Jahi’s family wants her declared 'alive again’

[CHERIE.T]

View attachment 60706
hope the photo works

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-moving-command-claiming-proves-s-alive.html

the screenshot from video

JMO and i'm no radiologist but it looks to me like her brain has pretty much liquefied in the middle. Part of the corpus callosum has been turned into a puddle and the rest looks pretty abnormal too.

View attachment 60707

Here's what a more healthy brain looks like
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/files/2009/07/019852403ximaging-techniques1.jpg

Shocking... has a medical professional explained this xray to the fam?

 

[Donjeta]

OK well I'm probably too cynical for my own good but it has occurred to me that if people were so inclined they could have other people in the room pulling invisible strings, apply electricity stimulation underneath the covers, or simply edit the audiotrack to insert an appropriate command to a random twitch.

But, the cup falling out of her hand just seemed inevitable to me, and if you know there are random foot twitches it's probably easy enough to time a command to a random twitch. If you record enough video it will happen randomly eventually.


I have a really hard time believing that any of this is real because whatever Dolan & co are claiming now, there still are the brain scans Fisher relied on that said she had no blood flow to her brain two weeks after the surgery, and even if there is some bloodflow there now I can't imagine there could be enough cortical activity to understand verbal commands after two weeks or more without brain circulation. Shewmon is saying that maybe the scans weren't sensitive enough to distinguish low blood flow from no blood flow but even if that's true her brain circulation was severely compromised for such a long time...

 

[threecrazykids]

I am just curious...is it possible that her brain wouldn't actually liquify but rather do the opposite? Maybe harden up...or what I would call something similar to calcifying? Would that attribute to the shrinkage, but not "draining" or "liquifying" as predicted?

I have ZERO medical knowledge...so I'm curious if that's even possible. Sorry, if that is a dumb question...just trying to understand what the heck is going on. :thinking:

 

[meanmaryjean]

NASCAR for nerds made me spit my Diet Pepsi onto my laptop screen.

totally worth it

 

[al66pine]

Prof. Thaddeus M.Pope, J.D. Ph.D., Hamline University Health Law Institute and Albany Medical College
http://medicalfutility.blogspot.com/ Mon. Oct 6 pub.

"The legal mechanism that the Jahi McMath family is using to reopen the January 2014 judgment of death is with a writ of error coram nobis.
"The function of this wit is to bring to the attention of a court errors of fact which could not have been discovered by the petitioner at an earlier date, and which if known to the court at the time would have prevented entry of the judgment. People v. Cole, 152 Cal.App.2d 71, 312 P.2d 701 (1957).
" This writ is a remedy of narrow scope. But its basic purpose seems to be satisfied here. That purpose is to secure relief, where no other remedy exists, from a judgment rendered. The prerequisites are

1. There existed some fact which would have prevented its rendition if the trial court had known it.
2. That fact through no negligence or fault of the applicant, was not then known to the court.
3. The applicant for the writ shows that the facts upon which he relies were not known to him and could not, in the exercise of due diligence, have been discovered by him at any time substantially earlier than the time of his motion for the writ."

bbm

 

[al66pine]

Originally Posted by K_Z Paper presented in May 2014 at an American Academy of Neurology meeting.
Note: 4 of the co-authors are Philip Defina, Dr. Calixto Machado, Dr. Charles Prestigiacomo, and (former) Dr. Jonathan Fellus (who had his medical license revoked this past summer.) The first 3 are part of Dolan's team of medical experts.
http://www.neurology.org/content/82/...nt/P4.285.long

Has this team had any 'luck' bringing patients into recovery after massive brain injuries? .... :candle:

sbm bbm

Short answer, IIUC, they claim to have brought about changes in VS & MCS patients; and yes, w one BD patient.
Long answer from the abstract (abstract only) of paper at link above, w bbm sbm ubm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Objective: Describe a comprehensive multi-modal approach to reversing brain death."

"Background: Historically, treating coma, vegetative (VS) or minimally conscious states (MCS) is rarely attempted due to poor prognosis, especially after 3 months. [discusses 'improvements in some VS & MCS patients] ... under the
International Brain Injury Foundation’s Advanced Care Protocol (ACP).
3 This same ACP was here used in the first ever reversal of brain death (BD).

"Methods:Four neurologists diagnosed a female, aged 28 as brain dead (BD) following overdose-induced (quetiapine, diazepam) asystole."

"Results: The following changes evolved over three to six weeks on the ACP. QEEG recorded robust, differentiated activity; BIS exceeded 80 sustained for 20 after CES. Vital signs coupled to noxious stimuli; body temperature stabilized. Evoked potentials correlated to familiar voices; desmopressin intervals increased from 18 to 32 hours; head lateralized to mother’s voice; semi-purposeful finger movements emerged with inconsistent ‘thumbs-up’ to command.

Conclusions: Treatment-induced reversal of BD was evidenced by functional recovery across several domains. ACP neuromodulation optimizes cerebral functioning: electrical stimulation increases metabolic coupling; nutraceuticals promote healing, repair and neurotransmitter production while attenuating inflammatory cascades and free-radical damage. BD may not be definitively irreversible and deserves therapeutic consideration."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First ever reversal of brain death??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
.............................................If true, isn't this headline, front page news in gen interest publications????????????????
Or is it a gross overstatement?
..............................................IIRC, Dolan's Sept 30 ct-filed memo states Jahi's brain death reversal is the first ever.
jmo moo

 

[MyBelle]

For anyone who has ever been forced to consent to cease life support this whole case must be painful and must be triggering a lot of people into unplanned guilt trips. I hope that there is resolution soon through the courts.

I agree, the courts need to get this resolved. But I'm not sure what guilt trips anybody would be taking. I think all Dr. Showman is saying in his affidavit is that the current criteria in determining brain death are not as reliable as the scientific and medical community has believed. He points out that Jahi had a flat EEG last December and now it shows electrical activity and that a truly "dead" brain would not be able to show any activity. He said her heart rate changes when her mother speaks. He points out a corpse can not menstruate.

iow, Jahi was never actually brain "dead" even though she was properly diagnosed. The doctors weren't wrong, the criteria is wrong. Showman's point is that the statutory/legal diagnostic criteria need to change.

JMO

 

[Donjeta]

I think the point about guilt trips is that people who have been told that their relative is brain dead and agreed to turn off life support because they were told it's irreversible and counts as death might be getting second thoughts if it turned out that brain death as defined by the current criteria is actually not completely irreversible

they might be thinking, what if my relative was still alive, what if we killed him/her while there was still a chance, what if the criteria were wrong in his case too

however unrealistic

 

[wendiesan]

I don't understand the remarks about how Shewmon had no time to receive the raw data from the EEG's. Why? Dolan was under no deadline to file the court papers, Jahi is not going anywhere, the whole thing was months late anyway, there was no reason that I can see they couldn't have waited for a few days for Shewmon to receive all the data. Better yet, fly him in to do some actual testing himself so he doesn't have to testify about second hand data that he hasn't seen.

There is a need to "rush" if you don't want your expert to have time to form an opinion that differs from what you want him to say.
Shewmon was careful to state that his opinion was based on the materials which he had been sent by Dolan, and the opinions of people whose testimony he was inclined to believe.
Shewmon has not conducted tests on Jahi himself, if I've read the document correctly, and, therefore, has no first-hand knowledge of Jahi's current physical, mental, or emotional state.

 

[CHERIE.T]

I am just curious...is it possible that her brain wouldn't actually liquify but rather do the opposite? Maybe harden up...or what I would call something similar to calcifying? Would that attribute to the shrinkage, but not "draining" or "liquifying" as predicted?

I have ZERO medical knowledge...so I'm curious if that's even possible. Sorry, if that is a dumb question...just trying to understand what the heck is going on. :thinking:

IIRC, people who have Altshimers have brains thaT calcify.

People who are BRAIN DEAD HAVE BRAINS THAT EVENTUALLY LIQUEFY FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD. please excuse caps.

 

[MyBelle]

I think the point about guilt trips is that people who have been told that their relative is brain dead and agreed to turn off life support because they were told it's irreversible and counts as death might be getting second thoughts if it turned out that brain death as defined by the current criteria is actually not completely irreversible

they might be thinking, what if my relative was still alive, what if we killed him/her while there was still a chance, what if the criteria were wrong in his case too

however unrealistic

It is a legal criteria that defines death. If it is flawed, it needs to be adjusted from a legal perspective. Dolan has never suggested Jahi's brain injury is completely reversible.

Years ago, our close friends were told their son had no hope of recovering from a massive head injury sustained in a car accident on his way to school. There isn't any guilt that I've seen. They've met some of the organ recipients and are comforted by it.

JMO

 

[katydid23]

I think the point about guilt trips is that people who have been told that their relative is brain dead and agreed to turn off life support because they were told it's irreversible and counts as death might be getting second thoughts if it turned out that brain death as defined by the current criteria is actually not completely irreversible

they might be thinking, what if my relative was still alive, what if we killed him/her while there was still a chance, what if the criteria were wrong in his case too

however unrealistic

My mom had to make the tough decision to take my dad off life support. I know it is not nearly as heartbreaking, in that he was in his 80's, and had already lived a full and fulfilling life. It is not at all the same as unplugging a young child from life support.

However, looking at Jahi does not make me wonder if we made the wrong decision. Quite the opposite. We were in the hospice for only 2 weeks. My dad was 'gone' already in many senses. He never regained consciousness and knew nothing that was going on around him. He was much like jahi in that sense. And I cannot even imagine what it would be like to watch him in that condition for a year already. That would be torturous for the family and for him. There is no quality to that kind of 'life.' What is the point of lying there, hooked up to machines that keep your heart beating if you have no brain power?

 

[katydid23]

It is a legal criteria that defines death. If it is flawed, it needs to be adjusted from a legal perspective. Dolan has never suggested Jahi's brain injury is completely reversible.

Years ago, our close friends were told their son had no hope of recovering from a massive head injury sustained in a car accident on his way to school. There isn't any guilt that I've seen. They've met some of the organ recipients and are comforted by it.

JMO

How is that legal criteria flawed? Does Jahi seem 'alive' in any real way? Is it a good thing that she has been lying in bed hooked up to the machines?

 

[MyBelle]

There is a need to "rush" if you don't want your expert to have time to form an opinion that differs from what you want him to say.
Shewmon was careful to state that his opinion was based on the materials which he had been sent by Dolan, and the opinions of people whose testimony he was inclined to believe.
Shewmon has not conducted tests on Jahi himself, if I've read the document correctly, and, therefore, has no first-hand knowledge of Jahi's current physical, mental, or emotional state.

I'm not sure how or why you are concluding that Dr. Shewmon is simply saying what Dolan wants him to say.

Dr. Shewmon does not have to personally conduct a test to form a professional opinion about the results. What he said he had not yet received was "raw data." He clearly states that he spoke to the experts who did conduct the tests such as the EEG and they are submitting their own reports.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

How is that legal criteria flawed? Does Jahi seem 'alive' in any real way? Is it a good thing that she has been lying in bed hooked up to the machines?

I think what Dr. Shewmon is stating is that under California law, Jahi is alive because her brain shows activity that was in some way obscured in the earlier testing. A person who is not brain dead can not be declared legally dead under California statute. The statute states that ALL brain function must be absent.

7180. (a) An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards. (b) This article shall be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this article among states enacting it. (c) This article may be cited as the Uniform Determination of Death Act.



http://www.braindeath.org/law/california.htm

 

[K_Z]

Regarding Dr. Shewmon's philosophies, it's my opinion that he would consider any patient with a beating heart who meets brain death criteria to be an "alive organism". He does not consider the brain to be important in the philosophical discussion of "alive"-- if the body functions with somatic support (ventilator, provision of IV or enteral fluids and nutrition), then he considers the organism alive. He leaves the determination of whether that organism is a human person to others.

He would perhaps answer that he does not need to examine Jahi to determine, within his philosophy, that she is "alive", as long as her body functions on a ventilator with other nutrition and fluids for support.

Read this link carefully-- it is as close to sitting down with a cup of coffee and having discussion with Dr. Shewmon as we can get.

https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/pcbe/transcripts/nov07/session5.html

He recognizes that humans enact laws regarding determination of death, and brain death. He clearly realizes that all kinds of people without any brain function meet the legal criteria of "alive" or "dead" based upon the laws where they live. His is a purely philosophical argument based on science-- not a religious one. If the organism is capable of any kind of functioning, it is "alive" in his philosophy. I daresay that he would even consider a person with no brain function and an artificial heart, or on cardiopulmonary bypass, "alive", if any aspect of the rest of the body was able to function with the support of the artificial heart or bypass machine. He might even consider a decapitated body alive, if it was possible to provide ventilator support and nutrition, and the body continued to function. For him, if I understand his philosophy correctly, "life" is all about the functioning of cells, and organ systems-- if they function at all, they are "alive". Alive as in "an organism."

So, it may not matter to him if SPECT is not sensitive enough, or EEG brain waves are weak, nonexistent, or present-- if any aspect of the intact corpus (body) functions, to him that equals "alive". I think that's why he was willing to put forth his affidavit to the court without doing an exam in person of Jahi. Jahi is "alive" enough for his philosophy to consider her "alive."

Now, legal definitions of brain death are a whole nother conversation, especially as the definitions of alive and dead affect eligibility for government support and other monies. He recognizes Jahi is dead under the laws of California and the UDDA. I think he also knows it's pretty unlikely those laws will change anytime soon. So, he's focusing on little technicalities in Jahi's case that are contrary to typical death criteria, to attempt to persuade the courts that she no longer meets the California definition of brain dead. That's how I read it.

I actually don't think the courts will ultimately reverse the determination of death for Jahi, but it will be interesting to watch how this plays out. It is a fascinating philosophical discussion, especially with religion left out of the discussion. Especially what it means to be "human" vs what it means to be an "organism". Quite fascinating, IMO.

 

[Donjeta]

It is a legal criteria that defines death. If it is flawed, it needs to be adjusted from a legal perspective. Dolan has never suggested Jahi's brain injury is completely reversible.

Years ago, our close friends were told their son had no hope of recovering from a massive head injury sustained in a car accident on his way to school. There isn't any guilt that I've seen. They've met some of the organ recipients and are comforted by it.

JMO

Yeah... IIRC from the earlier threads the criteria for declaring brain death have been revised and rewritten a few times so it's not out of the question that they could be revised again. But I think that before using Jahi as evidence that the criteria need to be changed we should see impartial tests from people who have no dog in this race. There seems to be a strong possibility for confirmation bias in the interpretation of Jahi's twitches, and was the EEG really reliably administered? The guys at the IBRF institute seem more than a little iffy to me, the way they're marketing their cures, and Fellus being struck off didn't help either, and they went to the press saying they could help Jahi before seeing her. Shewmon seems respectable enough but I understand he's not examined Jahi personally so anything he has is second hand and only as reliable as the sources of his information and he appears to have a strong philosophy about brain death.

Give me an experienced neurologist who is not out to prove he can cure brain death or philosophisizing about whether it's our duty to keep brain dead individuals on life support forevermore on the off chance that the existence that they have could be somehow considered life, and have him arrange an EEG and the rest of the tests and once he says Jahi has brain activity I'd be more convinced.


I have a huge problem with the way Dolan is not saying Fisher et al's diagnosis was wrong because if it wasn't wrong Jahi was without brain blood flow for a long time and then logically she must be brain dead.

Unless maybe there was a divine miracle.... but if there was a divine miracle it was left sadly half-way and unfinished.

 

[seattlechiquita]

omg are these people for real? My level of disgust with them and those feeding their delusions is growing.

 

[sunflowerchick]

I am not trying to start a religious debate here and my questions are mostly hypothetical but can someone explain to me the logic of expecting a miracle while relying on science to perform said miracle? In other words, if this family truly believes it is God's will for Jahi to survive this, why not take her off life support and let the miracle happen? If they don't do that because they know it won't work, then isn't it God's will to let her go?

 

[Hiandmighty]

I am not trying to start a religious debate here and my questions are mostly hypothetical but can someone explain to me the logic of expecting a miracle while relying on science to perform said miracle? In other words, if this family truly believes it is God's will for Jahi to survive this, why not take her off life support and let the miracle happen? If they don't do that because they know it won't work, then isn't it God's will to let her go?

Yes, I agree.

I assume there will be a hearing? Anyone know when/where?

I think this is so very sick of the family. I'm sad for them, but wanting to believe something will happen if you want it very badly is "magical thinking"-- it's not reality,.