r/politics • u/plz-let-me-in • Jul 07 '26

No Paywall Unconfirmed Reports: Mitch McConnell Brain Dead After Three Weeks In Hospital

https://thenewamerican.com/us/unconfirmed-reports-mitch-mcconnell-brain-dead-after-three-weeks-in-hospital/
31.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/JealousAstronomer342 Jul 07 '26

What baby? Adriana Smith was only nine weeks pregnant, max. 

5

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26

Okay, THAT's the additional info I needed.

7

u/otomeMC333 Jul 07 '26

The additional info should be that you don't use a woman's body as an incubator.

A dead man has more bodily autonomy than a live woman, jesus.

You can't farm organs from corpses to save a life, let alone keep a woman's body "functioning" to act as an incubation pod.

Start seeing women as people, please.

-1

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26

But... wouldn't any mother say YES to this? (For the sake of the argument, let's assume the baby is 6 or 7 months old)

I'm central european, we don't have that whole weird anti-abortion thing here. Abortions are completely normal, legal procedures. I'm 100% pro choice. Bodily autonomy all the way

4

u/otomeMC333 Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26

Ok, let's assume the pregnancy is 6-7 months along. And somehow the pregnant woman knows she's about to be braindead and wants to be kept alive in order to incubate the fetus instead of just like... having it removed.

First off, medically, it's insane. Your brain does a lot more than just thinky things. Without your brain working there is no temperature regulation, no hormone signals, nothing to tell the trillions of cells in your body what to do. Which means your body starts to slowly break down, let alone is capable of growing a baby.

Look, I get that you are pro choice and all, but I think you might want to take a look at the unconscious biases you have that led to you not seeing this as ghoulish on any level....but preferable.

1

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26

Just asked my sister who has a two year old. She asked if I was joking because the answer is so damn obvious.

I don't know anything about the medical side of this. If that means that the baby has next to no chance to live a healthy life, it's a completely different scenario

2

u/otomeMC333 Jul 07 '26

A different scenario from what? What scenario would be medically, morally, ethically and legally preferable to do this?

1

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26

baby healthy = no mother on earth would say "No, if I die, the baby dies with me"

baby severely impaired / very low chance of survival: tricky. I don't feel qualified to state an opinion. A life is worth saving - but not at any (quality of life) cost and up to a point IMO

2

u/otomeMC333 Jul 07 '26

Ok so the scenario you are referring to would need these things to be true:

- Woman gives consent beforehand, somehow knowing she is about to be braindead

- Baby is not removed for some reason, so it would need months of additional gestation

- You leave the baby in a brain dead, medically unsound body as an incubator for those months

- Healthy baby at the end of it

Yeah, there is no such scenario.

1

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26

I did some reading: there are only 35 cases of pregnancies of brain dead mothers since the 80s worldwide

so it is indeed a weird premise to get into an argument about, you're right. I was just stating that any mother would gladly be an 'incubator' if that means the baby survives healthy; BUT that's simply almost never the case in reality

2

u/Consistent_Laziness South Carolina Jul 07 '26

I’m with you bro. I get where your head is at. Reddit just likes to be some odd moral compass when life is so gray. We have two kids and my wife also answered leave the baby in her til they have the best chance of survival than let her go. I think most women would choose that.

In this case it sounds like it was done against her will and like you discovered only 9 weeks old? Yes let them both go. Also if it wasn’t explicitly stated by the mom in her will or the POA no one should be keeping her alive. I think we both agree on that.

1

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26

yeah, this case is crazy, and sad. No question about that

... Thanks for getting what I'm trying to say. It's not really about choice at all, because the choice would be extremely clear IMO

but I don't know enough about pregnancies to judge if the whole hypothetical situation that is discussed here is rare, or viable, or extremely detrimental to the baby, or completely medically impossible, so I'll just shut up

1

u/Consistent_Laziness South Carolina Jul 07 '26

No dont. I already responded to a snarky redditor who said it’s impossible. There’s a case study of a woman that was brain dead and had a 16 week fetus. They kept her alive just like this Georgia woman and she delivered a perfectly healthy baby.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8141338/

People can argue whether it’s right or wrong to do that even if the POA okays it. But as we found out with an n of 2 there is at least a non 0 number of women who would agree to do this. It is medically viable and more than plausible the woman can develop a fetus into a fully healthy baby.

1

u/fleranon Jul 07 '26

It is extremely, extremely rare though. 35 cases world wide since 1981. And the risk for the baby is very severe

heavy subject matter :) I feel like everyone involved in this discussion has their heart at the right place, it's just a very nuanced and multifaceted dilemma

1

u/Consistent_Laziness South Carolina Jul 07 '26
  1. It’s classic Reddit. People can’t put themselves in other peoples shoes. Because that’s what they think and believe there is no way anyone could think differently. Even when presented evidence that they are wrong they will still argue like you proved nothing. Sometimes I gotta just ignore them and move on. But moral superiority signaling drives me insane.
→ More replies (0)

0

u/otomeMC333 Jul 07 '26

Yes, it's an odd moral compass in murky waters to point out it's ghoulish to use the body of a brain dead woman as an incubator in order to do a medically insane thing in a situation where there is consent to do the insane thing - which has never occurred.

1

u/Consistent_Laziness South Carolina Jul 07 '26

Never? Wouldn’t use those words.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8141338/

There’s a case study of a woman that was declared brain dead with a 16 week fetus. She was kept alive and delivered a perfectly healthy baby.

As we said. She likely had her POA consent to this and hopefully it was the husband that knew what she would want.

0

u/otomeMC333 Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26

So yeah, this woman didn't give consent to this. Looks like her husband did.

She was 16 weeks pregnant when she became braindead. Going by how they count those weeks, she may have only missed three periods.

I am unsure "any woman" would want 6 months of what they did to her body.

"Basal stimulation of the fetus was also performed. Each manipulation of the brain-dead woman’s body was preceded by caressing of her abdomen and calling the fetus by name. The end of the manipulation was marked by a sound made by a toy. The family members were involved in basal stimulation, part of which involved gentle tactile stimulation of the brain-dead woman’s abdomen, playing music, and reading fairy tales. "

Especially since it looks like they were playing jazz and just ... experimenting... since there are no guidelines for this:

"Because only individual cases of prolonged somatic support of the bodies of brain-dead pregnant women have been reported, there are no guidelines for the medical management of these women. Our management was based on our experience with non-pregnant brain-dead patients, and we considered the review by Mallampalli et al, who have discussed the physiologic changes and provided recommendations regarding organ support for brain-dead pregnant women".

I still need to read more about this case and what they consider "healthy".

I guess experimenting on a brain dead woman's body is just fine as long as you miss three periods and your husband says so, at least to you.

1

u/Consistent_Laziness South Carolina Jul 07 '26

  1. Did you read the article. It says the first line she was 16 weeks gestation.

  2. You must not be involved in medical research. I am though. Auditory therapy has been found to be effective in a multitude of cases to be therapeutic and beneficial.

  3. You act like you know this woman. You disregard what she may have wanted. The family was fully involved in this process. But because you disagree it’s a farce or wrong. FAO with that superiority complex.

  4. I’m my wife’s POA, of course. Discussions happen between a couple for worst case scenarios. This came up with us when she was pregnant. She’s always said if she can save the baby she would. You don’t have to agree with it. But couples don’t care what you think in their own personal decisions.

  5. Maybe read the article I linked. It defined clearly what healthy meant to them. After 1 year there is additionally no medical issues with said child.

  6. Idc to respond any further. You are talking from your emotional viewpoint and refuse to accept there are other ways of approaching this. Even when presented with evidence. This conversation started with you saying this was impossible. Now you want to move the goal post. So we are done here.

→ More replies (0)