Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #9

[ArianeEmory]

I guess I just don't quite see it with the same amount of cynicism. I think a lot of families are just conflicted. That's it. It doesn't mean that money is a motive -- especially when you consider how much money it costs to keep them "alive."

I think we need to remember that we do not know Jahi -- she does not belong to us. Compassion can take you far, but not all the way. We can look at the situation from an objective point-of-view and think that everything is obvious. We can tell Jahi's mother that it's ok to let go -- but we are not Jahi's mother and we do not feel the commitment toward her.

A lawyer might be wheeling & dealing in the background here, but just perhaps to the family they simply needed this lawyer to help them hold onto their little girl. Perhaps at this point they are willing to be less private if their lawyer told them it would help with medical expenses.

I just find the entire situation heartbreaking and can't bring myself to vilify Jahi's family.

I'd like to back this up a little for those who may not be as familiar with the situation.

This family has:

--Done the cable interview rounds while dismissing the $250,000 damages cap as 'chump change' (Uncle Omari). Quote.

--Lied about being at the hospital for her initial surgery when he was actually in Cabo (also Uncle Omari, but he tends to fib about being/having been with Jahi quite frequently).

--Told a bunch of kids that if they prayed hard enough she would wake up. So a bunch of middle school kids are now probably really confused about brain death, think hospitals are scary evil places that just want to put you to sleep and then pull the plug on you, and maybe even feel like failures because they didn't pray hard enough.

--Blackmailed her school into giving her an 8th grade diploma (and then admitted they blackmailed the school with threats of a media circus--verifiable via MSM sources)

--Made that entire 8th grade class's graduation ceremony about Jahi

--Done their part to spread magical thinking and fear of science

This is in addition to a LOT of other stuff that I won't repeat because none of it is via primary/verified sources.

To the best of my knowledge I've never explicitly said anything insulting/negative about Jahi's mother, and I won't pretend to know her motivation. But what she is doing is causing damage to other people, and unknown damage in the future. (And let's not forget she has other children who have now been, essentially, back-burnered.) I understand that a mother's love is untouchable, but we cannot extend that so far that every mother has the guaranteed (and paid) right to keep their brain-dead child alive as long as the body can be kept warm, because they can't let go of that body. It's not reasonable and it doesn't benefit anyone, including the mother.

The dismissive attitude towards critical thinking as 'cynicism' is insulting. One can have a heart while still utilizing the brain. I think if more people did both, civilization would be in better shape.

 

[hopingicanhelp]

The dismissive attitude towards critical thinking as 'cynicism' is insulting. One can have a heart while still utilizing the brain. I think if more people did both, civilization would be in better shape.

I never intended to be insulting and so for that, I apologize. I was replying to one post in particular that I found to be over-reaching in its assumption.

My point was that it is easy for US to find the odd, strange, weird, "off", abnormal, etc and wonder "WHY don't they GET it?" but we look at SO many cases -- we are bound to become jaded/cynical.

In your post you mentioned that they harmed others by misleading them -- I can agree to that to a large extent. However, I'm trying to put myself in Jahi's mother's shoes -- I can imagine feeling like this: I can't be alone in my hope; if I fight hard enough and convince enough people to fight just as hard (through prayer or other means), then something HAS to happen -- even if it's just because I can't bring myself to believe otherwise.

Add in a lawyer and an attention-grabbing uncle who **might** be using her emotions to their advantage.

Again, I apologize if I offended -- but not all people react as though we might expect; not all people believe the same as we do; not all people are somewhat desensitized by facts as we are on Websleuths.

 

[Nore]

K_Z, may I ask do you know if a persons fingers will "club" after death? That is during decomposure. (sp)..Her brain is totaled by now. In fact, many moons ago. My God the family must be nuts! IMO.:seeya:

 

[PeteyGirl]

This is my first encounter with this story. It strikes me as SO no one else's business. The amount of money spent for Jahi's care or publicity or whatever other nonsense is negligible against the backdrop of how people and their governments spend their money, so even *that* bit of imagined personal impact on the rest of us is nonsense. This is a situation that should fade from public consciousness, I'm sure we have plenty of other pressing personal and societal issues to gnash our teeth over. The outrage against the family's behavior is beyond 'our business' and makes me wonder about some folks's priorities. What *we* opine about any aspect of this is a delusion.

All a person can do is reflect upon what they themselves, confronted similarly, would plan to do if confronted with their worst nightmare, and do the family a favor, stop paying attention to them no matter how they demand it.

I'm a nurse and the child's body is not decomposing (for God's sake!) and I've been with countless family who sat with their unresponsive loved one doing their nails and caring for their skin, combing every inch of their body because that is all they have left. It is tender and beautiful, the care I've witnessed being taken. The disgusting remarks I've read (glossing over the links etc) do not reassure me at all, it's as though people revel in spewing their negative, hateful opinions over a tragedy they've arrogantly made THEIR personal business. Gross and shameful.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I'd like to back this up a little for those who may not be as familiar with the situation.

This family has:

--Done the cable interview rounds while dismissing the $250,000 damages cap as 'chump change' (Uncle Omari). Quote.

--Lied about being at the hospital for her initial surgery when he was actually in Cabo (also Uncle Omari, but he tends to fib about being/having been with Jahi quite frequently).

--Told a bunch of kids that if they prayed hard enough she would wake up. So a bunch of middle school kids are now probably really confused about brain death, think hospitals are scary evil places that just want to put you to sleep and then pull the plug on you, and maybe even feel like failures because they didn't pray hard enough.

--Blackmailed her school into giving her an 8th grade diploma (and then admitted they blackmailed the school with threats of a media circus--verifiable via MSM sources)

--Made that entire 8th grade class's graduation ceremony about Jahi

--Done their part to spread magical thinking and fear of science

This is in addition to a LOT of other stuff that I won't repeat because none of it is via primary/verified sources.

To the best of my knowledge I've never explicitly said anything insulting/negative about Jahi's mother, and I won't pretend to know her motivation. But what she is doing is causing damage to other people, and unknown damage in the future. (And let's not forget she has other children who have now been, essentially, back-burnered.) I understand that a mother's love is untouchable, but we cannot extend that so far that every mother has the guaranteed (and paid) right to keep their brain-dead child alive as long as the body can be kept warm, because they can't let go of that body. It's not reasonable and it doesn't benefit anyone, including the mother.

The dismissive attitude towards critical thinking as 'cynicism' is insulting. One can have a heart while still utilizing the brain. I think if more people did both, civilization would be in better shape.

Maybe you haven't ever explicitly said anything insulting/negative about Jahi's mother, but others have. Many posts (here and elsewhere) are beyond cynical. They are bashing in nature. Utilizing the brain goes both ways. You can have a brain and compassion at the same time. Using smiley emojis and one liners when referring to how "horrible" this family is, to ME, is uncalled for
and disrespectful. It's like some take pleasure in it or act as if its a game.
This is not a game. In any way.

The fact that some have come here daily since December just to bash. Not add anything to the conversation at all is very telling.

I've followed this story from day one. I know the facts. But I find it hard to read here sometimes.

I think using the word cynicism is actually very kind. It's not the critical thinking that is cynical, it's the bashing. Surely we can all see the difference. Some posts here make me cringe.

JMO
Not to stir the pot but to just let everyone know, those who have compassion for this family do have a brain.

 

[K_Z]

Having read volumes of scientific literature on brain injury, she's working to have Jahi's death certificate revoked so that she can qualify for medical benefits.

http://www.essence.com/2014/06/05/jahi-mcmath-nailah-winkfield/

Then we can surely expect to see the results of the new brain death exams any day now...? The ones that the family wasn't averse to? I mean, not only are they not averse, they NEED these done asap.

I been thinking about this. I think the attorney and family will try their best to petition the courts to reevaluate Jahi's status based on physical exam alone, and challenging ventilator apnea testing as irrelevant. I think they will resist any suggestions from the courts to repeat things such as EEG testing, MRI, and intracranial blood flow studies. These diagnostic studies will support and reinforce the existing brain death determinations and death certificate process that was tested in the California courts.

I think they will try to use Dr. David Byrne's theories to make their case, emphasizing brain DAMAGE, instead of brain DEATH. That continued functioning of the body with ventilator "assistance" and feeding tube support = alive. I think the spinal reflexes will be offered as proof, as well as things like evidence of teleological healing, bowel function, organ system functioning, and fingernail growth (not being facetious at all about the fingernails. That may be partly why those pictures were taken and made public.)

In order to "revoke" the finding of brain death, they would have to offer new evidence that she is alive. They may also have to show how the other determinations were incorrect, or not in accordance with state law. Which state is now the question-- can jahi be considered a NJ resident? Or would NW bring the petition as the parent? Does NW have standing in NJ to bring this challenge? Has she established residency?

Does establishing residency AFTER a legally tested declaration of death from another state give someone status in NJ to bring the challenge? Imagine the can of worms that could open!

Ultimately, I think a challenge to revoke the death determination will fail. But I do think the NJ courts will do exactly what California has done. They will allow her family to seek care for her body as long as they wish, or until the heart stops. I don't think NJ would have to initiate a death certificate unless they want to move her body again-- and they already have the death certificate from CA that allows them to do that.

Since no one at the NJ hospital is trying to withdraw support, there is no need to have her declared dead again. NJ can probably just wait for the heart to stop. (Presuming the hospital there is willing to maintain the care until the heart stops.) NJ hasn't issued a death certificate, so it seems unlikely NJ has standing to overrule California's right to issue one! Another big can of worms there.

Remember that NJ's brain death laws do mirror those in other states, under the UDDA. They just have that little added piece that says if the family claims a religious objection, that support can be continued. Not MUST be continued, as I read it.

From where I'm sitting, there is no need to challenge the statute in NJ. They are already doing what the family has requested in NJ, with the exception of MONEY and BENEFITS. The future case could be dismissed on that alone, since the family has found care, IMO.

But I'm not an attorney, so who knows?! Makes for a good splashy story, though, for their purposes, as well as Dr Byrne's lifelong agenda. Jahi's challenge could be his swan song, too, IMO. One last big splash on the expert witness stand that he can write about for the rest of his life.

That's my :twocents:

 

[K_Z]

Wow. Just. Wow. What about rigor mortis though?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No rigor mortis until the heart stops. Rigor is the result of stopped muscle metabolism.

And the altered circulation (mottling) in the pics is not Livor mortis. Just areas of poor peripheral circulation.

 

[ArianeEmory]

I'll bow out of the 'cynicism v compassion' argument other than to point out that coming into the thread and posting to tsk-tsk at other people for paying attention to the story is, in itself, raising the profile of the story. It's always a slippery-slope issue to try to shame anyone on this particular website for interest in things other people consider macabre, and this family has chosen to remain in the media.

 

[nrdsb4]

This is my first encounter with this story. It strikes me as SO no one else's business. The amount of money spent for Jahi's care or publicity or whatever other nonsense is negligible against the backdrop of how people and their governments spend their money, so even *that* bit of imagined personal impact on the rest of us is nonsense. This is a situation that should fade from public consciousness, I'm sure we have plenty of other pressing personal and societal issues to gnash our teeth over. The outrage against the family's behavior is beyond 'our business' and makes me wonder about some folks's priorities. What *we* opine about any aspect of this is a delusion.

All a person can do is reflect upon what they themselves, confronted similarly, would plan to do if confronted with their worst nightmare, and do the family a favor, stop paying attention to them no matter how they demand it.

I'm a nurse and the child's body is not decomposing (for God's sake!) and I've been with countless family who sat with their unresponsive loved one doing their nails and caring for their skin, combing every inch of their body because that is all they have left. It is tender and beautiful, the care I've witnessed being taken. The disgusting remarks I've read (glossing over the links etc) do not reassure me at all, it's as though people revel in spewing their negative, hateful opinions over a tragedy they've arrogantly made THEIR personal business. Gross and shameful.

BBM

I agree with some of the points you've made but disagree vigorously with a couple (BBM). Many of us saw the writing on the wall from the beginning-that in spite of their protestations to the contrary, eventually the issue of getting Jahi's care paid for not by individual donations from the generous and compassionate, but by insurance and the general public would be brought to the courts by Jahi's family. All of the comments stating "as long as WE aren't expected to pay for this, what business is it of ours?" were numerous. It's naive to believe that Jahi's family will be the only one to demand indefinite, incredibly expensive care for a completely lost cause if they win this case and get the courts to MANDATE treatment and payment for same for their brain dead child. It is about precedent, and we quite simply don't have the funds to take care of all of our living citizens, much less all of the people who could be kept "alive" on life support for decades.

Finally, with all due respect, who are you to judge which issues we may be outraged over? You're right, the world is full of injustices and causes to be fought, but we all have the right to determine where we put our energy. Your pet causes are no more legitimate than the next person's. Many of us are in the medical profession (critical care in particular) and understand quite intimately the scope of the care that a person in Jahi's position demands. If you are a nurse, you should also be well aware of this. Knowing this, many of us find it UNTHINKABLE and completely impractical that this case could set a precedent requiring us to care for and society to pay for precious ICU resources for patients who are dead, who will never recover, and who will experience nothing ever again other than a beating heart and the most basic of human function. Tender and beautiful though their care for Jahi may be, they are attempting to change public policy in a way that most of us posting here find unacceptable and downright scary and creepy. It is not and has never been just about this one family.

 

[AnaTeresa]

I been thinking about this. I think the attorney and family will try their best to petition the courts to reevaluate Jahi's status based on physical exam alone, and challenging ventilator apnea testing as irrelevant. I think they will resist any suggestions from the courts to repeat things such as EEG testing, MRI, and intracranial blood flow studies. These diagnostic studies will support and reinforce the existing brain death determinations and death certificate process that was tested in the California courts.

I think they will try to use Dr. David Byrne's theories to make their case, emphasizing brain DAMAGE, instead of brain DEATH. That continued functioning of the body with ventilator "assistance" and feeding tube support = alive. I think the spinal reflexes will be offered as proof, as well as things like evidence of teleological healing, bowel function, organ system functioning, and fingernail growth (not being facetious at all about the fingernails. That may be partly why those pictures were taken and made public.)

In order to "revoke" the finding of brain death, they would have to offer new evidence that she is alive. They may also have to show how the other determinations were incorrect, or not in accordance with state law. Which state is now the question-- can jahi be considered a NJ resident? Or would NW bring the petition as the parent? Does NW have standing in NJ to bring this challenge? Has she established residency?

Does establishing residency AFTER a legally tested declaration of death from another state give someone status in NJ to bring the challenge? Imagine the can of worms that could open!

Ultimately, I think a challenge to revoke the death determination will fail. But I do think the NJ courts will do exactly what California has done. They will allow her family to seek care for her body as long as they wish, or until the heart stops. I don't think NJ would have to initiate a death certificate unless they want to move her body again-- and they already have the death certificate from CA that allows them to do that.

Since no one at the NJ hospital is trying to withdraw support, there is no need to have her declared dead again. NJ can probably just wait for the heart to stop. (Presuming the hospital there is willing to maintain the care until the heart stops.) NJ hasn't issued a death certificate, so it seems unlikely NJ has standing to overrule California's right to issue one! Another big can of worms there.

Remember that NJ's brain death laws do mirror those in other states, under the UDDA. They just have that little added piece that says if the family claims a religious objection, that support can be continued. Not MUST be continued, as I read it.

From where I'm sitting, there is no need to challenge the statute in NJ. They are already doing what the family has requested in NJ, with the exception of MONEY and BENEFITS. The future case could be dismissed on that alone, since the family has found care, IMO.

But I'm not an attorney, so who knows?! Makes for a good splashy story, though, for their purposes, as well as Dr Byrne's lifelong agenda. Jahi's challenge could be his swan song, too, IMO. One last big splash on the expert witness stand that he can write about for the rest of his life.

That's my :twocents:

I'm not sure how that would work, though. I'm skeptical they could get Dr. Byrne qualified as an expert witness, given the controversy surrounding him.

 

[Elley Mae]

BBM

I agree with some of the points you've made but disagree vigorously with a couple (BBM). Many of us saw the writing on the wall from the beginning-that in spite of their protestations to the contrary, eventually the issue of getting Jahi's care paid for not by individual donations from the generous and compassionate, but by insurance and the general public would be brought to the courts by Jahi's family. All of the comments stating "as long as WE aren't expected to pay for this, what business is it of ours?" were numerous. It's naive to believe that Jahi's family will be the only one to demand indefinite, incredibly expensive care for a completely lost cause if they win this case and get the courts to MANDATE treatment and payment for same for their brain dead child. It is about precedent, and we quite simply don't have the funds to take care of all of our living citizens, much less all of the people who could be kept "alive" on life support for decades.

Finally, with all due respect, who are you to judge which issues we may be outraged over? You're right, the world is full of injustices and causes to be fought, but we all have the right to determine where we put our energy. Your pet causes are no more legitimate than the next person's. Many of us are in the medical profession (critical care in particular) and understand quite intimately the scope of the care that a person in Jahi's position demands. If you are a nurse, you should also be well aware of this. Knowing this, many of us find it UNTHINKABLE and completely impractical that this case could set a precedent requiring us to care for and society to pay for precious ICU resources for patients who are dead, who will never recover, and who will experience nothing ever again other than a beating heart and the most basic of human function. Tender and beautiful though their care for Jahi may be, they are attempting to change public policy in a way that most of us posting here find unacceptable and downright scary and creepy. It is not and has never been just about this one family.

You took the words out of my head. Thank you for this post.

 

[K_Z]

NW and her family have not wanted any privacy since Jahi was originally admitted to CHO. They have gone out of their way to keep this case in the public. They have marched, complained, conducted lots of interviews and public appearances, and made unreasonable demands every step of the journey. They recently threatened a middle school with disrupting graduation ceremonies if they did not get their way.

If they want privacy, they need to get off the public spaces on the Internet. They need to stop all interviews. Tell their attorney to be quiet and not give statements. Take down the fundraisers. Stop courting magazines to do articles about them. Stop making statements about getting Jahi's death certificate revoked. Stop saying they intend to seek medical funds from official sources.

They said all they wanted was to take their daughter and go. They had their days in court. But that's not what they have done. They, and the issues they espouse, are fair game for discussion and criticism as long as they make this a public issue.

What NW wants is her daughter alive again. No one on this earth can do that for her. IMO, God has answered her pleas continuously for 6 months, but NW doesn't like the answer.

NW has found a place to care for her daughter's body. It's a good place. A PICU, for Pete's sake. That should be enough, under the moral laws of both man and God. But her stated goal NOW is revoking the death certificate. So that is definitely fair game for criticism. That has nothing to do with how much someone feels compassion for their loss. Jahi is gone. Everyone but the family and a few terribly misguided and hyper-religious supporters can see that.

If they keep quiet, communicate privately with friends, shut down all public communication and appearances , people will forget them. They will have privacy. IMO they don't want privacy. They want to control the message and make demands of a lot of agencies and individuals. They want attention. A lot of attention. And NW has said she is seeking money to pay for care, and her brother wants to overturn limits on civil damages that he says are "chump change". So yeah, again. Their public efforts make them fair game for discussion and criticism.

 

[K_Z]

Really well written post above. nrdsb4. Thank you! Very well said. It's not just about this one family.

 

[K_Z]

I'm not sure how that would work, though. I'm skeptical they could get Dr. Byrne qualified as an expert witness, given the controversy surrounding him.

I agree. California courts felt the same and limited his input. I still think the family will try again to have him involved. He is their strongest MD supporter at this point, at least publicly.

He's a neonatologist. He might have to legally opine as an ethicist, rather than a specialist. Idk. I just think the family wants his voice in their battles. Or the courts may insist again on uninvolved evaluators. That is, if anything is actually ever filed, or makes it to a hearing.

 

[al66pine]

Having read volumes of scientific literature on brain injury, she's working to have Jahi's death certificate revoked so that she can qualify for medical benefits.

http://www.essence.com/2014/06/05/jahi-mcmath-nailah-winkfield/

thanks, momrids6, for this link and above quote from Jahi's mother.

The editor's note said info came solely from Jahi's mother and family.

Somewhat puzzling to me that she said, she wants Jahi to qualify for medical benefits. After all, Jahi is (or her remains are, depending on one's point of view) receiving med ben's (or med treatment, as if she is alive).

Ct. proceeding for that reason only, seems, imho... unnecessary? Redundant?

Has anyone seen MSM quote / unquote from mom about reason for getting death crtf 'revoked'?
If so, link, pls.

Thx in adv.:seeya:

 

[K_Z]

Having read volumes of scientific literature on brain injury, she's working to have Jahi's death certificate revoked so that she can qualify for medical benefits.

http://www.essence.com/2014/06/05/jahi-mcmath-nailah-winkfield/

I guess this should be pretty obvious, but if NW has actually read "volumes of scientific literature on brain injury", then she should clearly understand that there is a big difference between brain injury and brain death. Jahi does not have a brain injury-- she is brain dead. No amount of fish oil in the g-tube will heal that.

She would understand that no one who has the same diagnostic results as Jahi has ever improved or recovered, to any extent. No one has ever even recovered to a PVS state. So I find her comments (to the media at the graduation) that she is "looking forward to Jahi recovering enough to attend HS and college" to be so far from any kind of reality, as to make me concerned for her mental health. Is this grief, or denial, or mental illness, or manipulation, or deception, or some combination of all?

The real question is what kind of scientific literature has she read, and why would that literature somehow persuade her that there would be an association between brain injury, and having brain death revoked? What scientific literature has she read about brain death? It's pretty clear, IMO. And I've read a fair amount myself.

This is NW's fundamental medical/ scientific issue, IMO. She has said over and over she doesn't believe in brain death, and will not accept that term as applied to her daughter. Would she believe in brain death for someone else?

 

[wendiesan]

Now there's an amazing turnaround!

From:

In her idle time at Jahi’s bedside, the only book that Winkfield keeps on hand is the Holy Bible. "Literally," Winfield said. "That's the only book I read."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/jahi-mcmath-shows-signs-improvement-mom-article-1.1737661 (Published March 28, 2014)

To:

Today, Winkfield spends her time at the private location where Jahi is receiving medical attention. Having read volumes of scientific literature on brain injury, she's working to have Jahi's death certificate revoked so that she can qualify for medical benefits.

http://www.essence.com/2014/06/05/jahi-mcmath-nailah-winkfield/ (Published June 5, 2014)

I wonder how many "volumes" she read? Of those "volumes" how many were written by Paul A. Byrne, MD.? How many were given to her by the Life Guardian Foundation?

http://www.lifeguardianfoundation.org/action=resources_books.html
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/byrne

 

[lawstudent]

Since no one at the NJ hospital is trying to withdraw support, there is no need to have her declared dead again. NJ can probably just wait for the heart to stop. (Presuming the hospital there is willing to maintain the care until the heart stops.) NJ hasn't issued a death certificate, so it seems unlikely NJ has standing to overrule California's right to issue one! Another big can of worms there.

I've had trouble working out the law here, but NJ wouldn't be "overruling" California's "right" to issue anything. California issues a death certificate, and that's that. If for some reason it later turned out to have been wrongly issued under CA law, that would be litigated in the CA courts. What NJ does doesn't matter because it doesn't affect what CA did. If there was some way to create a certificate of life and NJ issued one, there could start to be a conflict, but only where interstate issues or federal issues were involved, in which case I'm guessing federal law would control. All CA's certificate does is put people on notice that a death has been declared. Most people will read that and just accept it, so entities in CA wouldn't be giving her benefits or allowing her to litigate. Other states don't have to go by it, but they probably would consider her dead for obvious reasons, and would use the CA certificate as evidence as of that if Jahi's parents tried to get her treated as alive in that state.

The issue here is that NJ hospitalized her. If they moved her into NJ and then requested disability, my guess would be that NJ would see CA's death certificate and deny the request, and use it as evidence in a court battle, and likely win. And if the hospital had been unwilling to accept her ,they would probably have said the same thing.

However, if the hospital is agreeing currently to provide care, whether they consider her brain dead or have some other diagnosis, that leads to the issue of possible removal from life support in the future. In NJ, it would be a lot more difficult for a NJ doctor to make that call himself because of the law. The hospital could go to court with the CA certificate and argue she is dead, but their doctors are not allowed to declare it based on neurological criteria over religious objections.

However, and I don't think the statute considered this possibility - she obviously will experience continuing physical issues from her brain-dead state. If they diagnose brain death based not solely on neuro criteria, but on that criteria, would there be a different result? Could that be a basis for recognizing death, in combination with neuro criteria? That may allow them to remove life support.

No rigor mortis until the heart stops. Rigor is the result of stopped muscle metabolism.

And the altered circulation (mottling) in the pics is not Livor mortis. Just areas of poor peripheral circulation.

Right - I don't think people grasp she is not biologically dead. Brain dead. I mean, she has absolutely no prospect for any recovery and her body is barely capable of functioning such that artificial means are needed. I'm not disputing the seriousness of the situation. But she's not just going to decompose because she isn't dead - her heart and breathing are ongoing. The brain tissue decomposes, just like when you are alive but part of your body decomposes from gangrene, frostbite, tooth decay, etc. But everything else will technically function. The machines don't do as good a job as a functional body in terms of circulating blood, though, so then you get more decomposition at extremities and areas blood isn't reaching. Plus the issue of lack of nourishment is going to cause some wasting away. It's definitely not pretty. But it's not the decomposition some people seem to imagine - it would be a million times more disturbing if this was the equivalent of someone living with a corpse because they couldn't let go. If that's what they were willing to do, there would be no need for the life support - that keeps her from actually being dead and not just according to NJ law.

I'll bow out of the 'cynicism v compassion' argument other than to point out that coming into the thread and posting to tsk-tsk at other people for paying attention to the story is, in itself, raising the profile of the story. It's always a slippery-slope issue to try to shame anyone on this particular website for interest in things other people consider macabre, and this family has chosen to remain in the media.

I do agree with this - obviously everyone here is engaging in some sort of obscure gossip. That's what Websleuths is for! I think this situation very much needs public debate, and I know the family is putting it out there, but people who are saying they wish this evil family would go away because they are so sickened seem to be engaging in masochism. I find it sickening as well, but I also find it interesting, and that's why I read about it. I think the family should quit it with the press attention and have no problem discussing how the social media stuff is seriously pushing it, but it seems silly to express outrage on having to be exposed to this stuff.

I also think the uncle sounds like someone who has highly questionable motives, and it's fine to go after him. But to lump the whole family in with him seems unfair. I think we all know that sometimes you have a relative who causes problems and wants to take advantage of a situation and get attention, and maybe they are too stressed with everything else to get into it.

 

[Frigga]

^ Amazing. Thank you Wendesian, not to mention the fact that Jahi is not brain injured- she is brain dead- huge difference.

 

[K_Z]

K_Z, may I ask do you know if a persons fingers will "club" after death? That is during decomposure. (sp)..Her brain is totaled by now. In fact, many moons ago. My God the family must be nuts! IMO.:seeya:

Hi Nore. I'm sorry I overlooked your question earlier today.

To the best of my knowledge, the answer is no. I checked Alan Shewmon's articles again, and a couple of other references for brain dead individuals who received prolonged somatic support (months to years). No clubbing noted. In my experience, I have seen clubbing in adolescents with cystic fibrosis, as well as complex congenital cardiac defects. Clubbing is a result of chronic (years) low partial pressure of oxygen state. It has nothing to do with decomposition. However, shriveling, dehydration of tissues, and retraction of nail bed plumpness in younger and recently dead people can make the nails appear to have "grown" after death. Old wives tale.

Here are some images of clubbing, and a brief explanation of the phenomena.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nail_clubbing

Search "clubbing of the fingers" and select images for some good pics.