Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I don't understand is why anyone is blaming the attorney. An attorney's job is to represent the interest of his client. Jahi's mom feels that it is her best interest to keep her daughter above ground and hold on to her false hopes of recovery. Her attorney has made sure that she gets to do that. It is not his job to make her understand brain death or to brow beat her into pulling the plug. He is not a doctor and he is not her nanny. She is a grown woman fully capable of making her own choices regardless of what anyone thinks of them.
I notice that brain death is conspicuously absent from that list. How do you reestablish circulation to a brain that has none? Cells deprived of oxygen and nutrients die. That cannot be regenerated. Even if by some miracle it would be possible to transplant healthy brain cells into that environment, they would die, too.
The only "experiment" I can envision is to see how long the heart of someone who has no brain can be kept beating artificially. When Jahi's heart does stop, will her mother demand she have a pacemaker installed? How long will Dolan continue to foster her delusion that Jahi is alive?
Suzy,
Well thought out questions as usual.
I don't know that I suggested Neurons somehow be implanted in this brain dead 13 y.o. I agree, I don't know how oxygen and more would arrive as needed in living people.
I think it's best to end that part of this thread openly. I'll send you a PM.
I don't know why I hadn't thought about the family fighting a cardiac arrest by having a full code in the orders. I sure hope that doesn't happen!!
Be sure to check out the article I posted above. I'll be more than livid if the lawyer was watching for the right case to challenge CA law.
Mtn. States Resident, I want to take a moment and acknowledge what a tremendous job you have done with this thread. I don't know if I have ever followed a thread so well moderated. You constantly address each issue and infuse with new information all the while treating everybody with the utmost respect! Kudos to you
Thanks for the kind words, J2. I'm not a moderator but have felt strongly if teaching can occur then those who know the answers owe it to those truly asking to try to share knowledge. Fortunately, we've all benefited from excellent posts from many others.
Opinion posts are opinions and everyone is entitled to his/hers. I don't comment on every opinion unless I can offer useful information backed with experience or link.
This is a very difficult subject to address. It helps to have knowledge and to have been a team member on a similar case. But there are so many things I don't know about certain state laws etc. Others have been great to help answer where they could.
Thanks again to all who have participated in the discussion.
I don't know that I suggested Neurons somehow be implanted in this brain dead 13 y.o. I agree, I don't know how oxygen and more would arrive as needed in living people.
I think it's best to end that part of this thread openly. I'll send you a PM.
I don't know why I hadn't thought about the family fighting a cardiac arrest by having a full code in the orders. I sure hope that doesn't happen!!
I only meant that as a hypothetical.
People have to realize that in the context of brain death, a person on a ventilator is not breathing for herself. One of the tests for brain death is to turn off the machine and see if the patient does breathe. If the patient can breathe off the ventilator, brain death has not yet happened. Once brain death does occur, all that is between the patient and cardiac death is the machine. Stop the machine, and when breathing stops, the heart stops soon after. The machine may postpone the inevitable, but it cannot prevent it and continuing to use it is futile. Our religious leaders and the legal profession need to understand that.
Although we would like to be altruistic and allow the family all the time they want, economics do have to come into play. It may take weeks or months for the body to deteriorate enough for the heart to stop despite the ventilator. Who should pay for that? The number of dollars available for health care is finite. How much of that should the family of a brain dead person be entitled to? Should a living person take second place to one who is brain dead?
Quote:
Be sure to check out the article I posted above. I'll be more than livid if the lawyer was watching for the right case to challenge CA law. MSR
I did. Very informative. I agree with you. Legislators, lawyers, and judges who do not understand human physiology and medicine should stay out of medical decision making.
It is true that carefully designed, controlled and closely monitored studies using hyperbaric oxygen chambers are in clinical trials for several neurological and psychiatric disorders. Each study site and protocol is monitored by IRBs and ultimately the FDA.
People have to realize that in the context of brain death, a person on a ventilator is not breathing for herself. One of the tests for brain death is to turn off the machine and see if the patient does breathe. If the patient can breathe off the ventilator, brain death has not yet happened. Once brain death does occur, all that is between the patient and cardiac death is the machine. Stop the machine, and when breathing stops, the heart stops soon after. The machine may postpone the inevitable, but it cannot prevent it and continuing to use it is futile. Our religious leaders and the legal profession need to understand that.
Although we would like to be altruistic and allow the family all the time they want, economics do have to come into play. It may take weeks or months for the body to deteriorate enough for the heart to stop despite the ventilator. Who should pay for that? The number of dollars available for health care is finite. How much of that should the family of a brain dead person be entitled to? Should a living person take second place to one who is brain dead?
I did. Very informative. I agree with you. Legislators, lawyers, and judges who do not understand human physiology and medicine should stay out of medical decision making.
I'm not in entire agreement with this last sentence. The doctor isn't always wise, altruistic or all 'knowing'. Just review the foundation that's currently being discussed. Doctors can and have gone to great lengths to cover up a mistake; not saying that is the case here but it happens. Doctor's need some oversight from time to time as well and other doctors are often unwilling to question a peer.
I'm not sure about the lawyer in THIS case or the judge in THIS case - but should I have a dispute with a medical facility or provider - a lawyer sure does come in handy.
You'd think there would be some serious deterioration of the body by now.
And the clock keeps on ticking.
I know I haven't read anything to the effect of "we're waiting for the heart to stop beating" from the parents or the lawyer. Have I missed something?
Because in the absence of that (which I might...MIGHT...see as a sign of legit religious beliefs), and at the risk of being gross, the parents are basically watching over a liquefying corpse. And possibly letting others experiment on the body. Any notion of any form whatsoever of 'recovery' has long since passed, I feel stupid even re-stating that as it seems achingly obvious. I can't imagine grieving a lost child at all never mind one who would be putrifying before me.
I struggle to see any positive individual or social benefit from this continuing.
I'm not in entire agreement with this last sentence. The doctor isn't always wise, altruistic or all 'knowing'. Just review the foundation that's currently being discussed. Doctors can and have gone to great lengths to cover up a mistake; not saying that is the case here but it happens. Doctor's need some oversight from time to time as well and other doctors are often unwilling to question a peer.
I'm not sure about the lawyer in THIS case or the judge in THIS case - but should I have a dispute with a medical facility or provider - a lawyer sure does come in handy.
Oversight != medical decision making. Outlawing procedures via legislation is medical decision making.
I'd like to see oversight in the form of both medical and lay personnel (with at least basic medical knowledge) reviewing cases with less than optimal outcomes.
When I worked in a hospital, I did work closely with both the Case Manager and the Risk Manager who analyzed outcomes, percentages of complications (including deaths), etc. They presented this information to the administration and the doctors, and each doctor received reports as to their statistics. It was a cardiac center, and so certain doctors had a higher rate of complications due to their willingness to surgically treat higher risk patients.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Dolan ' s Quest
Some Background about the Foundation
