Family wants to keep life support for girl brain dead after tonsil surgery #9

[LietKynes]

I've been following this case but confess to not having read every post/link.
Sorry if this is too graphic................



How in the world are they keeping Jahi from decomposing if she is truly brain dead ? Doesn't the body begin to break down ?

If she is gone...she is gone, and should be laid to rest. Poor girl.
MOO

 

[Softail]

Remember attorney Sam Singer, who represented CHO back in December?

He has some things to say about the current situation.






And Christopher Dolan says:



http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...i-mcmath-after-lawyer-said-girl-is-improving/

BBM.

Sooooooooooooo..........if the family is not adverse to having tests performed again, AND Jahi's body is being cared for in a Pediatric ICU, at a major pedes hospital, I just don't see the problem. Why the delay? These tests could be performed in the next couple hours.

Unless there is a big risk that the tests will continue to show that she is brain dead, and that the family is misinterpreting what they observe. So that would be a really good reason not to do any more testing. Because actual science, and their faith would still be in conflict. (Except I personally never believed that this whole situation had anything to do with the faith of NW and her family.)

:notgood: It's all such a farce.

I hope Jahi can eventually rest in PEACE. FGS

 

[Nore]

:notgood: It's all such a farce.

I hope Jahi can eventually rest in PEACE. FGS

-----------
Softail we all agree. I should think many Doctors would be reluctant to try for tests as she has a death certificate. If the family wants this done maybe they have to pay for it themselves. Believe me, when someone tries to prove movement on command they are very picky. I really dont see it happening IMO..I doubt she even has reflex movement any more. So sad. Someone (dont know who) needs to put their foot down. This cannot go on forever. I'd like to see a blood workup on her! How can anyone do this to their own child? I just dont know. :seeya:

 

[jjenny]

It makes perfect sense for them to move her to New Jersey, the only state where she could still be considered alive and not dead. She doesn't actually need to show any brain activity in New Jersey to be considered not dead, because New Jersey's law is different from the rest of the country when it comes to brain death.
I presume their next step is to sue the hospital claiming she is alive and needs ongoing care.
If she is not dead, that eliminates the limit one can recover for a dead patient.
Her bills got to be enormous to keep her in ICU.
I presume that was their plan all alone.

 

[CHERIE.T]

It makes perfect sense for them to move her to New Jersey, the only state where she could still be considered alive and not dead. She doesn't actually need to show any brain activity in New Jersey to be considered not dead, because New Jersey's law is different from the rest of the country when it comes to brain death.
I presume their next step is to sue the hospital claiming she is alive and needs ongoing care.
If she is not dead, that eliminates the limit one can recover for a dead patient.
Her bills got to be enormous to keep her in ICU.
I presume that was their plan all alone.

Daum that all makes perfect sense....especially your last paragraph.

 

[lawstudent]

If you mean their strategy is to sue the hospital she was in previously in a different state, I don't think NJ law would give them any claim.

I also think people are confused about NJ law. NJ law has a different definition of legal death from other states - it is not making a medical judgment. 'Actual' death, brain death, and legal death are all different things I guess the best comparison would be the opposite - life. 'Actual' i.e. biological life begins at conception, legal life in some states begins then and in others at viability, and legal life with full rights begins at birth. You can have a fetus without a brain that is 'alive' but only in the most basic sense. You can have 2 separate embryonic lives that fuse into conjoined twins, which legally will be two lives if that twin is developed, and one life it is merely parasitic. Biologically, there are still two lives involved. Then you have all sorts of religious beliefs about when death and life are recognized. Doctors have never argued that brain death and death are the same thing - effectively in terms of future prospects, they are, but it's obviously not the same biological state. N.J. doesn't tell people how to define brain death - it tells them that brain death cannot result in legal death if that conflicts with religious beliefs. Brain death gives permission for legal death, but not a guarantee. Same with a person missing for a long time - eventually you can have them declared legally dead, in accordance with that state's rules - obviously, that may or may not be true - it's just what the state is choosing to recognize, and it can vary.

 

[K_Z]

lawstudent, I'm curious what you think may happen, legally.

Do you think NW and attorney Dolan will attempt to change her status from "dead" (with a death certificate that is supposed to be recognized between all states), to some form of "alive", meaning she regains the rights of a living person? (Including the right to apply for things like SSI and Medicaid, etc.)

Originally I was being somewhat facetious when I posted about them seeking for Jahi to be declared "un-dead", but I really think that they may actually try to have her status changed, now. I doubt if they would ultimately be successful in regaining "living" status for her, but the whole process would definitely generate a lot of attention and publicity, IMO.

What do you think? Will they go there? Will they try to have her declared legally "un-dead?"

It's an interesting conundrum.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

lawstudent, I'm curious what you think may happen, legally.

Do you think NW and attorney Dolan will attempt to change her status from "dead" (with a death certificate that is supposed to be recognized between all states), to some form of "alive", meaning she regains the rights of a living person? (Including the right to apply for things like SSI and Medicaid, etc.)

Originally I was being somewhat facetious when I posted about them seeking for Jahi to be declared "un-dead", but I really think that they may actually try to have her status changed, now. I doubt if they would ultimately be successful in regaining "living" status for her, but the whole process would definitely generate a lot of attention and publicity, IMO.

What do you think? Will they go there? Will they try to have her declared legally "un-dead?"

It's an interesting conundrum.

B...b...but what about the "wrongful death" claims against the hospital that they blame Jahi's condition? Does that not matter any longer if Jahi is deemed to be "alive"? They can't have it both ways...or can they? Jahi's family seems to always get exactly what they want. :moo:

 

[jjenny]

My understanding of the situation. There is a $ limit on wrongful death lawsuits.
There is no $ limit on lawsuits regarding hospital rendering someone severely disabled.
Therefore it makes a lot more sense to sue the hospital for rendering Jahi severely disabled, rather than dead.

 

[jjenny]

If you mean their strategy is to sue the hospital she was in previously in a different state, I don't think NJ law would give them any claim.

I also think people are confused about NJ law. NJ law has a different definition of legal death from other states - it is not making a medical judgment. 'Actual' death, brain death, and legal death are all different things I guess the best comparison would be the opposite - life. 'Actual' i.e. biological life begins at conception, legal life in some states begins then and in others at viability, and legal life with full rights begins at birth. You can have a fetus without a brain that is 'alive' but only in the most basic sense. You can have 2 separate embryonic lives that fuse into conjoined twins, which legally will be two lives if that twin is developed, and one life it is merely parasitic. Biologically, there are still two lives involved. Then you have all sorts of religious beliefs about when death and life are recognized. Doctors have never argued that brain death and death are the same thing - effectively in terms of future prospects, they are, but it's obviously not the same biological state. N.J. doesn't tell people how to define brain death - it tells them that brain death cannot result in legal death if that conflicts with religious beliefs. Brain death gives permission for legal death, but not a guarantee. Same with a person missing for a long time - eventually you can have them declared legally dead, in accordance with that state's rules - obviously, that may or may not be true - it's just what the state is choosing to recognize, and it can vary.

Every state would consider her to be dead because she is brain dead. Except New Jersey. Where she could still be considered alive.
So, if she is alive there, then lawsuit would be about hospital severely injuring her rather than wrongful death.
There is no guarantee it would work, but New Jersey is the only state where it could actually work, since it doesn't necessarily consider a brain dead person to be legally dead.

"If Jahi McMath is at a New Jersey hospital, as one TV-news station reported last week, the 13-year-old Oakland, Calif., girl would be in the “best destination” for a patient declared brain dead, a medical expert said."

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2023899650_njjahixml.html

 

[K_Z]

My understanding of the situation. There is a $ limit on wrongful death lawsuits.
There is no $ limit on lawsuits regarding hospital rendering someone severely disabled.
Therefore it makes a lot more sense to sue the hospital for rendering Jahi severely disabled, rather than dead.

Not only that, IMO, maybe someone really CAN have it both ways-- sue for disability now, keeping options open to "discover" that later on, there was "something" that caused wrongful death.

Double dip. Brilliant, eh?!

I still think there's a triple dip for this ice cream cone, though. Maybe even a full blown hot fudge brownie banana split, with a cherry on top. It's just not time for dessert....yet.

 

[K_Z]

Every state would consider her to be dead because she is brain dead. Except New Jersey. Where she could still be considered alive.
So, if she is alive there, then lawsuit would be about hospital severely injuring her rather than wrongful death.
There is no guarantee it would work, but New Jersey is the only state where it could actually work, since it doesn't necessarily consider a brain dead person to be legally dead.

"If Jahi McMath is at a New Jersey hospital, as one TV-news station reported last week, the 13-year-old Oakland, Calif., girl would be in the “best destination” for a patient declared brain dead, a medical expert said."

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2023899650_njjahixml.html

And as Arthur Caplan said, the statute has not yet been invoked/ challenged, from his research. Who better to "challenge or invoke" than this family? The constitutionality of it all would ensure the issue survived the beating of Jahi's heart.

 

[Melanie]

Found this:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...nd-brain-dead-life-support-christopher-dolan/

OAKLAND (KPIX 5) – Six months after doctors at Children’s Hospital Oakland declared her brain dead, KPIX 5 has learned the whereabouts of 13-year-old Jahi McMath.

She is now in a hospital bed at Saint Peter’s University Hospital in New Brunswick, New Jersey. She is in the pediatric intensive care unit of the Children’s Hospital where patients receive 24-hour, round-the-clock care.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BBM - heaven forbid my child was in a pediatric ICU receiving 24 hour care, I certainly couldn't turn around and say she was doing great. They are keeping her body warm for Lord knows what reason.

So sad.

MOO

Mel

 

[Donjeta]

Every state would consider her to be dead because she is brain dead. Except New Jersey. Where she could still be considered alive.
So, if she is alive there, then lawsuit would be about hospital severely injuring her rather than wrongful death.
There is no guarantee it would work, but New Jersey is the only state where it could actually work, since it doesn't necessarily consider a brain dead person to be legally dead.

"If Jahi McMath is at a New Jersey hospital, as one TV-news station reported last week, the 13-year-old Oakland, Calif., girl would be in the “best destination” for a patient declared brain dead, a medical expert said."

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2023899650_njjahixml.html

Could a California hospital be sued for something that happened in California, governed by California laws, in New Jersey, according to New Jersey legislation?

 

[Karmady]

Could a California hospital be sued for something that happened in California, governed by California laws, in New Jersey, according to New Jersey legislation?

Imo, no. But two points - (1) the dichotomy helps the argument that the family's position is not absurd and what better way to bring the dichotomy to the forefront than to argue about it from a State where the family's position would have been accepted by law ;and (2) I think you can apply for medical benefits from where you are based on the laws where you are. I don't know (2) for a fact, but that would make sense to me. Or at least it would be arguable and would be tough to take the contrary position from a PR perspective. jmo

eta: I misread the question. Yes, the hospital can be sued in NJ. The question is whether the court has jurisdiction (probably no, imo) and what law will apply. The procedural law of the venue applies and the substantive law of the state that prevails in the choice of law analysis will apply. Query whether the distinction between a wrongful death and "living" medical malpractice case in terms of the damages cap is procedural or substantive. This entire case is like a massive law review article! jmo

 

[jjenny]

Could a California hospital be sued for something that happened in California, governed by California laws, in New Jersey, according to New Jersey legislation?

I am not a lawyer so I have no idea. But it sure sounds to me that Dolan is going to try.

"Dolan, a San Rafael resident who has gained newfound prominence as the attorney for Jahi's family, hopes to mount what may be the nation's first challenge to a law linking end of life to brain death."

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_24993248/jahi-mcmath-could-her-case-change-how-california

 

[Nore]

My husband had a brain aneurysm he was left brain dead. My PCP phoned me to talk. I told him we were taking Joe off the ventilator. He told me "you understand if they take him off and his heart continues to beat, he will go to hospice". I said yes. He was taken off. His poor heart beat two weak beats and stopped. They had done all the tests for brain death. I lifted an eyelid and I knew. We both had/have living wills. I knew we did the right thing. This family is out for one thing. I tell you if I'd had to sit there and watch my son or my husband go through the mess Jahi is in, I'd have lost my mind. I'm serious. :seeya:

 

[Tssiemer]

I mean... let the poor girl go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Philigumbo]

My husband had a brain aneurysm he was left brain dead. My PCP phoned me to talk. I told him we were taking Joe off the ventilator. He told me "you understand if they take him off and his heart continues to beat, he will go to hospice". I said yes. He was taken off. His poor heart beat two weak beats and stopped. They had done all the tests for brain death. I lifted an eyelid and I knew. We both had/have living wills. I knew we did the right thing. This family is out for one thing. I tell you if I'd had to sit there and watch my son or my husband go through the mess Jahi is in, I'd have lost my mind. I'm serious. :seeya:

I'm so sorry, Nore, for the loss of your husband. Thank you for sharing your story with us.

 

[Really?]

Not only that, IMO, maybe someone really CAN have it both ways-- sue for disability now, keeping options open to "discover" that later on, there was "something" that caused wrongful death.

Double dip. Brilliant, eh?!

I still think there's a triple dip for this ice cream cone, though. Maybe even a full blown hot fudge brownie banana split, with a cherry on top. It's just not time for dessert....yet.

Ha, were there any pre op papers signed waiving rights to sue? Or am I naive?