Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #5

[dh109977]

From your link
“After the surgery, she (Jahi) was fine. She went into the recovery room. She was alert and talking, and she was asking for a Popsicle because she said her throat hurt. As part of the procedure, she was meant to spend the night in ICU,” Sealey said. “When she got moved to ICU, there was a 30-minute wait until any family member could go see her. Upon entry, they saw that there was way too much blood.”
“She lost four pints of blood. She had to have four blood transfusions. She had two liters of blood pumped out of her lungs, not including what was in her stomach,” Sealey said. “There was an enormous amount of blood, and we kept asking, ‘Is this normal?’ Some nurses said I don’t know and some said yes. There was a lot of uncertainty and a lack of urgency.”

This is only one of many versions. There is also the one where she was given the whiteboard to write on and told not to talk. The family didn't like that so they let her talk and laugh. It wasn't until the nurse overheard her asking for a popsicle that she told her there is to be no talking.

Also there is the one where she is writing notes to her mother about how she is suddenly feeling like she is swallowing too much mucus. Which turned out to be blood.

The uncle and the lawyer both keep telling different stories because neither were there. Once this is in court and we can see the medical records we will have a better picture of what really did happen.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yes, the grandmother talks about it in either a huffpo or CNN link. Will brb.

http://wqad.com/2013/12/17/girl-predicts-devastating-outcome-of-her-own-tonsillectomy/

Grandmother: 'as part of the procedure she was meant to spend the night in ICU'.

I'm a little confused? The consensus seems to be to dismiss what her family and lawyer says happened.

So what happened in the 30 minutes between fine in recovery and bleeding way too much in the ICU?

 

[BeginnersLuck]

You would happened to have a copy of the standard informed consent that patience sign would you?
I don't ever recall signing over right to decide end of life decisions for my child upon admittance to a hospital.

Here is the CA statute. So, if we are going to entertain taking brain deceased individuals home, then why not let people take home individuals whose hearts have ceased as well?

http://www.braindeath.org/law/california.htm

 

[threecrazykids]

I don't believe that would be an issue.
I don't believe there is a person on this thread that would want what Jahi's mother does. It's rare. It should be treated with the upmost compassion. IMO it should have never come to this.

1. Brain death is NOT "rare".

2. I agree no one WANTS something like this to happen to anyone they love - but denial of the FACT that she is dead is NOT going to bring her back - and THAT is what as brought them to "this". How long do you suggest they be allowed ignore the fact that no matter WHAT they do she is NOT going to "come back".

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I've read that the belief is that once her heart stops beating she is dead.

With medical intervention you don't NEED a brain for your heart to keep beating nor a body for that matter. You could lay a heart on a table and medically manipulate it to continue to beat...does that (in their opinion) mean she'd still be alive?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Are you debating that this happened? I'm not sure I understand your point sorry. You'll have to spell it out a little more clearly for me.

It seems we should either take it all with a grain of salt allowing for emotions, shock and fear...or not.

I'm sure the hospital records will not document each and every conversation had during this bleeding.

I think the truth is going to come somewhere down the middle.

I think it's wrong at this point to claim it's likely someone in her family caused the bleeding.

IMO this mother and her daughter, regardless exactly HOW it happened are victims. They should be treated as such.

I don't care what anyone has to say about The Beast.

 

[dh109977]

1. Brain death is NOT "rare".

2. I agree no one WANTS something like this to happen to anyone they love - but denial of the FACT that she is dead is NOT going to bring her back - and THAT is what as brought them to "this". How long do you suggest they be allowed ignore the fact that no matter WHAT they do she is NOT going to "come back".

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I've read that the belief is that once her heart stops beating she is dead.

With medical intervention you don't NEED a brain for your heart to keep beating nor a body for that matter. You could lay a heart on a table and medically manipulate it to continue to beat...does that (in their opinion) mean she'd still be alive?

This is where I am stuck. I believe in god. I have never read the bible so I guess that's the info I might be lacking. I can understand them thinking that she isn't dead til her heart stops. In fact I can't say that I wouldn't feel the same if it was my child. I would have them unplug her. If it is her time and her heart is gonna stop it will. If it isn't her time and it's gonna keep beating well then there it is. To me it's cut and dry. But I don't know what faith they follow or even what other faiths believe.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Here is the CA statute. So, if we are going to entertain taking brain deceased individuals home, then why not let people take home individuals whose hearts have ceased as well?

http://www.braindeath.org/law/california.htm

People in California are given that to sign upon admittance to a hospital???

 

[Linda7NJ]

1. Brain death is NOT "rare".

2. I agree no one WANTS something like this to happen to anyone they love - but denial of the FACT that she is dead is NOT going to bring her back - and THAT is what as brought them to "this". How long do you suggest they be allowed ignore the fact that no matter WHAT they do she is NOT going to "come back".

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I've read that the belief is that once her heart stops beating she is dead.

With medical intervention you don't NEED a brain for your heart to keep beating nor a body for that matter. You could lay a heart on a table and medically manipulate it to continue to beat...does that (in their opinion) mean she'd still be alive?

" Rare" as in the refusal to come to terms with it for whatever reason. Religious, like in NJ, or denial or otherwise.

 

[Zuri]

Is obviously needed. IMO it needs clarification.

I think doctors have followed the standard of brain death since the Supreme Court ruling in the 1970's. Standards of care have IMO only improved as technology has progressed. The fact that X-rays can be digitally sent to the ER for immediate viewing is amazing.

If nothing else comes from this case, I hope that it has opened a conversation on organ donation, patients asking more questions of their physicians, extra care by all medical professionals, researching of symptoms and diagnoses by patients to self educate, assigning medical power of attorneys to someone they trust and more.

I hope that stricter guidelines and definitions of brain death will be forthcoming. The downside may be doctors and hospitals not extending days for families to make heart wrenching decisions to end life support. I don't think another hospital is going to risk what has happened at CHO to ever occur again. JMV

 

[dh109977]

It seems we should either take it all with a grain of salt allowing for emotions, shock and fear...or not.

I'm sure the hospital records will not document each and every conversation had during this bleeding.

I think the truth is going to come somewhere down the middle.

I think it's wrong at this point to claim it's likely someone in her family caused the bleeding.

IMO this mother and her daughter, regardless exactly HOW it happened are victims. They should be treated as such.

I don't care what anyone has to say about The Beast.

I wouldn't say the family caused the bleeding. But I can't imagine that the hospital would let them suction her that would be a lawsuit waiting to happen. If the did indeed suction her without supervision that to me would be a contributing factor in the bleeding. I would that that would make you bleed more.if done wrong. But I don't know for sure that is something that I will have to wait for.

 

[fruity]

I'm a little confused? The consensus seems to be to dismiss what her family and lawyer says happened.

So what happened in the 30 minutes between fine in recovery and bleeding way too much in the ICU?

My opinion has always been that we only have one side of the story and that we need to be mindful of that side of the story if the recounts from different people are conflicting.

Why would the statement that the grandmother said she was scheduled to go to ICU be dismissed? This is a child having a complex surgery with multiple risk factors. Why would the grandmother lie about her needing to go to the ICU? It makes sense that it would be scheduled.

It seems we should either take it all with a grain of salt allowing for emotions, shock and fear...or not.

I'm sure the hospital records will not document each and every conversation had during this bleeding.

I think the truth is going to come somewhere down the middle.

I think it's wrong at this point to claim it's likely someone in her family caused the bleeding.

IMO this mother and her daughter, regardless exactly HOW it happened are victims. They should be treated as such.

I don't care what anyone has to say about The Beast.

I agree with the truth being somewhere in the middle but I don't understand what all of this has to do with the quote you snipped from the link about the grandmother saying she was scheduled to go to the ICU.

I guess you're not the only confused one here.

 

[Harmony 2]

Let's go easy on each other please. Emotions are running very high in this case, but we are all entitled to our thoughts and opinions.

You are great folks who stand vigil on this thread because you care about Jahi and the issues at hand.

Friendly reminder: Comments and replies should be respectful of the other person's point of view, even when we vehemently disagree!

Thank you...

 

[Linda7NJ]

My opinion has always been that we only have one side of the story and that we need to be mindful of that side of the story if the recounts from different people are conflicting.

Why would the statement that the grandmother said she was scheduled to go to ICU be dismissed? This is a child having a complex surgery with multiple risk factors. Why would the grandmother lie about her needing to go to the ICU? It makes sense that it would be scheduled.


I agree with the truth being somewhere in the middle but I don't understand what all of this has to do with the quote you snipped from the link about the grandmother saying she was scheduled to go to the ICU.

I guess you're not the only confused one here.

lol guess not

 

[otto]

I'm a little confused? The consensus seems to be to dismiss what her family and lawyer says happened.

So what happened in the 30 minutes between fine in recovery and bleeding way too much in the ICU?

Various family members admitted to using the suction tube at that time. That's all we know.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

People in California are given that to sign upon admittance to a hospital???

If someone dies whether it is due to brain or heart failure, the family is not the one that has to consent to ventilator support being removed. It is automatically done by the hospital after giving the family a "small" amount of time to gather.

If someone is in a coma or vegetative state, where there is brain trauma but not brain death then family has to consent before removal of life support.

 

[fruity]

I wouldn't say the family caused the bleeding. But I can't imagine that the hospital would let them suction her that would be a lawsuit waiting to happen. If the did indeed suction her without supervision that to me would be a contributing factor in the bleeding. I would that that would make you bleed more.if done wrong. But I don't know for sure that is something that I will have to wait for.

Yes. I was really careful in my earlier post to say that wrt to suctioning I don't know who is in the wrong. The nurses shouldn't have let the family suction. On ghe other hand, you can understand the family wanting to do ANYTHING to help but accidentally causing harm.

None of us was there. We don't know what happened for sure. I admit I'm speculating and that this is all IMO.

 

[Softail]

You have an amazing heart. You say you're losing empathy for the family but I think you're selling yourself short. I think you care a lot.

I agree. Zuri has an amazing heart! :blowkiss:

 

[newmrsc]

People in California are given that to sign upon admittance to a hospital???

No, we do not need to sign anything about the brain death law upon admittance to the hospital. It is just the law that has been passed by our legislature and that we are all required to follow. Most states chose not to include a religious exemption in their similar laws, so there is no exception even if we personally disagree.

 

[seattlechiquita]

I agree. Zuri has an amazing heart! :blowkiss:

She does :loveyou: ..... but I am Still the Prettiest :blushing:

 

[Cubby]

:

The issue then becomes ....do doctors have sole authority of your child's medical care after you sign them in? For any and ALL procedures or emergencies?

There are laws which exist which clearly define brain death. There are laws thst exist which clearly define what medicine can or can not occur on deceased patients.

There is no law requiring any medical facility to operate on a deceased body. There are laws pertaining to the treatment of human remains. Jahi is by all legal defitions deceased.

The true muddy issue here is what defines a reasonable amount of time to keep a deceased patient on life saving machines once there is zero chance of recovery.

Jahi's family is not Jewish, thus the laws for religious beliefs for the Jewish faith do not apply in this case.