Jahi’s family wants her declared 'alive again’

[MyBelle]

The AMA has nothing to do with anything; most doctors don't even belong to it.

That might be your opinion but the Judge certainly respected the ethical concerns of the CHO. The AMA has the Code of Ethics. The CHO sited ethics as the reason their physicians could not perform a trach or insert Jahi's feeding tube. The Judge honored that ethical concern and required them to work out a settlement agreement.

THE COUNCIL ON ETHICAL AND JUDICIAL AFFAIRS

In a rough analogy between the structure of AMA and that of the Federal Government, the Officers and the Board of Trustees constitute the Executive Branch; the House of Delegates the Legislative Branch; and CEJA the Judicial Branch. Oversight of the Code of Medical Ethics resides with CEJA, which is charged with interpretation of the Principles of Medical Ethics and issuing and promulgating Opinions on ethical matters.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399321/

 

[TJL]

I've not seen any physician state that Jahi has made a miraculous recovery.
JMO

One of the doctors whom you've repeatedly defended their opinions on this matter, and repeatedly referred to their credentials in order to demonstrate that you hold their opinions in high regard and esteem: Dr. Shewmon. He has made such statements that infer Jahi has made a recovery which is nothing short of miraculous. From Dolan's press release that you were unaware existed:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nacvrwtpa5w6jqv/McMath_Linked_File.pdf?dl=0

Starts at page 128, document titled, "Declaration of D. Alan Shewmon, M.D. dated 3 October, 2014":

Dear Mr. Dolan:

...

Based on materials that you have provided me so far, I can assert unequivocally that Jahi currently does not meet diagnostic criteria for brain death. ... Jahi does not currently currently fulfill criteria for brain death on several grounds. ... Thus, with the passage of time, her brain has recovered the ability to generate electrical activity, in parallel with its recovery of ability to respond to commands.

...

Clearly Jahi is not currently brain dead. Yet I have no doubt that at the time of her original diagnosis, she fulfilled the AAN diagnostic criteria, correctly and rigorously applied by the several doctors who independently made the diagnosis then. That diagnosis was even backed up by two ancillary tests:

... Jahi has now proved that it can occur in clinical reality. I believe that is the only possible explanation for the discrepancy for her original fulfillment of the brain death criteria and her current lack of their fulfillment.

He acknowledged that she was correctly and independently diagnosed as brain dead by competent doctors, using the proper tests and tools. He also states that he believes her brain has recovered some of its capabilities which are absent in dead brains.

I think that most certainly qualifies as a doctor claiming Jahi has made a miraculous recovery. However cuckoo the idea may be (the idea that dead brains can come back to life), that's still someone who's made such a claim that you believe no one has made.

 

[Hiandmighty]

Only 15% of American doctors belong to the AMA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3153537/

 

[al66pine]

Not exactly new news.
http://medicalfutility.blogspot.com/ copies & pasted from Jahi's mom's FaceBook. (All discussed here on W/S recently)
She thanks $$$ donors and ppl who have prayed for family, etc.
Also describes Jahi's 'progress' about moving on command, having periods, etc.

Posting link to law professor's site, just in case FB post vanishes later.

 

[MyBelle]

Only 15% of American doctors belong to the AMA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3153537/

members or not, the CHO physicians were licensed and must adhere to the Code of Ethics, which was my point.

JMO

 

[Hiandmighty]

The AMA has nothing to do with this case

Doctors aren't licensed by the AMA.

 

[TJL]

members or not, the CHO physicians were licensed and must adhere to the Code of Ethics, which was my point.

JMO

Which begs the question: what sort of doctor would deliberately violate that Code of Ethics by traching and intubating a brain dead person and treating it with life-saving techniques, while knowing good and well that the tests and examinations they perform are not at all even remotely acceptable standards for confirming or ruling out brain death?

I think we know the sort of doctor who would deliberately violate that Code of Ethics, as we've seen a couple of them brought in as expert witnesses for Dolan.

 

[Lippy]

I don't believe that is correct. It would not be chump change either way. Perhaps a legal expert can better explain but I think in California, there would be compensatory damages and punitive damages awarded if they won. The compensatory damages are for real things such as her care. The Proposition on the ballot deals with the cap on punitive damages which is now $250,000. Hardly to be considered chump change by anyone. And the hospital and Jahi's family can settle at any time.



JMO

In an interview in front of CHO at the beginning of the battle over Jahi her uncle, Omari Sealy, referred to the $250,000 cap on damages for the death of a child as " chump change" in comparison to what they could get in a settlement for a live child. He went on to cite this as the reason CHO wanted to declare Jahi dead.

 

[MyBelle]

The AMA has nothing to do with this case

Doctors aren't licensed by the AMA.

BBM. I never said they were nor did I even suggest membership in the AMA has anything to do with this case.

To repeat my earlier point: The AMA establishes the Code of Ethics. Ethics were the reason CHO refused to allow the invasive procedures for ventilation and the feeding line.

All the doctors at CHO have to adhere to ethics. It doesn't matter if they are paid members in the AMA or belong to the local country club.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

In an interview in front of CHO at the beginning of the battle over Jahi her uncle, Omari Sealy, referred to the $250,000 cap on damages for the death of a child as " chump change" in comparison to what they could get in a settlement for a live child. He went on to cite this as the reason CHO wanted to declare Jahi dead.

Sorry, I didn't see that quote and without a link, I really don't believe it. A settlement can be for whatever amount is agreed whether the child is alive or dead. The $250,000 cap applies to any award for punitive damages at trial. If there is a settlement, there will not be a trial.

JMO

 

[Hiandmighty]

BBM. I never said they were nor did I even suggest membership in the AMA has anything to do with this case.

To repeat my earlier point: The AMA establishes the Code of Ethics. Ethics were the reason CHO refused to allow the invasive procedures for ventilation and the feeding line.

All the doctors at CHO have to adhere to ethics. It doesn't matter if they are paid members in the AMA or belong to the local country club.

JMO

What code of ethics are you talking about because you keep saying "code of ethics" and AMA in the same sentence.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Please explain what this mysterious "THE code of ethics" is, that the doctors supposedly have to follow, that are apparently made up by an irrelevant voluntary organization that has zero influence in American Mecidine and is so poorly regarded by American doctors that 85% do not join.

You may as well be talking about that country club's code of ethics.

The AMA has nothing to do with anything. Please understand that. It's a nothing organization that no one belongs to and that 85% of doctors don't join or follow or have any allegiance to any part of...

 

[TJL]

What code of ethics are you talking about because you keep saying "code of ethics" and AMA in the same sentence.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Please explain what this mysterious "THE code of ethics" is, that the doctors supposedly have to follow, that are apparently made up by an irrelevant voluntary organization that has zero influence in American Mecidine and is so poorly regarded by American doctors that 85% do not join.

You may as well be talking about that country club's code of ethics.

The AMA has nothing to do with anything. Please understand that. It's a nothing organization that no one belongs to and that 85% of doctors don't join or follow or have any allegiance to any part of...

Thanks for the insight into the AMA. We always hear about it being quoted or referenced in medical issues, advertisements, etc. But I've never taken any time to look into the organization. My philosophy is that any organization quoted in an advertisement, deserves a higher level of skepticism than most. And prefer to look for sources that don't have a financial interest in something.

 

[Hiandmighty]

All doctors I know have disdain for the AMA.

That's why I can't understand MyBelle trying to say that the AMA has the "code of ethics" and somehow that code of ethics is tied to Jahi McMath.

There can be nothing further from the truth.

Perhaps the AMA has drawn up a code of eithics, but that code of ethics has nothing to do with any doctor and is not related in any way to the Jahi McMath case.

Doctors have no connection to the AMA's code of ethics.

In fact, there is no ethical consideration in not treating a brain dead person. Brain dead is dead, and doctors don't treat brain dead people... Because they are dead.

Here is an interesting letter by Dolan stating he has been retained as the family lawyer
http://www.sfgate.com/file/702/702-Letter-to-CHO%5B1%5D.PDF


Oh!!! Hahahahahaha :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Dolan is the one who brought up the AMA code of ethics in this letter. O.k. LOL.... That shows you what an idiot :cow: Dolan is. I'm actually chucking right now. Wow, that is incredibly stupid.

Dolan was grasping at straws from the very beginning.

As I said, the AMA has nothing to do with 85% of American doctors. The organization is a joke and exists for whatever it's own reasons are.....

It has zero influence in American medicine. Bring up the AMA to a doctor and watch him/her roll his/her eyes.

The AMA has nothing to do with anything.

And besides, what he quoted from the AMA didn't have to do with brain death.

O.k. My puzzlement has been solved.

 

[TJL]

All doctors I know have disdain for the AMA.

That's why I can't understand MyBelle trying to say that the AMA has the "code of ethics" and somehow that code of ethics is tied to Jahi McMath.

There can be nothing further from the truth.

Perhaps the AMA has drawn up a code of eithics, but that code of ethics has nothing to do with any doctor and is not related in any way to the Jahi McMath case.

Doctors have no connection to the AMA's code of ethics.

In fact, there is no ethical consideration in not treating a brain dead person. Brain dead is dead, and doctors don't treat brain dead people... Because they are dead.

Here is an interesting letter by Dolan stating he has been retained as the family lawyer
http://www.sfgate.com/file/702/702-Letter-to-CHO%5B1%5D.PDF


Oh!!! Hahahahahaha Dolan is the one who brought up the AMA code of ethics in this letter. O.k. LOL.... That shows you what an idiot :cow: Dolan is. I'm actually chucking right now. Wow, that is incredibly stupid.

Dolan was grasping at straws from the very beginning.

As I said, the AMA has nothing to do with 85% of American doctors. The organization is a joke and exists for whatever it's own reasons are.....

It has zero influence in American medicine. Bring up the AMA to a doctor and watch him/her roll his/her eyes.

The AMA has nothing to do with anything.

Wow, that's all incredibly interesting and not at all surprising at the same time! I admit I assumed there was some sort of professional adherence to an AMA CoE, because it just didn't seem to me like it was anything but no-brainer standards to follow. Kind of like the the "Bill of Rights" you see posted at grocery store entrances: "All customers have the right to be greeted with a smile and friendly service!"

Where can we find, more specifically, a set of medical ethics standards that are most widely accepted, recognized, and prudently followed by medical professionals?

 

[Hiandmighty]

You know, I don't know. Aside from the Hippocratic Oath doctors take when they graduate medical school, and the guidelines from state licensing organizations, I don't think there is one. You know, because ethical issues are dynamic and not static... There can't be one rule or guideline that covers every medical situation that will arise.

Of course there are laws, such as HIPPA.

 

[TJL]

You know, I don't know. Aside from the Hippocratic Oath doctors take when they graduate medical school, and the guidelines from state licensing organizations, I don't think there is one. You know, because ethical issues are dynamic and not static... There can't be one rule or guideline that covers every medical situation that will arise.

Of course there are laws, such as HIPPA.

Makes perfect sense, appreciate it. "Do no harm" really is difficult to misinterpret.

 

[MyBelle]

What code of ethics are you talking about because you keep saying "code of ethics" and AMA in the same sentence.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Please explain what this mysterious "THE code of ethics" is, that the doctors supposedly have to follow, that are apparently made up by an irrelevant voluntary organization that has zero influence in American Mecidine and is so poorly regarded by American doctors that 85% do not join.

You may as well be talking about that country club's code of ethics.

The AMA has nothing to do with anything. Please understand that. It's a nothing organization that no one belongs to and that 85% of doctors don't join or follow or have any allegiance to any part of...

I never mentioned anything about AMA membership. You keep mentioning membership and I fail to see the point. Membership has nothing to do with this case but imo, ethics is very much a part of it.

The CHO claimed ethics didn't allow their physicians to do Jaci's trach or the feeding tube so yes, ethics are an element of this case. The CHO made it an element and absolutely Dolan should address.

You'll have to ask the Hospital what code of ethics they were adhering to. Perhaps it was their country club ethics they were following because they didn't say they objected to the procedure, just that their version of "ethics" didn't allow it. I guess at that hospital it is okay to perform an invasive procedure on a corpse for organ transplantation but not to do so while a Judge decides whether the child is legally dead or not. Strange set of ethics, there.

JMO

Hospital representatives have said that they've never objected to the girl receiving a tracheostomy, but would not allow the procedure done in its hospital or performed by its staff because of the ethical and legal issues related to operating on a deceased person.



http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Jahi-McMath-family-hospital-to-meet-for-5109332.php

 

[Donjeta]

I've not seen any physician state that Jahi has made a miraculous recovery. All the declarations make it clear she has suffered severe brain damage. I have no clue about why one set of medical brain death criteria is different from another. It's up to the AMA and the American Academy of Pediatrics and any other group involved in establishing the criteria to sort it out.

JMO

It's not a huge mystery I think. Adult and pediatric populations are somewhat different so there are frequently somewhat different guidelines regarding treatments and diagnoses of children and adults. The criteria have to be evidence based and something that was validated in research in an adult population may or may not work similarly in children or it might not have been even researched properly.

 

[Hiandmighty]

Here is the link to the Medical Board of California, which is the organization that licenses doctors to practice medicine in California. It doesn't really have any information on the web site:

http://www.mbc.ca.gov/Licensees/Physicians_and_Surgeons/

 

[Hiandmighty]

I never mentioned anything about AMA membership. You keep mentioning membership and I fail to see the point. Membership has nothing to do with this case but imo, ethics is very much a part of it.

The CHO claimed ethics didn't allow their physicians to do Jaci's trach or the feeding tube so yes, ethics are an element of this case. The CHO made it an element, not Dolan.

You'll have to ask the Hospital what code of ethics they were adhering to. Perhaps it was their country club ethics they were following because they didn't say they objected to the procedure, just that their version of "ethics" didn't allow it. I guess at that hospital it is okay to perform an invasive procedure on a corpse for organ transplantation but not to do so while a Judge decides whether the child is legally dead or not. Strange set of ethics, there.

JMO

Hospital representatives have said that they've never objected to the girl receiving a tracheostomy, but would not allow the procedure done in its hospital or performed by its staff because of the ethical and legal issues related to operating on a deceased person.



http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Jahi-McMath-family-hospital-to-meet-for-5109332.php

Right, doctors don't treat dead people. There doesn't need to be a "code of ethics" about that... It's common sense.

Doctors also don't operate on dead people. Again, common sense for the same reason insurance companies don't pay doctors to operate on dead people. Dead people are dead. We bury dead people.