Requests for assistance and advocacy.
Narof tries to give what
support it can to families and professionals who need assistance
with advocacy and legal preperations. Many of our members have been
involved in protracted legal battles and willingly give of their
time and experience to support others in similar circumstances.
CASE OF THE MILLER
Taken from the Appeal decision:
"The narrow question we must decide is whether Texas law recognizes a claim
by parents for either battery or negligence because their premature infant, born
alive but in distress at only twenty-three weeks of gestation, was provided resuscitative
medical treatment by physicians at a hospital without parental consent. The court
of appeals, with one justice dissenting, held that neither claim could be maintained
as a matter of law because parents have no right to refuse urgently-needed life-sustaining
medical treatment for their child unless the child’s condition is “certifiably
terminal” under the Natural Death Act ..."
Sidney Ainsley Miller, by and Through Her next Friend Karla H. Miller, and
Karla H. Miller and J. Mark Miller, Individually v. Hca, Inc., Hca-hospital
Corporation of America, Hospital Corporation of America and Columbia/Hca
Healthcare Corporation - Appeal Decision)
My name is Mark Miller. my daughter is Sidney. I sincerely appreciate
your offer to write a letter on our behalf. You can read the decision
by going to the link or
going to www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us and clicking on the 9/30/03
After you read the opinion, i think you will be able to see that the court
took 18 months for the texas supreme court to rewrite 150 years of texas
law. they strip away the rights of parents to make health care decisions
for their children in this landmark opinion.
The hospital ( HCA-Columbia ) argued to the supreme court that a fetus has
no rights until it is born. that would be an expansion of the roe v wade
decision, and against every other written opinion by this court in the past.
The basis for the opinion appears to be this was an emergency situation,
a defense that was rejected at the trial court who heard all the evidence,
and this court felt it needed to protect doctors from litigation and accountability.
we did not suit any doctor in our case, yet the court went on about the need
to protect the profession.
The treating physicians knew of the outcome of the tragic miscarriage 11
hours before the birth, and detailed to us exactly what our child's condition
would be. the hospital administrator selected and ordered a neonatologist,
that we had never met to attend the birth and to "resusitate any child
with a birth weight over 500 grams, as a matter of hospital policy." for
the supreme court to hold otherwise, as a matter of law, is a fiction so
transparent that it exposes the true political nature of this court and it's
reasons for such a blatently bad opinion.
The author of this opinion reveals his contempt for the intelligence of the
family and the american public. it is meaningless to say that parents have
the right to decide medical treatment for their children, even before birth
if you also say that any treatment given at birth is ok because the child
can't be properly assessed until birth. this opinion makes every birth an
I hope you will take the time from your busy schedule to write a letter to
the court, and copy these important folks..... the Editor of the Austin American
Statesman in Austin, Texas, Tennessee Senator Bill Frist, and to the Chairman
of the Board of Columbia HCA Hospital.
I will be happy to visit with anyone in your group, at any time to discuss
the events that lead up to this opinion, and the repercussions of such a
poor evaluation of the facts in this case. when you see and hear on the news
about " judicial activism " and how the citizens need to be aware
of judges writing legislation from the bench......here is a practical example
of that practice in black and white. this court and these justices have taken
facts that our jury found against the hospital ( not physicians ) and used
spin to write an opinion that protects doctors from the liability of their
actions, even when ordered to act over the express wishes and with no consent
to treat from the parents.
Any help, from any person that knows this was a political opinion and has
no relation to the specific underlying case that that the miller's attorneys
won at the trial court, would be great to hear from. please give them my
e-mail address and my home address. we are all fighting an uphill battle
and need your support !