13 Year old gir declared brain dead has now officially died

MINNIEsotanice said:
I just had my tonsils out in November. There is no way I could eat toast right after my surgery. Not saying I don't believe others who had. I just can't imagine it. If the hard toast scraped where my tonsils had been I would have jumped out of my skin. Plus the bleeding that could occur from the toast potentially scraping the scabs away. Eating was so painful altogether for at least 3.5 weeks. Right out of surgery I was given a popsicle. I was on so much pain medication right after that my throat didn't hurt. Then day 1 of surgery I felt pretty good. Just slight pain. I was still hoped up from so much pain medication. Day 2 and so forth we're complete misery and the worst thing I've ever experienced. The pain medication wore off and I couldn't keep oral pain meds down. Eating and swallowing we're the worst and I lost 15 pounds because of it. Like I said earlier I would never recommend this surgery for any older patient as it was such an awful recovery.

Ouch! Sounds horrendous :-( I do know though, the younger the patient, the better the recovery. With my DD being just 5 (in the UK doctors will only take them put in adults if it becomes absolutely essential as the recovery is tough) she recovered quickly. You are allowed two weeks off school (to avoid infection) and that is it. You aren't released until you can show you can eat properly (my other post also said DD was offered fish and chips, and given a mouth spray to numb the throat) and she gobbled down toast. She also had throat muscle removed (she was only very underweight and I worried about her not being able to eat) but on day three, she was refusing pain med saying she just wanted cordial and water with her food. If you saw a photo of her the day after the op, you'd think she was catalogue modelling she looked so well!
The older you are, the worse the recovery process. I think the hospitals here are tough!
 
With the latest developments, I wonder if the lawyer is fighting to keep her "alive" in order to sue the hospital for more $. Is that possible? :scratchin
 

For the medical people on here..what is the difference between a vent and a breathing tube? My understanding is the vent was the only thing keeping the heart beating..will a breathing tube do the same thing?
 
With the latest developments, I wonder if the lawyer is fighting to keep her "alive" in order to sue the hospital for more $. Is that possible? :scratchin

They aren't keeping her "alive" and won't be able to get more out of the hospital. Her death certificate was issued with DOD at 12/12/13. That is the day she died. As was said, CHO will likely eat any costs between then and the day they released her to the coroner, but they are now not responsible for her care or the cost of it.
 
/
A vent is the actual machine that blows the oxygen into the patient. The breathing tube is the part that goes into the patient that is then connected to the vent.
 
A vent is the actual machine that blows the oxygen into the patient. The breathing tube is the part that goes into the patient that is then connected to the vent.


OK, so in the article linked a few posts up it says she was fitted with breathing and feeding tubes. I guess I'm trying to figure out if they still have the vent connected and if she was on a vent shouldn't there have already been breathing tubes in place so why would they need to fit her with another breathing tube?

That is why I was wondering if there was a difference. I know zero about this kind of thing.

That along with the fact that the mother says she could now kiss her on the lips without that tube in there had me questioning this.
 
They aren't keeping her "alive" and won't be able to get more out of the hospital. Her death certificate was issued with DOD at 12/12/13. That is the day she died. As was said, CHO will likely eat any costs between then and the day they released her to the coroner, but they are now not responsible for her care or the cost of it.

I understand that. But I'm wondering if this is some twisted way of challenging the death certificate and "proving" that she really didn't die. Thus suing CHO for more money.
I just can't make any sense of this.:confused3
 
With the latest developments, I wonder if the lawyer is fighting to keep her "alive" in order to sue the hospital for more $. Is that possible? :scratchin

On what grounds? They wanted custody of the body so badly that the were willing to take responsibility for the care and condition of the body once they received custody. In order to sue, the only thing they can try for now is expenses up to the point where CHO delivered the body to the coroner. Those expenses are either covered by their insurer or where CHO will likely just eat it. The family can likely get an easy $250,000 settlement, which is the capped amount in California for "noneconomic" damages such as pain and suffering. I don't think the family deserves it, but the hospital is likely to just settle to get it over with.
 
Just from reading the first few words of that article, it looks like somebody did a trach and connected the breathing tube that way. Before, the breathing tube went in through her mouth and into her lungs that way.

I have had a child on a ventilator, he had to have a trach after the first couple of weeks. That is surgery, he was taken into an operating room, put under and the surgery was performed. How do you anesthetize somebody who is brain dead and doesn't have the reflexes that a live person has? This whole thing is an abomination.
 
My husband had this same surgery a couple of years ago, and there is no way he could have eaten a piece of toast for a month! I remember giving him a yogurt after a couple of days and he said it was too chunky. It wasn't. That was a horrible recovery and I can totally see where there was possibility for severe bleeding if the healing area was disrupted in any way.

When I got my tonsils out I was 6, the nurse brought a tray of food,(back then you stayed the night) she told my mother I did not have to eat , but I did have to eat the bag of chips. I stopped the scabs from forming.
 
And I want to know what doctors are now feeding them this bs.

That's what gets me about this. Anyone who has an MD knows that this girl is dead. I have to assume, at this point, that whatever 'health care professionals' are participating in this disgrace are flat out lying to the family. They should have their licenses pulled.
 
The details in this case is so disturbing. I read through this thread the other day and the condition of the girl is so horrific, I just can't read through it again. I don't want to take a chance of stumbling across some ugly little detail, but I want to know, have they buried this poor girl yet?
 
That's what gets me about this. Anyone who has an MD knows that this girl is dead. I have to assume, at this point, that whatever 'health care professionals' are participating in this disgrace are flat out lying to the family. They should have their licenses pulled.

Again - Dr. Paul A. Byrne of the University of Toledo Medical Center. He's been outspoken in his opposition to "brain death" as a proper diagnosis. Additionally, I found one site claiming that he was once on the staff at Oral Roberts University although he appears to be Catholic. I get the suspicion that a lot of his medical ideology is driven by his religious views.
 
The details in this case is so disturbing. I read through this thread the other day and the condition of the girl is so horrific, I just can't read through it again. I don't want to take a chance of stumbling across some ugly little detail, but I want to know, have they buried this poor girl yet?

Oh no...according to the family, she is doing "much better".
 
For the medical people on here..what is the difference between a vent and a breathing tube? My understanding is the vent was the only thing keeping the heart beating..will a breathing tube do the same thing?

The fact that she is on a ventilator (vent) has not changed. What has changed is the means by which the ventilator pushes air into her lungs. Before it was a tube in her mouth going down her throat into her wind pipe. Now the tube goes through an incision in her neck directly into her wind pipe. The surgery to make the incision and insert the tube is the tracheostomy. The tube is no longer in her mouth.
 
The fact that she is on a ventilator (vent) has not changed. What has changed is the means by which the ventilator pushes air into her lungs. Before it was a tube in her mouth going down her throat into her wind pipe. Now the tube goes through an incision in her neck directly into her wind pipe. The tube is no longer in her mouth.


thanks (and thanks to the other person who answered too).

I just want to know who they got to do this procedure and did they go through the whole farce of using anesthesia?
 





New Posts










Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top