Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

...After about two years of litigation, defense attorneys for the hospital and doctors entered an argument that shocked the widower.

They said that under state law, an embryo is not person until it is born alive, according to court documents. The Stodghills' twins were deceased when they were removed from their mother's lifeless body.

"I didn't even get to hold them," Jeremy Stodghill said. "I have an autopsy picture. That's all I've got."

The court agreed with the argument, and Stodghill lost the suit. The court also ruled against Stodghill in the case of his wife for other legal reasons...

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/26/us/colora ... ?hpt=hp_t2

these lawyers should be fired and, if Catholic, excommunicated at once.

Statement from Colorado Bishops:

The Catholic bishops of Colorado learned recently of the deaths of Lori Stodghill and her two unborn children, which took place at St. Thomas More Hospital in Cañon City, Colo. in 2006. We wish to extend our solidarity and sympathy to Lori's husband Jeremy, and her daughter, Elizabeth. Please be assured of our ongoing prayers.

From the moment of conception, human beings are endowed with dignity and with fundamental rights, the most foundational of which is life.

Catholics and Catholic institutions have the duty to protect and foster human life, and to witness to the dignity of the human person -- particularly to the dignity of the unborn. No Catholic institution may legitimately work to undermine fundamental human dignity.

Catholic Health Initiatives is a Catholic institution which provides health care services in 14 states, providing care to thousands of people annually. Catholic Health Initiatives has been accused by some of undermining the Catholic position on human life in the course of litigation. Today, representatives of Catholic Health Initiatives assured us of their intention to observe the moral and ethical obligations of the Catholic Church.

The Catholic bishops of Colorado are not able to comment on ongoing legal disputes. However, we will undertake a full review of this litigation, and of the policies and practices of Catholic Health Initiatives to ensure fidelity and faithful witness to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Most Rev. Samuel J. Aquila, S.T.L., Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Denver
Most Rev. Michael Sheridan, S.Th.D, Bishop of the Diocese of Colorado Springs
Most Rev. Fernando Isern, Bishop of the Diocese of Pueblo

THE BOLD is what I highlighted. The Church has never changed her position. Unfortunately, there are those within the ranks that think THEY know best. Think of the parable of the wheat and the chaff.........

CNN tonight did a spot on this.

What was conspicuously absent was exactly why the hospital was being sued. Maybe it was for delayed care, but I saw the woman's picture and she was morbidly obese. She was a walking stroke waiting to happen.

I agree it is definitely inconsistent on the part of the Catholic Church, but no more asinine than those on the left that would support this guy's right to sue for 3 wrongful deaths.

psychoCAT wrote:Statement from Colorado Bishops:

The Catholic bishops of Colorado learned recently of the deaths of Lori Stodghill and her two unborn children, which took place at St. Thomas More Hospital in Cañon City, Colo. in 2006. We wish to extend our solidarity and sympathy to Lori's husband Jeremy, and her daughter, Elizabeth. Please be assured of our ongoing prayers.

From the moment of conception, human beings are endowed with dignity and with fundamental rights, the most foundational of which is life.

Catholics and Catholic institutions have the duty to protect and foster human life, and to witness to the dignity of the human person -- particularly to the dignity of the unborn. No Catholic institution may legitimately work to undermine fundamental human dignity.

Catholic Health Initiatives is a Catholic institution which provides health care services in 14 states, providing care to thousands of people annually. Catholic Health Initiatives has been accused by some of undermining the Catholic position on human life in the course of litigation. Today, representatives of Catholic Health Initiatives assured us of their intention to observe the moral and ethical obligations of the Catholic Church.

The Catholic bishops of Colorado are not able to comment on ongoing legal disputes. However, we will undertake a full review of this litigation, and of the policies and practices of Catholic Health Initiatives to ensure fidelity and faithful witness to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Most Rev. Samuel J. Aquila, S.T.L., Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Denver
Most Rev. Michael Sheridan, S.Th.D, Bishop of the Diocese of Colorado Springs
Most Rev. Fernando Isern, Bishop of the Diocese of Pueblo

THE BOLD is what I highlighted. The Church has never changed her position. Unfortunately, there are those within the ranks that think THEY know best. Think of the parable of the wheat and the chaff.........

It's all about the money, unfortunately. Two other disturbing things about this story. For one, the defense raised this issue two years in to the lawsuit. Some states might have considered that delay to amount to a waiver. For another, the hospital and the docs went after the poor guy for legal fees after his case was dismissed. That's not usually seen unless a case is determined to be frivolous or brought in bad faith, because the US does not have a "loser pays" system.

CID1990 wrote:CNN tonight did a spot on this.

What was conspicuously absent was exactly why the hospital was being sued. Maybe it was for delayed care, but I saw the woman's picture and she was morbidly obese. She was a walking stroke waiting to happen.

I agree it is definitely inconsistent on the part of the Catholic Church, but no more asinine than those on the left that would support this guy's right to sue for 3 wrongful deaths.

The wrongful death suit was being filed on behalf of the twin babies who also died. The woman was 7 months pregnant and came to the ER with nasuea and other symptoms and lost consciousness when she got to the ER. She evidently had a heart attack due to a large blockage of the main artery going to the lungs. I don't believe there was any lawsuit over her death (although I don't know for certain). The lawsuit was about the twins who subsequently died in the womb - the ER staff could not reach the obstetrician who the plaintiffs argue should've ordered an emergency c-section to attempt to save the babies.

GannonFan wrote:

CID1990 wrote:CNN tonight did a spot on this.

What was conspicuously absent was exactly why the hospital was being sued. Maybe it was for delayed care, but I saw the woman's picture and she was morbidly obese. She was a walking stroke waiting to happen.

I agree it is definitely inconsistent on the part of the Catholic Church, but no more asinine than those on the left that would support this guy's right to sue for 3 wrongful deaths.

The wrongful death suit was being filed on behalf of the twin babies who also died. The woman was 7 months pregnant and came to the ER with nasuea and other symptoms and lost consciousness when she got to the ER. She evidently had a heart attack due to a large blockage of the main artery going to the lungs. I don't believe there was any lawsuit over her death (although I don't know for certain). The lawsuit was about the twins who subsequently died in the womb - the ER staff could not reach the obstetrician who the plaintiffs argue should've ordered an emergency c-section to attempt to save the babies.

Gotcha. I thought I heard on CNN that the husband was also suing for the wife's death. That's what I get for expecting accurate info out of the TV media.

Of course, the oddity of these laws and rulings is that you could make an argument that the deceased mother, or her estate, could be sued for wrongful death or negligence if the cause for the blocked artery was poor physical health. There's a real murky area that would and is developing when you start to consider the personhood and legal status of babies that aren't full term.

GannonFan wrote:Of course, the oddity of these laws and rulings is that you could make an argument that the deceased mother, or her estate, could be sued for wrongful death or negligence if the cause for the blocked artery was poor physical health. There's a real murky area that would and is developing when you start to consider the personhood and legal status of babies that aren't full term.

Good point. The fat bitch.

D1B wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Of course, the oddity of these laws and rulings is that you could make an argument that the deceased mother, or her estate, could be sued for wrongful death or negligence if the cause for the blocked artery was poor physical health. There's a real murky area that would and is developing when you start to consider the personhood and legal status of babies that aren't full term.

Good point. The fat bitch.

Well, I don't really want to step on the grave of the deceased. That's what lawyers are for.

GannonFan wrote:Of course, the oddity of these laws and rulings is that you could make an argument that the deceased mother, or her estate, could be sued for wrongful death or negligence if the cause for the blocked artery was poor physical health. There's a real murky area that would and is developing when you start to consider the personhood and legal status of babies that aren't full term.

Maybe he should sue Wendys for forcing her to inhale all those Bacinators.

D1B wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Of course, the oddity of these laws and rulings is that you could make an argument that the deceased mother, or her estate, could be sued for wrongful death or negligence if the cause for the blocked artery was poor physical health. There's a real murky area that would and is developing when you start to consider the personhood and legal status of babies that aren't full term.

Good point. The fat bitch.

Very humanist of you.

Ibanez wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Of course, the oddity of these laws and rulings is that you could make an argument that the deceased mother, or her estate, could be sued for wrongful death or negligence if the cause for the blocked artery was poor physical health. There's a real murky area that would and is developing when you start to consider the personhood and legal status of babies that aren't full term.

Maybe he should sue Wendys for forcing her to inhale all those Bacinators.

Well, we are, every day, becoming more and more a guiltless society. Her own health clearly can't be her fault.

ASUMountaineer wrote:

D1B wrote:
Good point. The fat bitch.

Very humanist of you.

Thank you.

Secular humanism encourages everyone to take personal responsibity for moral and ethical excellence.

That woman did not take care of herself while pregnant.

D1B wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
Very humanist of you.

Thank you.

Secular humanism encourages everyone to take personal responsibity for moral and ethical excellence.

That woman did not take care of herself while pregnant.

I'm assuming it says encourages folks to take personal responsibility for their own financial survival as well?

ASUMountaineer wrote:

D1B wrote:
Thank you.

Secular humanism encourages everyone to take personal responsibity for moral and ethical excellence.

That woman did not take care of herself while pregnant.

I'm assuming it says encourages folks to take personal responsibility for their own financial survival as well?

Of course it does.

D1B wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
I'm assuming it says encourages folks to take personal responsibility for their own financial survival as well?

Of course it does.

So, a little libertarian, eh?

ASUMountaineer wrote:

D1B wrote:

Of course it does.

So, a little libertarian, eh?

Actually, a lot.

D1B wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
So, a little libertarian, eh?

Actually, a lot.

Good for them. Now, "live and let live" would be a good mantra for them.