Bloggers have been covering the story of St. Luke's plan to take Clark off "life support" for over a week -- from the day Dixon posted an entry on the Democratic Underground blog: KILLING MY SISTER - WE ARE PROTESTING - HELP US. That certainly got bloggers' attention. In that initial post, Dixon wrote,

The hospital ethics committee met the day before yesterday and concluded that Andrea's treatment (respirator and dialysis) should be discontinued. We have ten days to move her from that hospital or they will "pull the plug" and let Andrea die. Andrea, until a few days ago, when the physicians decided to increase her pain medication and anesthetize her into unconsciousness, was fully able to make her own medical decisions and had decided that she wanted life saving treatment until she dies naturally. We have learned that this is part of the process, when hospitals decided to declare the "medical futility" of continueing treatment for a patient. But, this is not a Terry Schiavo case; not anything like it. Andrea, when she is not medicated into unconsciousness (and even when she is, and the medication has worn off to some degree) is aware and cognizant. She has suffered no brain damage to the parts of her brain responsible for thought and reason, or speech. She has only suffered loss of some motor control. The reason that the physician gave to medicate her so much is that she is suffering from intractable pain in the sacral region (in other words, she has a bedsore that causes her pain). This is not reason enough, in our books, and we are trying, as we speak, to get Andrea's medication lowered so that she can speak to us.

Since then there's been lots of discussion -- but mostly all in the blogosphere. Sunday's front-page Houston Chronicle story signals the first time the story has been "legitimized" by the mainstream print media.

People like Wesley Smith have been warning us about "futile care policies" for a long time.

This has come up before. Some of you may recall that back when Terri Schiavo was being starved, progressives were talking about the case of an infant boy at a Texas hospital -- Sun Hudson, who ultimately died; and a few months ago I blogged about Tirhas Hatbegiris, also in a Texas hospital, also "allowed to die" based on the "futile care policies" in place in Texas hospitals.

Besides Smith's explanations, a good overview of what goes on in these Texas cases can be found here on the HealthLaw Prof Blog, in a post by Thomas Mayo, an attorney and law professor whose profile tells us that "he is a member of the Texas Advance Directives Coalition, which was responsible for drafting the 1999 Advance Directives Act and its 2003 amendments. He currently serves on five hospital ethics committees. . . "

Dixon is telling folks that there will be a meeting Tuesday in which the doctor who wants to continue treating Clark will try to persuade the hospital to support that effort. Dixon believes that calls and letters to the hospital will help.

You can help:

Call 832-355-1000 -- the operator will transfer you to public relations, which is fine. Register your opinion.

And/or write: Dr. David Pate, Hospital Administrator St. Luke's Memorial Hospital 6720 Bertner Ave. Houston, TX 77030-2604.