Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #8

[SophieRose]

Danville family of brain-dead girl sues Oakland hospital that treated Jahi McMath

http://www.contracostatimes.com/new...-family-brain-dead-girl-sues-oakland-hospital

The Danville family of a 21-month-old girl declared brain-dead after surgery filed suit Friday against the Oakland hospital at the center of the Jahi McMath saga, saying that the hospital's doctors botched an attempt to repair their daughter's birth defect, pressured the family to donate the girl's organs as they grieved and lied about an autopsy.

Children's Hospital of Oakland has been renamed to UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland

 

[K_Z]

Professor Thaddeus Pope criticizes Teri Shiavo Life and Hope Network

Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network WRONG to Defend the Dead?

I wonder if devoting resources to litigate this case and to provide mechanical interventions for Jahi McMath's body was prudent for the Life & Hope Network. After all, it is one thing to protect vulnerable adults from coercion, manipulation, bias, and conflict of interest that might hasten death. It is quite another to defend the dead themselves. Some donors may feel that the Jahi McMath case falls outside the appropriate scope of the organization's mission.

http://medicalfutility.blogspot.com/2014/04/terri-schiavo-life-hope-network-wrong.html

 

[i.b.nora]

"UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital and Children's Hospital & Research Center Oakland (Children's Oakland) have affiliated, building on the hospitals' mutual commitment to provide outstanding care to children in local communities, and advance medical discovery and treatment for the world.

The affiliation, effective January 1, 2014, brings together two leading Bay Area children's hospitals, strengthening their abilities to meet marketplace expectations, including the Affordable Care Act. The affiliation has the potential to provide better health care value to consumers through higher quality care, lower costs and more coordinated access to services at hospital locations on both sides of the Bay, as well as medical facilities throughout Northern California."

http://www.ucsfbenioffchildrens.org...ns_hospital_and_childrens_hospital_oakla.html

 

[Elley Mae]

Children's Hospital Oakland gets $50 million and new name in UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital merger

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking...rens-hospital-oakland-gets-50-million-and-new

Children's Hospital Oakland is receiving $50 million and a new name.

San Francisco philanthropists Lynne and Marc Benioff also are giving $50 million to UCSF's Benioff Children's Hospital, the school announced Tuesday.

In honor of the gift, Children's will now be called UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland. The two institutions formally allied earlier this year.

 

[SophieRose]

http://www.contracostatimes.com/new...-family-brain-dead-girl-sues-oakland-hospital

Christopher Dolan, the lawyer for the McMath family, said the Westhoff case demonstrates a "culture of pressure and insensitivity" at the children's hospital. The Westhoff family visited the McMath family while Jahi was in the hospital.

"It goes to show the experience that Jahi's family had was not isolated," Dolan said.

 

[Donjeta]

Professor Thaddeus Pope criticizes Teri Shiavo Life and Hope Network



http://medicalfutility.blogspot.com/2014/04/terri-schiavo-life-hope-network-wrong.html

It seems to me that becoming well known as the organization that insists there is hope for the dead might dilute the effectivity of the message when they're talking about hope for those who are alive if people perceive them as unable to comprehend the difference. But I suppose their donors may differ.

 

[Donjeta]

There probably aren't many ways of telling families that their precious little children just died unexpectedly that leave the families feeling good and happy with the experience but the autopsy thing is concerning to me, if true.

The suit alleges that doctors were "reckless in rendering medical services to Morgan," and misrepresented to the Westhoff family that the Alameda County Coroner's Office was going to conduct an autopsy.

No autopsy was performed because a doctor signed the death certificate saying the attended death was of natural causes, according to the coroner's office. Such cases do not fall under the jurisdiction of the coroner's office. If they had known no autopsy was being performed, the family would have sought an independent autopsy for their daughter, the girl's father said.

There should imo be an autopsy every time if a child dies unexpectedly after an operation.

 

[lawstudent]

The point of an autopsy is to discern a medical cause, so if a doctor has already ruled, there would be no need to then give the coroner jurisdiction, unless there was an allegation of misconduct by the doctor going on at the time. It wouldn't be considered an unexplained or unexpected death if it occurred in a hospital and doctors ruled it was natural causes.

 

[CHERIE.T]

http://www.contracostatimes.com/new...-family-brain-dead-girl-sues-oakland-hospital

oh puleazzz

 

[Donjeta]

The point of an autopsy is to discern a medical cause, so if a doctor has already ruled, there would be no need to then give the coroner jurisdiction, unless there was an allegation of misconduct by the doctor going on at the time. It wouldn't be considered an unexplained or unexpected death if it occurred in a hospital and doctors ruled it was natural causes.

Of course it is perfectly natural to die if you suffer cardiac arrest and brain death but there was a link from a coroner earlier that said that they always like to investigate the cases where someone died in the hospital in connection with a surgical operation.

If the below description is correct it seems like there is at least a decent possibility that someone botched something in the operation, and it should definitely have been investigated more closely in an autopsy imo. If for nothing else, to clear the doctors involved from the suspicions of malpractice that everyone should have seen coming.

Morgan and her twin sister, Hunter, were born April 9, 2011, with patent ductus arteriosus, a condition in which a blood vessel that allows blood to bypass the baby's lungs before birth does not close after birth. Doctors chose to insert a device that would help close the blood vessel, but the device never should have been used in the first place, the suit argues. Doctors failed to give Morgan an echocardiogram to determine the right size device to use and ensure that she did not have high blood pressure, which would likely cause the procedure to fail, the suit says.

Doctors found as they attempted to insert the device that Morgan in fact did have high blood pressure; they halted the procedure and consulted the family, but did not warn them of the risk of failure if they continued, the suit says. Eventually, they completed the procedure, but the device became dislodged after implementation.

Instead of closing the vessel, doctors worked to retrieve the device while Morgan suffered cardiac arrest and brain damage resulting in brain death, the suit said. Hunter had the same surgery at the hospital with a positive result. She turned 3 years old this week, her family said.

 

[lawstudent]

Of course it is perfectly natural to die if you suffer cardiac arrest and brain death but there was a link from a coroner earlier that said that they always like to investigate the cases where someone died in the hospital in connection with a surgical operation.

If the below description is correct it seems like there is at least a decent possibility that someone botched something in the operation, and it should definitely have been investigated more closely in an autopsy imo. If for nothing else, to clear the doctors involved from the suspicions of malpractice that everyone should have seen coming.

Agree it would be wise in many situations, but I'm just saying there's no reason to make it automatic - the coroner's opinion just isn't needed in most in-hospital deaths. I don't see how an autopsy would help - it's not really disputed how she died - what is disputed is whether or not that implant should have stayed in given the risks that it could fail, etc., which necessitated the risky surgery, and whether they should have kept trying to retrieve it. They still may get sued, but I doubt it would be successful.

 

[Donjeta]

Agree it would be wise in many situations, but I'm just saying there's no reason to make it automatic - the coroner's opinion just isn't needed in most in-hospital deaths. I don't see how an autopsy would help - it's not really disputed how she died - what is disputed is whether or not that implant should have stayed in given the risks that it could fail, etc., which necessitated the risky surgery, and whether they should have kept trying to retrieve it. They still may get sued, but I doubt it would be successful.

JMO but I see a lot of reasons to make the coroner opinion or another impartial investigation automatic if there is reason to suspect that an iatrogenic cause contributed to the death.

 

[lawstudent]

JMO but I see a lot of reasons to make the coroner opinion or another impartial investigation automatic if there is reason to suspect that an iatrogenic cause contributed to the death.

Yes, I agree with that, but what I was responding to was the idea that all deaths of children should be automatically investigated by the coroner. I don't think the age matters - it's more whether you suspect something went wrong. But also a lot of people object to autopsies - sometimes they may think a doctor should have done something more to prevent death and may have contributed to the death of an already ill person, but they still believe the person died of natural causes, and do not want an autopsy done. It can be traumatic, unless there's an actual crime suspected.

 

[Donjeta]

Yes, I agree with that, but what I was responding to was the idea that all deaths of children should be automatically investigated by the coroner. I don't think the age matters - it's more whether you suspect something went wrong. But also a lot of people object to autopsies - sometimes they may think a doctor should have done something more to prevent death and may have contributed to the death of an already ill person, but they still believe the person died of natural causes, and do not want an autopsy done. It can be traumatic, unless there's an actual crime suspected.

Ok, we are agreed then. Just to note that I didn't say that all deaths of children should be automatically investigated by the coroner, I said that I think there should be an autopsy whenever a child dies unexpectedly after an operation.

 

[Isabelle]

Danville family of brain-dead girl sues Oakland hospital that treated Jahi McMath

http://www.contracostatimes.com/new...-family-brain-dead-girl-sues-oakland-hospital



Children's Hospital of Oakland has been renamed to UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland

I can't tell you how many procedures I have witnessed to close the patent ductus of premature newborns. Procedure is done in NICU at the bedside. The doctors who performed the Danville child's surgery were lacking somehow for sure!

 

[rob]

I can't tell you how many procedures I have witnessed to close the patent ductus of premature newborns. Procedure is done in NICU at the bedside. The doctors who performed the Danville child's surgery were lacking somehow for sure!

Or either there was more to it than the article states.

 

[Supernovae]

Or either there was more to it than the article states.

That's not necessarily the only possibility. Even a generally "low risk" (for infant cardiac surgery) can sometimes go wrong without their having been negligence.

 

[vulture]

My dentist told me to get my wisdom teeth out even though he told me he didn't have a justification but just figured it woudl be good to do just in case. I know he is the professional, but I am extremely hesitant to have such a procedure done just in case. Of course it is devastating, but it's not as shocking as people think. I do think doctors should make the risks more clear, but I know they don't want to scare people unnecessarily.

Last year, my grandmother experienced sudden severe health problems and was admitted to top Boston hospitals. It turned out she had very advanced cancer, and the doctors danced around the fact that it was terminal, let alone that it was going to be months at the most. Because I am a well-informed person on these matters, I knew immediately from what the doctors didn't say that it was very bad. I knew from the first symptoms - it was clear her organs were failing suddenly, and that is a terrible sign. My mom did too - we both read a lot, but have no medical background. My dad and his family - it was his mother - just had no idea. They kept talking about her getting better, all excited about treatment, etc. I just couldn't stand watching the hope. It's terrible to watch these issues get minimized and people be too stupid to know better, and my dad is very intelligent, but he just really didn't get it. I just stood there silent because I knew what was going to happen, and then after my mom pulled me aside and said "did that indicate to you that it's terminal?" It's just weird how some people grasp reality despite trauma, and some don't.

Wow, I can really relate to a lot of what you have written. I finally have a dentist that agrees with me that I should leave my wisdom teeth in if there is nothing wrong with them (I'm 46). I have never had surgery before. How do I know how I'm going to react to the medications? I finally pressed one of my dentists to just come out and say what was so bad about my wisdom teeth. He said they might get a cavity! I said all my other teeth might get a cavity too and no one has suggested that I get rid of them! And guess what, since then one of my wisdom teeth has gotten a cavity, and guess what happened? The dentist filled it! Big whoop! It cost me $140 instead of thousands and was a lot less risky! (I don't have dental insurance).

When my Mom had cancer they really wouldn't come out and say it was terminal either. I knew though - I looked it up. So I was ready for several months and my Dad and brother didn't really accept it until two days before she died. About six months before my Mom died (that's when we found out it had come back) my Dad asked me how long I thought she might have I said based on what I read 18 months is the max amount. Dad couldn't get the doctors to get any more specific than to say she probably didn't have 10 years. He chose to believe the most optimistic interpretation possible. We all wanted her to live. Why was I able to accept reality more easily? I know the doctors don't have an easy job telling the family how long someone has because they can't say exactly how long someone has (although I think they could have been a little more specific than she probably doesn't have 10 years) and I guess they know some people won't accept it no matter what they say. We got Mom into hospice treatment 2 days before she died and the booklets they gave us to tell when the signs were showing death was near were very helpful. They were right on target. I was the only one who actually read it though.

 

[CHERIE.T]

(Hugs) to you Vulture.

 

[Nore]

Hi All, just peeked in to see if they came to their senses yet. Sometimes it takes a strong person to face the truth. I can imagine the shape of her body! Maybe they silently buried her. Will be hard to say she is dead all of a sudden.:seeya: