Jahi McMath case in California

[sparkles]

Since there is always an economic aspect to these situations, what are the economic ramifications if families get to decide when a patient has died? Who is paying for all this care? Insurance companies will opt out right after the doctors claim a patient is brain-dead. Right now, Jahi's family has economic support to continue down this road. What about the next family that wants to make the decision but does not have the means to provide continuing care? Will it be dependent solely on who can afford it or will they expect the government, through Medi-Caid or Medicare to pick up the tab? That would mean that available funds would be funneled to care for deceased individuals rather than the living. The economics of this decision is something that must be addressed. Talk about a slippery slope...

Then we really WILL have death panels. And no one can blame it on Obama.

[Coconut Flan]

Based on all the potential problems that can arise from families deciding on when death occurs (first time in my life I've encountered that concept in recent times), I think the judge made the wrong decision. Does anyone know why he didn't tell the family she was pronounced dead on date x so there is no reason for an injunction or allow one more doctor to examine her and if that doctor said she was brain dead give them an hour and then done?

[salex]

Since there is always an economic aspect to these situations, what are the economic ramifications if families get to decide when a patient has died? Who is paying for all this care? Insurance companies will opt out right after the doctors claim a patient is brain-dead. Right now, Jahi's family has economic support to continue down this road. What about the next family that wants to make the decision but does not have the means to provide continuing care? Will it be dependent solely on who can afford it or will they expect the government, through Medi-Caid or Medicare to pick up the tab? That would mean that available funds would be funneled to care for deceased individuals rather than the living. The economics of this decision is something that must be addressed. Talk about a slippery slope...

They said originally that the care facility was providing the care for free. They had asked for 20K to move the body to the new facility. (but that was, I thought when they were going cross country) They have raised roughly 60K on gofundme and asked for checks mailed directly to them in in ohter venues. IF they show pictures of her that more or less prove she is dead, all the people on the facebook site and still donating money will realize what has been happening and the money will dry up.

https://www.facebook.com/#!/keepJahiMcmathonlifesupport

(Public site)

The facebook group appears to block anyone who posts a negative comment.... and are now rejoicing and recommending a healthy diet including fishoil to heal jahi....

[starfish]

Based on all the potential problems that can arise from families deciding on when death occurs (first time in my life I've encountered that concept in recent times), I think the judge made the wrong decision. Does anyone know why he didn't tell the family she was pronounced dead on date x so there is no reason for an injunction or allow one more doctor to examine her and if that doctor said she was brain dead give them an hour and then done?

Because he was a chicken and afraid to anger this family.

And quite wrong.

[Rachel333]

I want them to get their miracle, I really do. I hope it's true that her condition is improving and her brain could become functional again. That would be amazing.

Unfortunately, though, she is dead. They're giving a lot of people false hope and taking money that could be used to help living children, and it's all going to end badly. This story just makes me really sad.

[Buzzard]

And now the LAtimes is feeding the trolls (aka - the lawyer).

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/commenta ... z2qzdfxwSF

Some finer points:

Despite the incendiary, hateful public rhetoric that has surrounded this case, I believe that self-interest alone should lead most Americans to thank Nailah Winkfield, Jahi's anguished mother, for her courage.

Self interest? What self interest? I should hope that should I find myself in the extremely unfortunate circumstance Jahi found herself in my family has the courage to do the exact opposite of what Ms. Winkfield has done. She has not demonstrated courage, she has demonstrated selfishness.

It has been amazing to see how many people think they have a right to an opinion about this child, this mother, this family and the issues in this case. Self-righteous commenters and commentators who have no firsthand knowledge of the facts or the people involved pretend they can somehow know not only what's best for Jahi but what's best for society in such situations. They take it upon themselves to proclaim what will relieve or prolong the family's suffering, what will desecrate Jahi or honor her, and they feel justified in sharing it with the world in mean-spirited terms.

I'm sorry, WHAT? I have every fucking right to have an opinion when you go on the news, shill for money, and put up a facebook page. In fact, I get to have an opinion based merely on the fact that you are publishing a fucking EDITORIAL in an international newspaper. Do I have firsthand knowledge? Nope. Do I need it? Nope. Why? Because people who know a fuckton more than I do about the circumstances and who DO have firsthand knowledge have filed papers in court that tell me everything I need to know. We have laws about desecrating corpses because its pretty common knowledge what is and is not acceptable in our society. Those laws are in place for a hell of a lot longer than I've been around and there's a reason for them. I dont have to pretend that I'm saying what is or is not desecration, this just is.

For the most part, those who have attacked Jahi's family argue these simplistic, uninformed points: The family is either stupid, misled by their lawyer or trying to exploit the system. Why can't they simply accept the doctors' decrees? Why should they be different?

Yeah, pretty much.

In New Jersey and New York, for example, there is accommodation for those who do not accept "brain death" as the appropriate criterion. According to New Jersey law, "the death of an individual shall not be declared upon the basis of neurological criteria … when such a declaration would violate the personal religious beliefs or moral convictions of that individual." The McMath family's position isn't ridiculous or unheard of. There would have been no legal battle if Jahi had had her tonsils out in New Jersey.

Religious beliefs? We keep hearing about these but you havent elaborated. Please fill us in. Also, please stop misleading the public on the procedure she had, this wasnt a simple tonsillectomy. "Legal Battle" or not, she's still dead.

And the rush to abrogate Nailah and Jahi's constitutional rights is as reprehensible as the widespread ignorance about the limits of "brain death." These rights include the 1st Amendment right to freedom of expression of religion, and the 4th and 14th amendment rights to privacy and personal liberty.

HUH? I think someone needs to go back to con law. Where has the government prohibited your expression of religion, searched your shit, or taken your stuff? Children's hospital is not a state hospital in any way.

Those who attack Nailah's decision and who are "pro-choice" on the issue of abortion should think hard about the fallout from their insistence that the family's personal and private decision about when life ends can and should be overridden by doctors or the state. The same rights that support the choice made by Nailah also support contraceptive rights and abortion rights.

Gotta throw that in there just for fun, eh?

Nailah has eloquently made her own case: "That's my daughter; I love her," she told me. "As long as she is fighting, and God has her heart beating, I will fight with and for her. She needs some time, God needs some time; I've seen what medicine has done, now I want to see what God can do."

Nailah's fight is the fight of a loving mother for her child. It is a fight for privacy in the making of a medical decision. It is a fight for a strongly held belief in the miracles and mercy promised by the Bible.

If any among her critics share her faith, how could they call her ignorant or ridiculous for actually believing in the power and mercy of God? If they would have made a different decision, then right-on, they are Americans and they get to make their own choice.

God needs time? How the hell do you know that? This isnt a matter of faith, this is a matter of reason and resources. This guy needs to get off his soap box and start explaining to these people how to bury this child.

[Koala]

There are strong cases to be made for legalized euthanasia. My aunt had early onset Alzheimer's, and by age 65 was needing assistance for even basic functions. Since she turned 70, she's basically been in somewhat of a vegetative state. She's awake, and sits propped up in a chair, but has no ability to do anything. That's no quality of life.

I have always said that we force people to live in conditions in which we would never consider letting the family pet live.

My great-grandmother lived alone until she was in her early nineties. She suffered a massive stroke one day and would have died if my grandfather hadn't found her. Anyway, she spent a good 3 years in a complete vegetative state. She was fed through a tube. She could not move at all. She was effectively trapped in her own body. NO ONE should have to live like that. It was heartbreaking.

[BalconySmoker]

I have a potentially offensive question, my apologies if this triggers any disturbing thoughts for anyone.

If somebody is completely brain dead, does their body begin decaying? What begins body decomposition after death, is it brain activity cessation or when the heart stops beating?

[bionicmlle]

I have a potentially offensive question, my apologies if this triggers any disturbing thoughts for anyone.

If somebody is completely brain dead, does their body begin decaying? What begins body decomposition after death, is it brain activity cessation or when the heart stops beating?

tissue only decays when it doesn't have supply of oxygen, essentially. So, since there is no blood flow in the brain, it does begin to decompose/atrophy/liquefy but other tissues would not unless they, too, have no blood supply (for instance, if someone has a severe brain injury/stroke due to very low blood pressure/blood loss, their gut may also lose blood flow and the tissue would die).

[RachelB]

Nailah has eloquently made her own case: "That's my daughter; I love her," she told me. "As long as she is fighting, and God has her heart beating, I will fight with and for her. She needs some time, God needs some time; I've seen what medicine has done, now I want to see what God can do."

Nailah's fight is the fight of a loving mother for her child. It is a fight for privacy in the making of a medical decision. It is a fight for a strongly held belief in the miracles and mercy promised by the Bible.

If any among her critics share her faith, how could they call her ignorant or ridiculous for actually believing in the power and mercy of God? If they would have made a different decision, then right-on, they are Americans and they get to make their own choice.

How does that square with omnipotence? If one takes the miracle stories literally, and it would seem that Jahi's family does, Jesus didn't "need some time" to raise Jairus's daughter from her sickbed. He didn't "need some time" to call Lazarus out of the tomb.

This whole situation is just sad.

[Arete]

I would not bring euthanasia into this discussion at all. That is exactly the kind of smoke and mirrors the lawyer is trying to put up. He wants to lump this as just another type of end of life issue to hide what he is doing...attempting to gain noteriety on a child's corpse. No, it is NOT up to individual family members to determine when death has occurred, nor should it be. That is completely seperate from the question of whether we should be allowed to hasten death under certain medical circumstances.

[starfish]

When he uses the term "moral convictions" and "religious beliefs" he really means "the belief that the SSI/Veteran's Benefits/Social Security/pension monthly payments should keep rolling in".

[NellieBell]

Just imagine the future if a doctor's diagnosis of death can be overruled by the family. There would be a huge number of much needed hospital beds ( not to mention medical personnel, equipment) being occupied by corpses. All so families can fool themselves, delaying the inevitable and selfishly using valuable resources that are needed for the living sick.

This family thought they could bully this hospital into getting their way. I'm glad that both the family and the sleaze ball ambulance chaser were denied it. I only wish the judge had grown a spine earlier. Someone needs to set a precedent and stop cowering to lawsuit threats. Our jobs are hard enough without the added stress of worrying if you charted enough to hold up in a court of law. I don' t know how some of these nurses and doctors manage after having to defend themselves routinely. I'd toss in the towel and work a different job before I would allow myself to be on edge everyday on the job. It's not good for the patients and certainly not the skilled staff. We already have mandatory routine meetings regarding legal issues, more so than patient care. This has to stop now.

Oh and the McMath family needs to put their grifted money where their big, attention seeking lying mouths are and post pictures and videos. I'm sure her improvement would only bolster donations right? Yeah, thought so.

[Buzzard]

I would not bring euthanasia into this discussion at all. That is exactly the kind of smoke and mirrors the lawyer is trying to put up. He wants to lump this as just another type of end of life issue to hide what he is doing...attempting to gain noteriety on a child's corpse. No, it is NOT up to individual family members to determine when death has occurred, nor should it be. That is completely seperate from the question of whether we should be allowed to hasten death under certain medical circumstances.

Shall we lay odds a contingency shows up at a local right to life march today wearing "Jahi" shirts? I can see it now... A shirt with her picture with verbiage to the extent of "a beating heart..."

[CallmeChaCha]

Shall we lay odds a contingency shows up at a local right to life march today wearing "Jahi" shirts? I can see it now... A shirt with her picture with verbiage to the extent of "a beating heart..."

That gives me chills. But, sadly, would not surprise me

[NellieBell]

I have a potentially offensive question, my apologies if this triggers any disturbing thoughts for anyone.

If somebody is completely brain dead, does their body begin decaying? What begins body decomposition after death, is it brain activity cessation or when the heart stops beating?

I meant to answer your question yesterday but I got called in to work. Decomposition of the brain has already begun and I believe there is probably only sludge left in her skull. I also believe I heard that brain matter was reported to have begun exiting her nostrils while she was still in the hospital. The quickest decomp would not take place until her circulatory system ceases, which is when her heart stops. But that does not mean that her body is not already breaking down. There are so many different body systems and they all require a delicate check and balance to keep us going. Someone mentioned that her small intestine is sloughing out and exiting her anus. I have no idea what will go on with the tube feeding, but her body will not be processing it and I don't see how peristalsis could be taking place.

I have a friend who works in a transplant unit and she said the amount of monitors and medications to keep the donor in good shape until the organs are harvested is astonishing and very expensive. There's a multitude of medications, i.v. solutions and hormones involved and it's very difficult even with all of our medical advances. That's why there is usually less than 48 hours between notification and transplant.

If you'd like an in depth answer, I'd suggest going to the website Trials And Tribulations and searching for Jahi McMath. The last time I was there, there were three separate postings and some really good expert answers - from physicians and nurses who work these sort of cases. You can also download the affidavit of one of the last physicians to testify for the hospital where she explained how she witnessed Jahi's body beginning to break down before she was officially released to the coroner.

Hope this helps.

[gustava]

Nellie...Thanks for the referral to Trials and Tribulations.

[NellieBell]

You're welcome Gustava. It's an incredible reference site for people who want to learn the truth.

[BalconySmoker]

Thank you for the information. That is so disturbing to think that this has continued on for so long.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

Since I know people are also following the pregnant Texas woman, here is an article on her. The baby is indeed abnormal:

rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/22/attorneys-brain-dead-pregnant-texas-womans-fetus-is-abnormal/

[Stephanie66]

I check in here to see if her family has come to their senses. Apparently not.

[ADoyle90815]

Thank you for the information. That is so disturbing to think that this has continued on for so long.

I agree, in fact I checked back on this thread to see if the family has finally decided to let her go.

[Lillybee]

This is slightly off topic but not really. It is about the woman whose family was denied the right to take her off life support because she is pregnant. Her family's lawyers are claiming that the fetus is suffering from many deformities.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/22/a ... -abnormal/

not breaking link Raw Story won't care.

[gustava]

When he uses the term "moral convictions" and "religious beliefs" he really means "the belief that the SSI/Veteran's Benefits/Social Security/pension monthly payments should keep rolling in".

I don't think this is about money for Jahi's mother. Her brother may be in it for the money, but not the mother. The mother might not be rational, but she's not a grifter.

[Coconut Flan]

There are no monthly payments rolling in. She's been declared dead and a death certificate was issued. The government is informed when deaths occur so the payments can be stopped. Should the family receive payments they aren't entitled to then they'll be required to repay the overpayment.