Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #8

Status
Not open for further replies.
The namecalling ends. Now. It's clear in our rules that namecalling of players in cases, or each other, is a rules violation. If I see any more namecalling in this thread, the poster gets to be on the outside looking in.

Zero tolerance from this point forward. :saber:

Everyone is safe.

However............

I'm adding two issues that need to be addressed.

No more personalizing. Time outs for this from now on. If someone is bugging you for some reason, use the alert feature and/or put the member on your ignore list. The modsnips are many and our mods are not editors. They are moderators.

Use links to back up your facts! If you are not a verified professional in the field of the topic you are discussing, you must link!

None of this is new. If you don't understand what is going on, please contact me privately so I can help you.

 
Guidelines for posting:

*be prepared to substantiate with a link to statements of fact

*post in a respectful and civil manner

*steer clear of bringing race into the discussion

*selective social media is allowed as long as it has to do with Jahi's condition, the hospital or related to the case. Anything personal is OFF LIMITS. It must PERTAIN to the case.

*avoid posting negative insinuations about the family

*rumors are NOT allowed to be posted and discussion of such may result in a recommendation for a posting hiatus

*alert problematic or offending posts and do not respond
 
One of those pointless anecdotal posts, re food in hospitals. As of last year, if would have been very easy for me to buy my father Krispy Kreme donuts in the *Duke University Hospital Cafeteria* and bring them to him on the cardiac floor. It's probably still the case. I haven't spent much time in hospitals personally so I was kind of surprised.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Someone asked in the closed thread about the right to a jury trial in a med mal case. The answer is no, the CHO cannot decide. The plaintiff is entitled to a jury trial on any genuine issue of material fact. In finding the link to support that, though, I found a very recent case finding that the med mal cap in another jurisdiction was recently held to be unconstitutional after 20 years. The reason -- violation of the plaintiff's right to a jury trial.

Snipped from the link:

Overruling its own twenty-year precedent in Adams By and Through Adams v. Children’s Mercy Hospital1 (Adams), the Missouri Supreme Court, in a four-to-three decision, held in Watts v. Lester E. Cox Medical Centers (Watts) that the cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases in Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.210, passed as part of the comprehensive tort reform passed by the Missouri Legislature in 2005, violates article I, section 22(a) of the Missouri Constitution’s right to trial by jury.2 The Missouri Supreme Court also held that Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.220 grants a trial judge authority to determine the manner by which future damages shall be paid, including what amount shall be paid in future installments.3

http://www.fed-soc.org/publications...ding-noneconomic-damages-cap-unconstitutional

jmo
 
I am sad we are at thread #8. When is this mother going to let go?
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again--it just seems unbelievably cruel to confuse uneducated people about death. Especially for the profit of a few individuals.

And I agree with the posters in the precious thread about the current mood on social media--it's terrifying. I'm starting to become somewhat afraid of SM in general--it's like an incubator for basic "grassroots" stupidity.

Many cases on WS do not affect me so deeply and I'm thankful for the island of sanity here and each and every poster.
 
Well, you know, bread and circuses. :(

Ariane, one reason I instinctively like you as a poster is that I completely love the group/song you quote in your tagline.
 
The thing that struck me about Terri Schiavo's brother was that he thinks ones's parents should always make the decision to go off life support. His family battled her husband (her designated POA) for years. So which is it? Can an adult pick who gets to make decisions about life and death or do mommy and daddy get to decide forever?
 
Well, and I say this kind of reluctantly, I was actually on the side of Terri Schivao's parents in that case. Not because I thought she was going to rise up and be herself again, just that her parents wanted to have the keeping of her and her husband had clearly already moved on emotionally/romantically AND she wasn't brain dead. Although once she did die I was pretty horrified to learn the state of her brain. Nevertheless, she wasn't brain dead like Jahi is and so there was at least some thread of actual (brain stem induced?) life there.
 
Schiavo was never considered dead.
She was brain damaged, but not brain dead.
Her only life support was a feeding tube.
Since all of us must eat to stay alive, I don't consider that life support, but the law did. So that is how husband was able to remove the feeding tube. It took her 11 days to die, as I recall.
 
Thank you so much to the contributors to the sister Media/Medical Facts thread. The references that I've started referencing are excellent. I'm grateful that so many important articles and interviews have also been gathered in one spot. Much, much appreciated.
 
Well, you know, bread and circuses. :(

Ariane, one reason I instinctively like you as a poster is that I completely love the group/song you quote in your tagline.

How odd, I almost always use Tapatalk and don't see it, but just today I was on the normal website, saw the lyric I'd forgotten about putting there, and thought "wonder if anyone recognizes that...nah, probably the wrong crowd." :) Which just goes to show you shouldn't make assumptions.

And thank you for the compliment, it's reciprocated. :) I wish I had more to add sometimes, but I don't have a legal or medical background, just a finely tuned sense of follow-the-money cynicism. :/
 
Someone asked in the closed thread about the right to a jury trial in a med mal case. The answer is no, the CHO cannot decide. The plaintiff is entitled to a jury trial on any genuine issue of material fact. In finding the link to support that, though, I found a very recent case finding that the med mal cap in another jurisdiction was recently held to be unconstitutional after 20 years. The reason -- violation of the plaintiff's right to a jury trial.

Snipped from the link:

Overruling its own twenty-year precedent in Adams By and Through Adams v. Children’s Mercy Hospital1 (Adams), the Missouri Supreme Court, in a four-to-three decision, held in Watts v. Lester E. Cox Medical Centers (Watts) that the cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases in Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.210, passed as part of the comprehensive tort reform passed by the Missouri Legislature in 2005, violates article I, section 22(a) of the Missouri Constitution’s right to trial by jury.2 The Missouri Supreme Court also held that Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.220 grants a trial judge authority to determine the manner by which future damages shall be paid, including what amount shall be paid in future installments.3

http://www.fed-soc.org/publications...ding-noneconomic-damages-cap-unconstitutional

jmo

That was me asking Karmady and thanks again for your time and work. I suppose this will get fairly ugly legal wise but I'm reluctant about seeing huge numbers in a jury award.

If I'm not mistaken a hospital would have to be found guilty of Med-Mal before the insurance paid or the insurance relented. I believe it will take awhile for this case to settle. JMO
 
I am sad we are at thread #8. When is this mother going to let go?


I believe that you speak for many here. It has to be one of the most difficult tasks in life for a mother to let go of her child; the pain must be unbearable. :(

My thoughts and prayers are with Jahi's mother that she will soon have the strength and courage to know that her child is with G-d. :please:
 
That was me asking Karmady and thanks again for your time and work. I suppose this will get fairly ugly legal wise but I'm reluctant about seeing huge numbers in a jury award.

If I'm not mistaken a hospital would have to be found guilty of Med-Mal before the insurance paid or the insurance relented. I believe it will take awhile for this case to settle. JMO

You're most welcome. No, the hospital does not need to be found guilty for the medmal case to settle. A complaint doesn't even need to be filed. The insurers of the hospital, docs and nurses will evaluate it in business terms and decide whether and how much they're willing to settle for, if at all, given the costs of litigation, the likelihood of a substantial verdict in plaintiff's favor and the facts of the particular case. jmo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
98
Guests online
1,280
Total visitors
1,378

Forum statistics

Threads
590,008
Messages
17,928,897
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top