Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #521
Where does it say anything of the sort in the court document? What doctor you claim decided she was not brain dead? I dont' see anything of the sort.

I know this was not for me, but I am curious as well. Surely not Byrne? I don't think he counts.
 
  • #522
Here is the hospital's letter which also states that only 2 of it's staff found Jahi brain dead. Then on 12/23 Dr Fisher agreed. On 12/24 they got the TRO to keep her on until 12/30.

The family states that she is responding to them, that must be enough of a doubt to a court of law to extend another week.

Wouldn't it be easy to just have a brain scan done?
 
  • #523
Re #517

And...?

The Court's final decision was what.

~jmo~

"the court found that Drs. Heidersbach and Shanahan did not satisfy the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 7180 and 7181”

The court found means that it was the final decision.
 
  • #524
An MD on twitter says this is the location - Riverhead Patch
It is not even built yet.

Thanks, it appears they are trying to find anyone that they have connections with in the area to take her. I just read that they need a doctor to write orders for therapy for her. Hmmm....
 
  • #525
No, I strongly disagree! This family would rather have their daughter alive and well over money. The reason for the feeding tube is that Jahi doesn't have the consciousness to swallow solid food. She needs nutrition to keep her body going and they need to be able to transport her. NG-tubes can be easily dislodged, so a G-tube is preferable, and is considered a minor surgery.


Alive and well??? Really???
 
  • #526
"the court found that Drs. Heidersbach and Shanahan did not satisfy the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 7180 and 7181”

The court found means that it was the final decision.

That means the court decided the two doctors were not independent enough.
It doesn't mean what you are claiming here. I don't see anything about some third doctor.
 
  • #527
"the court found that Drs. Heidersbach and Shanahan did not satisfy the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 7180 and 7181”

The court found means that it was the final decision.

NOT what I meant. Carry on.

~jmo~
 
  • #528
IMO, this says it all...

But state law considers brain death the same as "death." And Caplan said Children's Hospital doctors got into an unusual position when they didn't simply take Jahi off the ventilator the first time the EEG came back negative. Instead, they gave the family more than a few minutes to say goodbye.

And in that time, a slippery slope was created, Caplan said. He asked rhetorically if the Jahi case now will have people running "to court if they refuse to accept ...death?"
 
  • #529
Absolutely nothing in what you just quoted here suggests any physican decided she was not brain dead. "Did not satisfy the requirements" simply means the physicans were not independent enough per judge's view since both had privileges at the same hospital.

Sorry JJenny, I was bolding that part for someone else. I thought if the paragraph was actually read, everyone would see the 3 doctors who examined her and the 2 who were nullified.

Here, I'll bold only the ONE whose report was still valid.

“On December 11, 2013, Dr. Shanahan, a physician from CHO, declared that MCMATH was brain dead. Dr. Heidersbach, another CHO physician verified Dr. Shanahan’s findings.”

“In support of their position CHO submitted Declarations of Robert Heidersbach, MD, Sharon Williams, MD, and Robin Shanahan, MD. Of these three physicians, Dr. Hidersbach (sp?) and Dr. Shanahan were doctors who examined Jahi and testified by way of declaration that Jahi suffered irreversible cessation of all functions of her entire brain, including her brain stem.” CHO argued that the two doctors meet the requirements of Health and Safety Code section 7181.

During oral arguments on December 20, 2013, over an objection by Real Party in Interest’s counsel, the court found that Drs. Heidersbach and Shanahan did not satisfy the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 7180 and 7181”
 
  • #530
Here is the hospital's letter which also states that only 2 of it's staff found Jahi brain dead. Then on 12/23 Dr Fisher agreed. On 12/24 they got the TRO to keep her on until 12/30.

The family states that she is responding to them, that must be enough of a doubt to a court of law to extend another week.

Wouldn't it be easy to just have a brain scan done?

Because two is what required to declare brain death.
But apparently they should be independent and court decided they were not independent enough.
They done brain scans on her.
She has no blood flow to her brain and no electrical activity in the brain.
 
  • #531
Thanks, it appears they are trying to find anyone that they have connections with in the area to take her. I just read that they need a doctor to write orders for therapy for her. Hmmm....

Wow...just wow.
 
  • #532
They went back to court to get more time to file an appeal in a higher court. They were given until 1/7 to do so. They filed that today and the higher court gave them a 24 hour hold to review the records.

It's pretty standard as far as the courts go.
 
  • #533
I am sorry, but do you not see that CHO sumbitted declaration from Dr. Williams in support of its opinion? Where does it say Dr. Williams didn't agree with the other two?
Dr. Williams obviously agreed with the other two, or CHO wouldn't be including her declaration in support of its opinion the child was brain dead.
 
  • #534
ok guys, I'm not on here to argue with anyone. I thought more of you would be interested in what I found in the documents.

I'm really surprised that some of you aren't seeing anything other than Jahi should be taken off the vent.

IMO I think this is a bigger hospital mistake than originally reported.
 
  • #535
IMO, this says it all...

I don't agree with that quote at all. Doctors are required by state law to give family some reasonably short amount to accept it. They aren't supposed to turn the ventillator off the minute EEG came back negative. So I don't think the hospital created this situation by not turning the vent off the minute EEG came back negative.
 
  • #536
ok guys, I'm not on here to argue with anyone. I thought more of you would be interested in what I found in the documents.

I'm really surprised that some of you aren't seeing anything other than Jahi should be taken off the vent.

IMO I think this is a bigger hospital mistake than originally reported.

Separate issues.

But thank you for your research! :-) I will look into it more tomorrow.

~jmo~
 
  • #537
  • #538
Snipped from CHO's Opposition to TRO filed on December 20, 2013.

There is not a scintilla of evidence suggesting that the diagnosis of death is a mistake or was not made in accord with accepted medical standards.
To the contrary, on December 18, 2013, lawyer Christopher Dolan, writing on behalf of Ms. McMath’s mother, stated that Ms. McMath “has been left brain dead” and requested a “complete explanation as to exactly how Jahi has now come to be brain dead.”
Copy attached hereto.


http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/childrens-hospital.pdf
 
  • #539
I don't agree with that quote at all. Doctors are required by state law to give family some reasonably short amount to accept it. They aren't supposed to turn the ventillator off the minute EEG came back negative. So I don't think the hospital created this situation by not turning the vent off the minute EEG came back negative.

Well the statement said the "first time" it came back negative, not "immediately". I think they allowed them more than the "ordinary" amount of time that was extended, and that is not hard to imagine...I can easily see the mother begging for them to wait...and wait.... I pray I am never in that position because I can't say I wouldn't do the same.
 
  • #540
Why would a facility that take patients with TBI, that are mostly out patient, with a new long term care facilty, that is a converted house? Jahi does not appear to fit their criteria from what I read. Interesting.

I wonder if they have a license to treat legally deceased individuals. Only ruling that was made was that the vent was ordered to remain on until Jan 7th.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
2,519
Total visitors
2,650

Forum statistics

Threads
632,508
Messages
18,627,782
Members
243,174
Latest member
daydoo93
Back
Top