CA - Parents Of Toddler Declared Brain-Dead Convinced He’s Still Alive

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I have to run, but will answer more later. There are a number of stimuli that can cause muscular movement. I'm not trying to be funny, but here is a video that might explain this more graphically. It's fresh frog legs, moving in response to the stimuli (salt-- an electrolyte). There is no question that the 3 unfortunate frogs who previously owned these legs are dead. Of course, a human mammal is not an amphibian, but these frog muscles are responding to the stimuli just like mammal muscles might.

In fact, there is a diagnostic test for a very serious condition called Malignant Hyperthermia, a genetic disease where patients have life threatening reactions to some anesthesia drugs. In that test, a muscle contracture test, a fresh sample of thigh muscle is removed surgically, and exposed to triggers to see if the patient has MH.

http://www.mhaus.org/testing/chct

Here's the frog legs with the sodium chloride stimulant:

[video=youtube;2YZJt_Bw3eo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YZJt_Bw3eo[/video]

Thanks for the reply! I have seen the frog leg video before...soooo weird to see those legs moving! I'll read the info at the link, too.
 
The UC-Davis doc's testimony at the ex parte hearing is available. You have to scroll down to about page 24 to get to it.
http://thaddeuspope.com/images/Stinson_v_UC_Davis_Placer_Cty_docs_.pdf



Sorry, the formatting of this copy-pasta from the pdf is terrible. But I thought this part of the doc's testimony was particularly enlightening. I've been confused from the beginning about that 40 minutes without oxygen while he was at UC-Davis. As the doc explains in his testimony, even with the breathing tube in place, they couldn't push oxygen into Israel's lungs:



Even with the intratracheal breathing tube in
·
6
· ·
place, they could not adequately force air into the
·
7
· ·
portion of his lung where oxygen is exchanged.
·
8

· · · · · ·
During this episode, Israel's heart stopped.
·
He
·
9
· ·
was resuscitated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation,
10
· ·
chest compressions, and continued attempts to force air
11
· ·
into his lungs through the intratracheal tube.
12
· ·
Q.
· · · ·
For how long?
13
· ·
A.
· · · ·
40 minutes this went on.
14
· · · · · ·
I spoke directly with one of the physicians of
15
· ·
record who told me that they had a terrible time trying
16
· ·
to get air in his lungs.

17
· · · · · ·
As hard as they pushed, they could not seem to
18
· ·
bypass this -- the spastic airway and get air into the
19
· ·

portion of his lung where it would be life sustaining.

http://thaddeuspope.com/images/Stinson_v_UC_Davis_Placer_Cty_docs_.pdf

ETA: Sorry, it's the Kaiser doc, not the UC-Davis doc. And his testimony starts on pg 33 of the linked pdf
 
Sonjay-- yes, that was the most severe bronchospasm that immediately preceded Israel being placed on ECMO. (Crashed onto ECMO?) Basically, it's not simply a matter of blowing air into the lungs during status asthmaticus. There is no gas exchange at the alveolar or tissue level, due to the severe bronchospasm, severe swelling, and other effects within the lungs. No oxygen getting into the blood, no carbon dioxide being exchanged. When the bronchospasm is that severe, even the usual strong bronchodilator meds don't work. Respiratory arrest always leads to cardiac arrest, if the respiratory problem isn't "fixed" promptly.

IMO, after 40 min of cardio respiratory arrest, they had few to no other options. (Back in the old days before ECMO, we used to try to save these kids by putting them on our anesthesia machines and using the anesthetic agents to try to bronchodilate the lungs.) Israel was going to die imminently, and so ECMO was a "hail Mary" last ditch effort to save Israel, IMO.

From the testimony of Dr. Myette, it appears Israel was on ECMO for about 48 hours (or less), which is a rather short time given the circumstances of his arrest, and the severe condition of his lungs. It's my opinion from the testimony and other media sources, that ECMO was likely discontinued when docs determined that his neurological status was devastated-- as opposed to his status "improving", and then ECMO being discontinued. Clearly his heart and lungs were functioning well enough that he came off ECMO (still on the ventilator, and with levophed and vasopressin to keep him somewhat stable), and the brain death evaluations were going on at that time, too. So, to me it's clear that the 40 min arrest produced the devastating hypoxic encephalopathy. Dr. Myette described the brain stem herniation they saw on imaging in his testimony.

It's lucky he was at UC Davis-- the only hospital in the area with a high level PICU and ECMO. Truly, this little one was given every possible chance to survive. He was simply too sick.

We also don’t know how things were going with Israel's health, and Jonee's compliance, prior to January, which would be interesting to know. And now from the court documents and statement of Dr. Myette, we also know the transfer to Kaiser Roseville was a compassionate move after UCSF Benioff refused the transfer—so Kaiser Roseville had absolutely nothing to do with Jonee’s insurance, as she said publicly. That was definitely a lie. I admit I was really, really puzzled why Israel was transferred from a tertiary care University medical center, to the Roseville Kaiser-- that made no sense at all to me. UC Davis is clearly the higher level of care, and Kaiser could not provide any type of care Israel wasn't already getting. No way would a university med center "dump" an ICU level pediatric patient onto Kaiser to avoid costs-- that would be an enormous violation of lots of laws and policies beyond EMTALA, and huge fines for UC Davis. So I knew there had to be much more to that part of the story.

Anyway, this sad case will not have any kind of a happy ending. My guess is that no criminal charges of child abuse or neglect will be filed against Jonee, but it sure looks like she and her attorneys were/ are worried about that. She has another little girl, about one year old, so she has to be worried she could lose custody of her, too. And the Judge invoking Dority says she is pretty suspicious about Jonee's actions/ negligence leading to this current admission and Israel's death, too. Could be that part of Jonee and Nate's motivation in going to the media was to head off criticism and deflect attention from the CPS investigation and guardianship request, or try to avoid criminal charges-- who knows. Poor Israel is dead, just the same. No happy endings here.

ETA: I just re-read the doc's testimony-- ECMO was continued for 4 days, not 48 hours. He was taken off ECMO on April 6, and immediately on Apr 7 the first radionuclide flow test was done (that looks at blood flow to the brain, and is done usually as a confirmatory test when other clinical exams and tests are indicating brain death.) So, docs definitely believed Israel was already meeting brain death criteria on Apr 6-7.

He was decannulated, which is to say taken off
13· ·of the ECMO circuit on April 6th.
14· · · · · · On April 7th, he had a procedure, a nuclear
15· ·medicine procedure at U.C. Davis, called radionuclide.
16· ·It's spelled r-a-d-i-o-n-u-c-l-i-d-e, I believe.


Radionuclide scan, which is a scan which
18· ·measures uptake of oxygen and nutrients, glucose and
19· ·such, into the brain.· That is often used as an ancillary
20· ·test.· It is not a test that you can use to determine
21· ·brain death in and of itself.· It doesn't substitute for
22· ·a brain death exam.· But in cases where a complete brain
23· ·death exam is not -- is not able to be done, it can be an
24· ·ancillary piece of information.· That's why I bring it up
25· ·because it's supporting information.

http://thaddeuspope.com/images/Stinson_v_UC_Davis_Placer_Cty_docs_.pdf
 
I imagine the parents were unable to accept the brain death diagnosis and were refusing to let UC Davis shut off the machines. Could the transfer have happened because the parents demanded an opinion from another hospital and Kaiser was the only one that would do it?
 
I imagine the parents were unable to accept the brain death diagnosis and were refusing to let UC Davis shut off the machines. Could the transfer have happened because the parents demanded an opinion from another hospital and Kaiser was the only one that would do it?

I think you are completely correct. Dr Myette in his testimony said that is exactly what happened.

Curiously, unlike other families who have been in similar situations, Jonee and Nate have not had a lot of negative things to say about UC Davis, IMO-- notwithstanding her comments about how the respiratory arrest/ bronchospasm went. They have both been curiously silent with severe criticisms of UC Davis, Mercy, or the Kaiser hospital. For that, I'm glad, because one thing I know for sure, is that all those medical professionals at 3 hospitals wanted very badly for this to end with Israel alive and well. They worked very hard to save Israel. It's heartbreaking for the medical professionals to lose a child of 2 years old. Many of them are parents, too.

And in cases like the McMath case, that was so contentious and angry, and the "demonstrations" and "protests" at the hospital, in the lounges, and the disruptions by the family for the other families and staff in the ICU-- well, the medical professionals have to stay mute. They can't say a thing to the media. So they have to put up with lots of negativity, and criticism from heartbroken and angry families, the media, and their supporters.

At least this part went differently this time. We'll see how it continues to play out.
 
I imagine the parents were unable to accept the brain death diagnosis and were refusing to let UC Davis shut off the machines. Could the transfer have happened because the parents demanded an opinion from another hospital and Kaiser was the only one that would do it?

The mother had Kaiser insurance so Kaiser was footing the bill at UC Davis anyway, so why not transfer him to Kaiser Roseville. The mother did not want any opinions on brain death, and she posted notes in his room at Kaiser that any test done had to have her permission. She said the tests were done when she left the room or hospital to do something (maybe get an attorney.) I guess she thought she would have more control at Kaiser.
 
From the same article:
Anahita Meshkin, 30, has been comatose for a decade and is hooked up to machines at her care facility in Walnut Creek, Calif., on Tuesday, May 10, 2016.
 
Professor Pope has updates on this case earlier than news stories:

http://medicalfutility.blogspot.com/2016/05/fonseca-v-kaiser-brain-death-dispute.html

The family has now appealed the federal court ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. That court set the following briefing schedule:

Opening brief and excerpts of record are due not later than June 13, 2016
Answering brief is due July 11, 2016 or 28 days after service of the opening brief, whichever is earlier
Optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the answering brief

Obviously, the appeal will not be decided until at least August.

And there is an emergency motion for an injunction to prevent Kaiser from withdrawing support on Friday:

The appeal would be moot if physiological support were withdrawn when the trial court's TRO expires on this Friday. So, the family has made an emergency motion for injunction pending appeal. Kaiser must respond to the emergency motion by 9:00 a.m. on May 19, 2016.

Here is the emergency motion, filed yesterday (63 pages):

http://thaddeuspope.com/images/Fonseca_v_Kaiser_9th_Cir_emergency_motion_May_17,_2016_.pdf
 
Professor Pope has updates on this case earlier than news stories:

http://medicalfutility.blogspot.com/2016/05/fonseca-v-kaiser-brain-death-dispute.html

And there is an emergency motion for an injunction to prevent Kaiser from withdrawing support on Friday:

Here is the emergency motion, filed yesterday (63 pages):

http://thaddeuspope.com/images/Fonseca_v_Kaiser_9th_Cir_emergency_motion_May_17,_2016_.pdf

Of course they're filing an emergency motion.

IMO, in light of the fact that little Israel is dead, disconnecting his somatic support cannot possibly result in any harm to him. Thus, no need for any injunction ordering Kaiser to keep his body on somatic support. If I were the judge, that's what I'd rule.
 
http://thaddeuspope.com/images/Fonseca_v_Kaiser_9th_Cir_emergency_motion_May_17,_2016_.pdf

So in essence, Attorney Snider (representing Fonseca) is arguing that an elective transfer to a lower level of care after a month in a university hospital PICU, and being diagnosed brain dead constituted an emergency situation in and of itself. And that “emergency situation” then requires an ongoing obligation on the part of the facility to “maintain, stabilize, and improve” Israel’s condition under EMTALA. Now that is indeed a novel argument. Snider is attempting to argue that Kaiser “could not” diagnose Israel as brain dead—that this is impermissible under EMTALA. I don’t think these arguments will work at the appeal level.

I’m getting the sense that Israel will be at Kaiser Roseville for a while to come. Israel has a death certificate that is incomplete only for disposition and custody of the body—exactly the same situation that occurred with Jahi McMath. That is an impediment to his transfer acceptance to another facility, as well as the trach and feeding tube. Dr. Myette has testified that Israel’s digestive system is non-functional (likely infarcted from the long episode of hypoxia, and subsequent ECMO), so placement of a feeding tube may be a moot point. One can’t pour tube feed into a non-functional gut. I don’t think the court would order either a trach or feeding tube, nor mandate IV nutrition. My sense is that this may end similar to Jahi, with Jonee being given authority to remove Israel “as is”, within a certain amount of time, and an injunction to Kaiser to keep the current treatment going until that date. I think the most realistic scenario for Jonee is home care, and I’m sure the “Life” organizations, hospice organizations, and churches could help her set up for custodial care/ hospice care at home.

But all that legal stuff notwithstanding, I'd hope that the appeal court/s will make a statement that state and federal law cannot be disregarded or "overturned", simply because someone doesn't agree with it. If there are organizations that want to challenge or overturn the laws regarding brain death, and the UDDA, then the proper place to do that is pro-actively with legislation. It's not the place of the judicial system to *make* law! Legislators make laws, the judiciary applies and upholds the laws.

I also can’t help but think that every administrator at UCSF Benioff is watching this unfold, and is VERY relieved that they didn’t get into the middle of this kind of situation again by taking Israel in transfer. And I'd guess that Kaiser Roseville will never, ever take a brain dead patient in transfer again.
 
Directing this to K_Z & other med professionals: re http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area...pital-mistakenly-diagnoses-moraga-woman-brain May 17, 2016
Does 1 1/2 page handwritten rpt by 'independent' drs (see pdf at link) re Anahita Meskin, pt in SF Bay area hosp, reflect complete BD exam?

After a massive seizure while battling anorexia, Meskin was in coma since 2007. Then May 2015, age 29, fractured, infected hip.
Father wanted surgery; hosp said no, she is BD; father filed in ct. 'Independent' docs examined & reported, pdf at link.
They conducted & reported re various tests and stated at end of rpt: "The motor responses to pain we see in her upper extremeties although possibly mediated by spinal reflexes may also indicate some residual brainstem or cortical [?] function. Therefore she does not meet the clinical criteria or brain death. No further testing is indicated."

^ bbm. Also I see nothing re 'perfusion' tests which I recall being performed in other disputed BD cases but may have missed it. Any thoughts?



___________________________________________________
More re events, per May 2016 article link describing May 2015 ct case.
"A year ago, four John Muir Medical Center doctors told Mohammad Meshkin his daughter was brain-dead. The hospital refused to operate on Anahita Meshkin's infected, fractured hip because it said it would not be ethical to treat a dead person."
"The Walnut Creek facility told the father they wanted to pull the plug on the then-29-year-old woman...."
"Before the hospital could stop treatment, Meshkin called the lawyer for Jahi McMath's family, Chris Dolan, ... filed a temporary restraining order May 1, 2015, to block the hospital from withholding Anahita's treatment. Hours later, two UC San Francisco School of Medicine neurologists and professors conducted an independent test -- ordered by a Contra Costa Superior Court judge -- and determined Anahita was not brain-dead after all..."
"She does not meet the clinical criteria for brain death," wrote physicians Wade Smith and Andrew Josephson, according to court records. They noted that she moved her head and elbow when they pinched her hands."
"After Meshkin won the right to keep his daughter on life-support machines, John Muir performed the surgery on her hip, and she has returned to her care facility. A hospital spokesman said ...he could not comment on specifics of the case." ^bbm

 
"Coma" and brain death are not the same thing. Persistent vegetative state and brain death are not the same thing. Those terms are often used interchangeably in media, but that is not accurate.

This may be one of those cases where the patient is NOT brain dead, but only "almost" brain dead, which in reality, isn't all that much different, but legally and medically, is significantly different.
 
I can't imagine a worse hellish nightmare than having a brain dead or 'near' brain dead child, hooked up to the machines for a decade or more.
 
I should have quoted post 153 in my response in post 154.

Also I see nothing re 'perfusion' tests which I recall being performed in other disputed BD cases but may have missed it. Any thoughts?

Brain perfusion tests are ancillary and not required to establish brain death, so they are not universally done. That is my understanding anyway.
 
From the SacBee link:
“We’re in the process of trying to find another country somewhere that will take him...We don’t have any other choice,” Stinson said.

The Vacaville couple, who also have a 1-year-old daughter, are getting their passports ready just in case, he said.

They think that by Monday they'll be able to find a facility in another country to take him, and make international travel arrangements to transport a dead child to another country?

 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
117
Guests online
2,133
Total visitors
2,250

Forum statistics

Threads
601,804
Messages
18,130,140
Members
231,145
Latest member
alicat3
Back
Top