a none-of-the-above selection here)
By father, here I am assuming you mean the step-dad? Absolutely not. The bio-dad, nope, he doesn't know her at all.
Should the kid's ventilator be removed?
I don't know. I have mixed feelings on these issues.
Should the kid's feeding tube be removed?
I don't know. I have mixed feelings on these issues. I lean toward yes, turn them off. But there is apart of me that is uncertain.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
As much as I hate to allow the state to have authority over children in ANY situation, I guess I have to grudgingly agree that it should be the states call.
Better yet, the medical professionals call. Let the doctors decide. The parents/step parents have no moral authority in this.
All my opinions about that sort of thing were dashed last year when a local Mountain View boy, Terry Wallis, came to after being in a "vegetative state" coma for twenty years. He has speech problems and some other problems, but I hear he no longer thinks Reagan is president and is coming to terms with the idea that his infant daughter is really a grown woman. Poor guy was knocked cold in a bad car wreck at age 19 and woke up in time for his 40th birthday.
Edited by Ron G.Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
How's come in this thread I can only reply using fast reply?
Works ok, but odd
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
Should the mother who gave the kid up for adoption have any role in this whatsoever?
Should the state have any role in this whatsoever?
Should the father have any role in this whatsoever?
(I ask the above because it seems like there should be a none-of-the-above selection here)
Should the kid's ventilator be removed?
Should the kid's feeding tube be removed?
There is a lot in the story about the extremely dysfunctional family dynamics, which is screwed up beyond belief, but I dont necessarily think that the surviving family members should be excluded from the process just because they seem somewhat reprehensible in the way that they are portrayed in the story.
I would hate to have to be the Solomon that sorts it all out, but I think that they should be at least given their say and have it weighed into the decision process.
There is not enough information on the exact condition of Haleigh for me to answer whether or not the ventilator or feeding tube should be removed or not. She has been in this condition only three months and the focus of the article was more on making the family members the story than her exact condition
The Schiavo case had been stretched out so long, tried and retried in so many courts, that every last angle had been covered as amatter of public record.
I am not against giving people the right to die but, I couldn't and wouldn't make a decision based on the scant info in this article.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
UPDATE:
I cant find the story online but read it in the local paper----FYI The little girl in question started breathing on her own yesterday a day after the state said that she could be taken off life support.
Edited by mstar1Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Thanks for bringing this back up mstar,
Here's an article on it:
source: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...ted_to_improve/
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.