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

[al66pine]

Here is MyBelle's link to the quote. No doubt the Judge said that, imo. But also no doubt it was not the basis for his ruling. Nor is it part of his ruling. He expressed his personal condolences.

"This has been very, very hard on you," Grillo told the family as he made his ruling. "No one anywhere would wish this to happen to anyone. ... I hope you find some comfort in your religion."

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...ults-at-closed


jmo

Karmady, thanks for response.

Yes, I understand the link quotes what the judge said at that hearing.
IUC, those comments he made are not part of the ct order or part of his ruling or ct opinion, as a basis for the decision.

So my request for link to ct record
----------------in which judge addressed religion
----religion is still not answered.

 

[Karmady]

Karmady, thanks for response.

Yes, I understand the link quotes what the judge said at that hearing.
IUC, those comments he made are not part of the ct order or part of his ruling or ct opinion, as a basis for the decision.

So my request for link to ct record
----------------in which judge addressed religion
----religion is still not answered.

I don't think there's any dispute that the Judge's order doesn't reference religion in any way shape or form. But you can look at the court docs on the court link I posted earlier today or on the medicalfutility link that's been posted a bunch, too. The order is among them and was recently reposted here by Donjeta iirc

 

[al66pine]

MyBelle -
I'd like to see ct doc--- judge's order, judge ruling, judge's opinion, i.e. in writing, part of ct record in which judge said something about religion - Jahi's mom's religion, his own religion, or anyone's religious beliefs as part of the basis for his ruling.
Link???

Thx in adv.

 

[MyBelle]

Here is MyBelle's link to the quote. No doubt the Judge said that, imo. But also no doubt it was not the basis for his ruling. Nor is it part of his ruling. He expressed his personal condolences.

"This has been very, very hard on you," Grillo told the family as he made his ruling. "No one anywhere would wish this to happen to anyone. ... I hope you find some comfort in your religion."

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...ults-at-closed


jmo

I didn't contend it was the basis of his ruling. He said it because religion was the reason the family requested the injunction. No Judge is going to mention religion to a family unless they bring it up first. Some families do not practice any religion and that includes Judges.

JMO

 

[Karmady]

I didn't contend it was the basis of his ruling. He said it because religion was the reason the family requested the injunction. No Judge is going to mention religion to a family unless they bring it up first. Some families do not practice any religion and that includes Judges.

JMO

I think everyone can agree that religion was brought up and that the judge mentioned it. The issue is whether it was a legal issue addressed in the case. It sounds like you agree that it wasn't. So...

 

[MyBelle]

I think the problem is that saying religion was "part of" the proceeding suggests that it had anything to do with the outcome in State court. Which it didn't per the Judge's decision and order. The freedom of religion issues could have been addressed in the Federal Court action, but that's been dismissed. So, yeah, it was "raised," but that doesn't mean anything. The judge did not rule that Jahi could be moved or kept on life support for any reason having anything to do with religion. As someone else mentioned, he expressed his personal sentiments on the record. Right now, the law of the case is that Jahi is dead and needn't be kept on life support regardless of her mother's religious beliefs.

jmo

If the Judge's words weren't part of the proceeding, the reporter would not have been able to quote him.

I can't imagine any Judge ordering a hospital to keep a dead body on full IV and vent support for any reason other than to respect the religious views of the family. Can you give another basis for his decision?

 

[K_Z]

Isn't it amazing how it is possible that many people can view the same situation so differently? Reminds me of the old game of "telephone", where the end message has changed substantially from what it was in the first place.

IMO, Jahi's family's response to her diagnosis of brain death has never been about religion at all. I don't personally think their response to her death in December had anything to do with their religious beliefs, and I don't think their current handling and management of the situation has anything to do with religion.

It's fine with me if some want to attribute this mother's resistance to the brain death determination as due to "religion", and endlessly pick at words to try to justify that, but I have never viewed any of the family's actions or reactions as rooted in any kind of religion. But that's just me. IMO. Etc.

Anyone's religious beliefs, truly held or not, can never be proven, or disproven. It's kind of a "beautiful" dead end, IYKWIM.

 

[K_Z]

I think the problem is that saying religion was "part of" the proceeding suggests that it had anything to do with the outcome in State court. Which it didn't per the Judge's decision and order. The freedom of religion issues could have been addressed in the Federal Court action, but that's been dismissed. So, yeah, it was "raised," but that doesn't mean anything. The judge did not rule that Jahi could be moved or kept on life support for any reason having anything to do with religion. As someone else mentioned, he expressed his personal sentiments on the record. Right now, the law of the case is that Jahi is dead and needn't be kept on life support regardless of her mother's religious beliefs.

jmo

Karmady, thank you for this sensible and accurate summary. Worth bumping!

:seeya::tyou:

 

[MyBelle]

Isn't it amazing how it is possible that many people can view the same situation so differently? Reminds me of the old game of "telephone", where the end message has changed substantially from what it was in the first place.

IMO, Jahi's family's response to her diagnosis of brain death has never been about religion at all. I don't personally think their response to her death in December had anything to do with their religious beliefs, and I don't think their current handling and management of the situation has anything to do with religion.

It's fine with me if some want to attribute this mother's resistance to the brain death determination as due to "religion", and endlessly pick at words to try to justify that, but I have never viewed any of the family's actions or reactions as rooted in any kind of religion. But that's just me. IMO. Etc.

Anyone's religious beliefs, truly held or not, can never be proven, or disproven. It's kind of a "beautiful" dead end, IYKWIM.

BBM. You certainly are entitled to your opinion but if you don't personally know the family you certainly aren't one to judge their religion. Dr. Byrne, a physician and educator and devout Catholic doesn't share your opinion of the family. He's met them.

Last I checked, nobody in this country is required to "prove" their religious beliefs and that includes Jahi's parents or Mordechai Brody or anybody else, including me. :seeya:

 

[K_Z]

From this link http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/loca...er-Says-of-Brain-Dead-Daughter-252700851.html

IF those are Jahi's nails shown in the photo, and IF there isn't a base layer of pink polish, then her peripheral circulation and O2 perfusion looks good " to the eye" as far as this one marker of perfusion goes. Obviously, we do not have benefit of any O2/CO2 sensors.

IF her mom is truthful about the vent. being set to room air ( usually stated as 21-28% FiO2, depending upon the elevation from sea level) then again, she's perfusing well, apparently.

IF her mom is truthful about no meds. for her blood pressure or " nothing to maintain any functions", then I take it to mean she's off the Vasopressin, and I never expected that to ever happen. I have seen it stop being effective, usually with a fatal outcome.

For the first time, I'm having a bit of professional curiosity about how the basic functioning can seem to improve vs. deteriorate over 3 months, and I am not addressing the issue of " movement" because I definitely know what Lazarus sign is and there are no videos of Jahi to compare one to the other. IF the interview was correct and not spin, delusion or misguided hope, then I have many more questions than ever. I have never observed this type of thing which the mother is saying, not once... in many years. Nothing about brain dead patients improve over time, they just don't.

Yes, I completely agree. There is no physiological possibility that things are as "rosy" as the picture the mother has painted in her latest interview. We all understand the intense love of a devoted mother, which might bias the perspective of the mother.

But I also recognize that the mother may not even realize she is engaging in "spin, delusion, and misguided hope." I don't think NW's perceptions are accurate, due to her deep love, grief, anger, etc.

I do believe NW deeply loves her daughter--and that love survives death. That is a comfort. And gives me hope that NW can cope with this deep grief (eventually).

I would be interested in the perceptions of a medical professional who has seen Jahi's body recently, and who has experience caring for critically injured neuro patients.

 

[lawstudent]

I didn't contend it was the basis of his ruling. He said it because religion was the reason the family requested the injunction. No Judge is going to mention religion to a family unless they bring it up first. Some families do not practice any religion and that includes Judges.

JMO

His comments were in response to the expert determining she was dead and the fact that therefore the injunction was being lifted, right?

He was saying he hopes their religion comforts them at this time - as in the difficult time of her death. I think it's a stretch to read it other ways.

 

[MyBelle]

I think everyone can agree that religion was brought up and that the judge mentioned it. The issue is whether it was a legal issue addressed in the case. It sounds like you agree that it wasn't. So...

I do believe their religion was the legal basis for the Judge's decision to keep IV fluids and the the Vent hooked up to the body while it was to be moved. The Judge wasn't required to do that yet he did. I can't think of any other reason he would do that than out of respect for the family's religious beliefs.

 

[MyBelle]

His comments were in response to the expert determining she was dead and the fact that therefore the injunction was being lifted, right?

He was saying he hopes their religion comforts them at this time - as in the difficult time of her death. I think it's a stretch to read it other ways.

Really? His comments were after he ordered the IV and Vent remain hooked up for transport. Why would he do that? She was dead in the eyes of the law.

 

[K_Z]

Just an observation, but NW appears to be in the studios of WCAU in her most recent interview. WCAU is a Philadelphia NBC affiliate, and about 10 miles from the address of the Terry Shiavo nonprofit address at Narberth, PA.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/loca...er-Says-of-Brain-Dead-Daughter-252700851.html

WCAU - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/

http://www.distancebetweencities.net/philadelphia_pa_and_narberth_pa/

There are a number of custodial care/ extended care/ skilled nursing facilities in that area. Evangelical Manor on Roosevelt Blvd is one example.

 

[lawstudent]

Really? His comments were after he ordered the IV and Vent remain hooked up for transport. Why would he do that? She was dead in the eyes of the law.

The articles I'm reading with that quote put it after he told them he was lifting the injunction and she would be taken off support soon. Before the transport issue. Are we talking about different quotes?

She was transported, but not because the law respected the idea she was alive - parents can do what they want with the body - it went to the coroner as is normal, and then they moved her. The judge just agreed they could work things out with the hospital to keep the support measures going until a facility was found to take the body, but he wasn't saying they had to treat her as a live patient and do more surgeries.

 

[Donjeta]

Really? His comments were after he ordered the IV and Vent remain hooked up for transport. Why would he do that? She was dead in the eyes of the law.

No, they weren't.

These remarks are after he said that the hospital could remove the vent on December 30th.

It was not until January that the transfer arrangements were made.

Here's the link you posted yesterday:
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking...th-neurologist-present-test-results-at-closed

You can see it's dated 12/24.

OAKLAND -- In a crushing blow to the family of a brain-dead 13-year-old girl, a judge ruled Tuesday that officials at Children's Hospital Oakland can take Jahi McMath off a breathing machine as soon as Monday.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Evelio Grillo handed down the verdict after hearing testimony from two doctors, one an independent expert appointed by the judge on Monday and the other a 30-year veteran of the hospital. Both testified that the teen is brain-dead and that her body is alive only because of a ventilator hooked up to her since Dec. 12.

This was after Fisher testified that Jahi was really brain dead, and at the time it wasn't clear that the family was going to appeal for more time to get Jahi transferred. Later they appealed to get another injunction that pushed back the unhooking until January 7th.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nction-stop-doctors-cutting-life-support.html

The practical arrangements about the transfer were not made until a settlement conference between all the parties on Jan 2nd. Anyway, I expect that the hospital had no problems letting her breathing tubes and IV's stay in place as they would legally have had to stay in place even if she was taken to the mortuary so it may easily have been a matter that everyone agreed about rather than something the judge had to force with an order.

Scroll to the second page for the arrangements
http://www.thaddeuspope.com/images/2014-01-03_Stip.pdf

It would rather defeat the purpose of letting the family transfer her in the first place if they weren't allowed to hook her up to a ventilator and IV lines of their own provider.

 

[K_Z]

Respectfully snipped for focus and BBM:


It's possible Jahi's mother's religious beliefs may initially have sparked her efforts against the hosp, with the atty later fanning the flames.
It's also possible that the judge's rulings re TRO, etc. may have bn subtly or greatly influenced by his personal religious beliefs or his thoughts about Jahi's mother's religious beliefs,

But judge's actual order does not address religion.
Others provided link.

I think it's definitely possible that "the flames" were fanned by someone/s.

It does seem that family opinions and intentions that were originally expressed, were drastically changed, once their new attorney come onboard, back in December, 2013. IMO. Just my observation and speculation.

 

[Donjeta]

Just an observation, but NW appears to be in the studios of WCAU in her most recent interview. WCAU is a Philadelphia NBC affiliate, and about 10 miles from the address of the Terry Shiavo nonprofit address at Narberth, PA.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/loca...er-Says-of-Brain-Dead-Daughter-252700851.html

WCAU - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/

http://www.distancebetweencities.net/philadelphia_pa_and_narberth_pa/

There are a number of custodial care/ extended care/ skilled nursing facilities in that area. Evangelical Manor on Roosevelt Blvd is one example.

The Life and Hope Award gala where she got an award was in Philadelphia 27th March.

 

[Donjeta]

If the Judge's words weren't part of the proceeding, the reporter would not have been able to quote him.

I can't imagine any Judge ordering a hospital to keep a dead body on full IV and vent support for any reason other than to respect the religious views of the family. Can you give another basis for his decision?

To preserve the status quo in order for the litigation to be completed. There were several different court actions in several different courts and as long as the judge wasn't sure what the evidence and the outcome of those rulings would be it was reasonable to preserve the status quo. If he'd allowed the hospital to remove the ventilator straight away he'd effectively have sided with them before the merits of anyone's full case could be heard.

He gave temporary injunctions that ordered the hospital to keep a dead body on IV and vent support for a few days at the time. It was necessary to keep the status quo as Jahi's fate was under legal dispute. At first the parties represented Jahi's current medical status and her prognosis to the court in different terms and more time on the ventilator was needed in order to get an independent expect to evaluate Jahi. When the independent expert had given his views the judge said that the hospital could take her off the ventilator on December 30th. Then there was another petition filed by the family and he extended the temporary injunction and said the hospital could take her off the ventilator on January 7th.

The family's religious views about Jahi's fate, whatever anyone may have thought them to be, probably weren't going to change on either December 30th or January 7th.

 

[MyBelle]

To preserve the status quo in order for the litigation to be completed. There were several different court actions in several different courts and as long as the judge wasn't sure what the evidence and the outcome of those rulings would be it was reasonable to preserve the status quo. If he'd allowed the hospital to remove the ventilator straight away he'd effectively have sided with them before the merits of anyone's full case could be heard.

He gave temporary injunctions that ordered the hospital to keep a dead body on IV and vent support for a few days at the time. It was necessary to keep the status quo as Jahi's fate was under legal dispute. At first the parties represented Jahi's current medical status and her prognosis to the court in different terms and more time on the ventilator was needed in order to get an independent expect to evaluate Jahi. When the independent expert had given his views the judge said that the hospital could take her off the ventilator on December 30th. Then there was another petition filed by the family and he extended the temporary injunction and said the hospital could take her off the ventilator on January 7th.

The family's religious views about Jahi's fate, whatever anyone may have thought them to be, probably weren't going to change on either December 30th or January 7th.

By all means please share with us what the investigations concluded. Thanks.