Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #1

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Donjeta said:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...y-found-for-calif-teen-on-ventilator/4231147/

If he told the truth about getting the signed authorization, and I don't see why he would lie about something that the coroner could so easily disprove, it's extremely odd to me that he didn't forward said authorization to the hospital to facilitate the transfer.
It makes me wonder if he's really seriously after getting Jahi transferred after all or if he's playing some other game.



http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/No-medical-center-lined-up-for-Jahi-McMath-s-body-5100141.php
Click to expand...

The medical procedures must first be performed and according to the mother's declaration, Durand has refused to provide a feeding tube and medical records. It's been a two-way game, imo
 
Donjeta said:
If he told the truth about getting the signed authorization, and I don't see why he would lie about something that the coroner could so easily disprove, it's extremely odd to me that he didn't forward said authorization to the hospital to facilitate the transfer.
It makes me wonder if he's really seriously after getting Jahi transferred after all or if he's playing some other game.
Click to expand...

Bolded and snipped by me.

He is a personal injury lawyer -- he is after lawsuit money and could not care one bit about either the family or the dead child.

I think the coroner's authorization was a bluff - had it existed, I would reckon the coroner would have cc'ed the hospital.
 
MyBelle said:
The medical procedures must first be performed and according to the mother's declaration, Durand has refused to provide a feeding tube and medical records. It's been a two-way game, imo
Click to expand...

Children's -and no other respectable hospital- will perform medical procedures on dead people, and Jahi is dead.

As far as the medical records, I do not know.
 
I believe that the family has the right to keep her on life support but I also believe that any care facility has say what they consider brain dead. If the hospital or nursing home/care facility has guidelines that say they will not care for a legally brain dead patient and take the word of a doctor as enough evidence to make that decision than so be it. It's really sad and unfortunate. I have a 10 month old and I would not know what I would do in that situation. I can't say that I would take my child off of life support because I have never been in that type of situation before.

I wonder if they stopped the vent if her heartrate would slow down etc. I don't know if it is ethically correct to stop the vent and see if she would go into cardiac arrest.
 
Here is a concern I have about 'warehousing' the clinically dead in some facility or facilities around the country for families who want to pursue such an outcome and can afford it, or have insurance that will pay for it, or can raise the money, etc.:

Since the person is legally dead, what protections do they have against being use for illegal or immoral purposes, such as black-market organ harvesting or production of *advertiser censored*, etc.? There are laws against desecration of a corpse, etc. but those aren't AFAIK as severe as for committing those crimes against a living person. What federal agency would oversee these 'living cemeteries'? Or would it be left to each state or to local authorities? Would medical personnel be required to oversee the facility? If so, would current malpractice insurance/laws apply? Would there need to be a two-step process for issuing death certificates, once when the personally is legally dead, and another for when the body finally gives up? I don't know, it seems a very complicated and ethically fraught notion to me--but you know, if you say "it's just *this* child, why can't she be maintained?" then how can you say 'no' to the next child? The next mother of young children? The next beloved uncle? Such a moral minefield.
 
Donjeta said:
Maybe it was. We don't know at this point. This still does not mean that Jahi will recover if left on the ventilator.


I don't think that taking Jahi off the ventilator would accomplish anything in terms of covering up malpractice. It would just get her on the medical examiner's table a little faster and give the family more evidence for a lawsuit a little sooner.
Click to expand...

I don't believe Jahi is going to recover.

I also don't believe the coroner would do an autopsy on a child that died in a hospital from medical complications. The coroner relies on the attending physician's judgment if further inquiry is needed.
 
Minette said:
Here is a concern I have about 'warehousing' the clinically dead in some facility or facilities around the country for families who want to pursue such an outcome and can afford it, or have insurance that will pay for it, or can raise the money, etc.:

Since the person is legally dead, what protections do they have against being use for illegal or immoral purposes, such as black-market organ harvesting or production of *advertiser censored*, etc.? There are laws against desecration of a corpse, etc. but those aren't AFAIK as severe as for committing those crimes against a living person. What federal agency would oversee these 'living cemeteries'? Or would it be left to each state or to local authorities? Would medical personnel be required to oversee the facility? If so, would current malpractice insurance/laws apply? Would there need to be a two-step process for issuing death certificates, once when the personally is legally dead, and another for when the body finally gives up? I don't know, it seems a very complicated and ethically fraught notion to me--but you know, if you say "it's just *this* child, why can't she be maintained?" then how can you say 'no' to the next child? The next mother of young children? The next beloved uncle? Such a moral minefield.
Click to expand...

Moral and legal minefield my friend. Very well said.
 
I wonder what their church has to say (if they attend etc.) I would think that if no one would take care of her, the church would supply funds for them to have in home care? It might be a long shot, but I think a church would support their decision financially if they can...
 
MyBelle said:
I don't believe Jahi is going to recover.

I also don't believe the coroner would do an autopsy on a child that died in a hospital from medical complications. The coroner relies on the attending physician's judgment if further inquiry is needed.
Click to expand...

The ME would do an autopsy.
 
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...case-misconceptions-20131230,0,6291462.story#
Jahi McMath case fueling misconceptions of brain death, experts say

With the clock winding down on a court order keeping 13-year-old Jahi McMath on a ventilator, medical ethicists say the public drama over the brain-dead girl has fueled a misconception that her condition is somehow treatable.

Multiple doctors, including a Stanford neurologist, have concluded that Jahi is brain-dead -- the result of complications from having her tonsils removed at Children’s Hospital & Research Center Oakland early this month. But her parents have fought to keep her on a ventilator, telling reporters they believe "there's still life there."

Arthur Caplan, director of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU Langone Medical Center, told CNN last week that the case is "giving the impression that dead people can come back to life."
 
MyBelle said:
From the various statements she has made both in her declaration and to the media, the mother gives me the impression she believes Dr. Durand was being a jerk because he wanted to cover up whatever it is that happened. iow, the family believes Jahi's condition is a direct result of either malpractice or worse, intentional negligence.
Click to expand...

BBM, this makes absolutely no sense though. What they have been doing is consistent with what they do anytime a patient dies. They are simply trying to remove a dead patient so that her body can be examined by the proper authorities and then released to the family for burial. As has been stated before, the chances of finding evidence of malpractice during the autopsy goes down the longer she stays on the vent.

And I can't imagine there won't be an autopsy unless the family specifically asks for it not to happen.
 
Minette said:
Here is a concern I have about 'warehousing' the clinically dead in some facility or facilities around the country for families who want to pursue such an outcome and can afford it, or have insurance that will pay for it, or can raise the money, etc.:

Since the person is legally dead, what protections do they have against being use for illegal or immoral purposes, such as black-market organ harvesting or production of *advertiser censored*, etc.? There are laws against desecration of a corpse, etc. but those aren't AFAIK as severe as for committing those crimes against a living person. What federal agency would oversee these 'living cemeteries'? Or would it be left to each state or to local authorities? Would medical personnel be required to oversee the facility? If so, would current malpractice insurance/laws apply? Would there need to be a two-step process for issuing death certificates, once when the personally is legally dead, and another for when the body finally gives up? I don't know, it seems a very complicated and ethically fraught notion to me--but you know, if you say "it's just *this* child, why can't she be maintained?" then how can you say 'no' to the next child? The next mother of young children? The next beloved uncle? Such a moral minefield.
Click to expand...

In my metro area of over 1 million people, there are only two long-term facilities that take patients on vents. If a religious organization is willing to support such a facility that's fine with me but I'm sure it would be regulated. I think the majority of families don't wish to perpetuate a loved one in a vegetative state.
 
It will be interesting to see what is in her system, stomach, if anything.
 
MyBelle said:
I don't believe Jahi is going to recover.

I also don't believe the coroner would do an autopsy on a child that died in a hospital from medical complications. The coroner relies on the attending physician's judgment if further inquiry is needed.
Click to expand...

I'm not a California coroner but imo that is nonsense. If they don't inspect sudden deaths that may possibly have been caused by medical malpractice or negligence they wouldn't be doing their job imo. This is so high profile anyway, and as I understand it has already been reported as a coroner case. Surely the family lawyer would make a fuss if the family suspect negligence was involved and her death wasn't properly investigated.

http://www.justanswer.com/law/0x0bb-when-autopsy-required-california.html

CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27491

27491. It shall be the duty of the coroner to inquire into and determine the circumstances, manner, and cause of all violent, sudden, or unusual deaths; unattended deaths; deaths wherein the deceased has not been attended by a physician in the 20 days before death; deaths related to or following known or suspected self-induced or criminal abortion; known or suspected homicide, suicide, or accidental poisoning; deaths known or suspected as resulting in whole or in part from or related to accident or injury either old or recent; deaths due to drowning, fire, hanging, gunshot, stabbing, cutting, exposure, starvation, acute alcoholism, drug addiction, strangulation, aspiration, or where the suspected cause of death is sudden infant death syndrome; death in whole or in part occasioned by criminal means; deaths associated with a known or alleged rape or crime against nature; deaths in prison or while under sentence; deaths known or suspected as due to contagious disease and constituting a public hazard; deaths from occupational diseases or occupational hazards; deaths of patients in state mental hospitals serving the mentally disabled and operated by the Stat Department of Mental Health; deaths of patients in state hospitals serving the developmentally disabled and operated by the State Department of Developmental Services; deaths under such circumstances as to afford a reasonable ground to suspect that the death was caused by the criminal act of another; and any deaths reported by physicians or other persons having knowledge of death for inquiry by coroner. Inquiry pursuant to this section does not include those investigative functions usually performed by other law enforcement agencies.

In any case in which the coroner conducts an inquiry pursuant to this section, the coroner or a deputy shall personally sign the certificate of death. If the death occurred in a state hospital, the coroner shall forward a copy of his or her report to the state agency responsible for the state hospital.

The coroner shall have discretion to determine the extent of inquiry to be made into any death occurring under natural circumstances and falling within the provisions of this section, and if inquiry determines that the physician of record has sufficient knowledge to reasonably state the cause of a death occurring under natural circumstances, the coroner may authorize that physician to sign the certificate of death.

For the purpose of inquiry, the coroner shall have the right to exhume the body of a deceased person when necessary to discharge the responsibilities set forth in this section.

Any funeral director, physician, or other person who has charge of a deceased person's body, when death occurred as a result of any of the causes or circumstances described in this section, shall immediately notify the coroner. Any person who does not notify the coroner as required by this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.
 
missy_g said:
I wonder what their church has to say (if they attend etc.) I would think that if no one would take care of her, the church would supply funds for them to have in home care? It might be a long shot, but I think a church would support their decision financially if they can...
Click to expand...

This is why I am surprised that this option has not been brought up. Between the family, one of which is a nurse, friends and the faith based community, it would seem the most logical to me for her to be in a home setting.

I don't know the laws in CA, but other stories I have read, children were cared for at home.

The mother has specifically stated that Jahi needs nutrition. I imagine she would want her to have all other medications and treatment as well. Hypothetically, if she were to be moved to another facility, I don't see any facility providing the treatment that the mother would demand, nor to I see the extreme cost being covered by any form.

The reason that people like Dr. Byrne don't create these types of facilities to care for the legally dead, is because insurance will not pay for it. The is no profit incentive for him to do so. You would have to be extremely wealthy to be able to pay for it out of pocket and any non profit or religious organizations funds would be quickly wiped out by the cost. A facility like this would not be ethical nor medically necessary, because the person is deceased. There is zero chance of improvement to their condition.

What is left, if families choose to fight this and wish to keep the deceased on artificial support, is for them to take care of them at home, if that option is even legally possible.
 
Per CNN, the state of California is already investigating what happened in the case of Jahi.

I am willing to bet that there IS going to be an autopsy. However, how much is to be discovered after nearly three weeks on a ventilator?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 170 more.
Total: 2,622 (members: 171, guests: 2,451)

Online statistics

Members online
171
Guests online
2,451
Total visitors
2,622
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
594,361
Messages
18,003,624
Members
229,377
Latest member
Missletoes
Back
Top