Brain dead cancer patient kept alive to gestate baby

More questions on medical treatment choices involving life and death

As it turns out in the case referenced in the article below (headline will be linked, taken from USA Today), the mother to be suffered brain failure after a stroke because of an undiscovered brain tumor that was most likely related to cancer that the woman suffered from. She never had a chance to decide for herself, or with her husband what she would have wanted if given a choice to possibly save herself instead of the unborn child.

The decision to save mother or child is one that has been used in TV dramas lately -- including ABC's hit show Grey's Anatomy, and I believe in shows like Law and Order, ER and others. In those shows, the choice has been more clear cut, with the mother and father deciding to save the child at all costs, instead of undergoing radical treatment for cancer that would most likely kill the unborn child and only possibly save the child.

Read on for the original article referenced above, and for some additional commentary and thoughts.





Woman is kept alive to save unborn baby

Survival hopes hinge on mom living at least a month more


By Richard Willing
USA TODAY

ARLINGTON, Va. — A 26-year-old pregnant woman with cancer whose brain function ceased last month is being kept alive with a respirator in hopes she can have a very premature baby who has a chance to survive.
Susan Torres, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), lost consciousness May 7 when an undiagnosed brain tumor caused a stroke while she dined at home. Her husband, Jason Torres, says doctors told him Susan's brain functions have stopped.
Torres, also 26, says he decided to keep Susan on life support when doctors at Virginia Hospital Center here offered him the chance to disconnect the machines after they determined that she would not recover. He says he believes this is what his wife would have wanted.
A hospital spokesperson did not return calls and e-mails to discuss the case.
Against long odds, the baby Susan was carrying when she was stricken appears to be thriving after nearly 21 weeks of gestation, Torres says. If she can stay alive another month, and the cancer stays away from her uterus, the baby could be delivered and have a chance of surviving, he says. The couple has a 2-year-old son, Peter.
“I hate seeing her on those darned machines,” Torres says, “and I hate using her as a husk, a carrying case, because she herself is worth so much more. But Susan really wanted this baby. And she's a very — how should I put this? — a willful lady. That's probably why she's made it this far.”
Since 1977, at least nine comatose women have given birth in the USA, according to research by the University of Connecticut's medical center. Women with aggressive melanoma, the skin cancer that spread to Susan's brain, have borne children in reported cases in the USA, the United Kingdom and Canada, though not all survived.
Susan's doctors tell Torres they know of no cases in which a brain-dead mother with melanoma has delivered a child, he says.
Torres has quit his job as a commercial printing salesman and has moved into Susan's hospital room. He speaks to his wife, making small talk about the family and letting her know what's on his schedule for the day. For Torres, the routine is something solid to grasp in a life he says “was blown to pieces” nearly six weeks ago and continues to be rocked by aftershocks.




... more at linked article


Interesting case, and I wish for the best for the father and his still unborn offspring.

Honestly, if I faced such a choice and had to help decide between my wife and my unborn child, I don't know what sort of decision I would make. Thankfully, I never had to face such a choice, nor has my wife.

I don't know how I could possibly make the decision for someone else though, and am glad I'm not a judge that might ever have to decide on such an issue. If a fight came before me between say the parents of the mother who wanted their daughter saved and the husband and/or wife who wanted the baby to be saved, I'd have a tough time telling either side that they lost the case. I suppose I would have to side with the husband and wife, but if I faced a Terri Schiavo type case where the wife's wishes weren't clearly known and were only communicated via the husband, it wouldn't be an easy decision.

Again, thoughts and comments are welcome.
4,535 views 7 replies
Reply #1 Top
I don't see as there was a choice to made here with regard to choosing between saving the mother or the child. The mother's brain function ceased. He was really presented with the choice of whether or not to try and save the child at all. From what I can gather from reading, there is/was no hope of saving the mother one way or the other.

It is a truly sad situation and on a broader scale, if presented with such a choice as you describe, it would be a very difficult choice to make.
Reply #2 Top
beat you by a bit.  But blog on and best of luck on your thread.
Reply #3 Top
beat you by a bit. But blog on and best of luck on your thread.


ooooh, sorry I missed your original thread Doc. I'll try to check in on it shortly and see if I can add any comments.
Reply #4 Top

The only choice here was to take her off life support or not.  There wasn't a treatment option.  They weren't deciding between "saving" the Mother.  They only decided to try and save the baby.

I doubt that any pregnant Mom, given the choice, would wish to be taken off life support if there was a chance that the baby would live.

Reply #5 Top

I doubt that any pregnant Mom, given the choice, would wish to be taken off life support if there was a chance that the baby would live.

But according to NARAL and the law, it is not a baby.  It is just a parasitic life form that has no right to existance.

Reply #6 Top
There was a follow-up article in today's Washington Post that includes a sub-head noting that the "Cancer That Felled Woman Now Threatens Fetus", though a thorough read of the article doesn't seem to indicate that the doctors have yet found the cancer encroaching upon the Placenta or damaging any of the woman's other vital organs.

Unfortunately the doctors obviously cannot treat the cancer at this point, as doing so could clearly bring harm to the fetus, and yet, without treating the cancer, the cancer could spread to other organs and even potentially spread to the woman's reproductive organs and attack the child.

I wish for all the best for the family, and hope they are able to welcome a healthy baby after this ordeal.
Reply #7 Top

There was a follow-up article in today's Washington Post that includes a sub-head noting that the "Cancer That Felled Woman Now Threatens Fetus", though a thorough read of the article doesn't seem to indicate that the doctors have yet found the cancer encroaching upon the Placenta or damaging any of the woman's other vital organs.

Unfortunately the doctors obviously cannot treat the cancer at this point, as doing so could clearly bring harm to the fetus, and yet, without treating the cancer, the cancer could spread to other organs and even potentially spread to the woman's reproductive organs and attack the child.

I wish for all the best for the family, and hope they are able to welcome a healthy baby after this ordeal.

Cancer is a bogeyman.  It brings fear to all who have it, and those who don't know what it is.

cancer is not a disease per se.  It is an abnormal growth of cells that the genetic code has gone wacko.

That does not mean it is a cancer (like we use in everyday terms).  It means that some cells of the body have left the reservation.

I read the same article.  Basically they are saying that some day all of us will die.

And that is true.

But is it any wonder why Lung cancer does not turn into leukemia?  because while they are all cancers, they don't run rampant.  Lung Cells don't become blood cells.

I am with you and pray that this baby can be born and live a life to validate their mother's.  Until such time as the baby is dead, the only thing the doctors really know is that they are not infallible.