Captain's Quarters is reporting that Sun Hudson, a disabled infant in Texas, died Tuesday after being taken off life support against his mother's wishes.
I discussed this story earlier with this post.
I find this statement in the CNN article to be truly odd: "'Texas Children's Hospital is deeply saddened to report that Sun Hudson has died,' the hospital said in a statement issued Tuesday."
It just seems odd to be sad about the death of an infant that you knew was going to die if taken off life support when you're the ones who took the infant off life support. Wasn't Sun's death the goal of taking him off life support?
Captain Ed summarizes the issues well with this:
Understandably, this case has its share of difficult decisions, but it's hard to understand how the court can overrule the wishes of the next of kin in making a determination to kill a child, simply because the doctors didn't want to go on treating him. Something tells me that we've stumbled over a line here, and what's on the other side has little purchase and a long fall.