13 Year old gir declared brain dead has now officially died

[DisneyJamieCA]

I don't think this is realistic at all. If this facility could possibly have it's funding withdrawn then it never would have taken the girl in the first place. It is not a dead body. It is a girl who is brain dead who currently is being artificially vented but has a beating heart. She is not a corpse. She is BRAIN DEAD. Once her heart stops beating she will be dead, a corpse. I think the girl very well may have died already but the family asked the facility to not say anything and they could have quietly had her buried or cremated. But I do think if they are seeing dollar signs and actually want to win a lawsuit they need to allow the body to be autopsied.

The family believing this is what caused this whole circus in the first place. The medical, and legal definition of brain dead is real dead.

ETA: Her heart is only beating because of the vent - her heart is not naturally beating. Remove the vent, the heart stops.

 

[LisaR]

This has become such a sad, macabre thing. The one thing that surprises me though is that no one seems to be outraged over the original judge who allowed this whole messed up situation to start. This man is really the one responsible for this. Were it not for him, this would have ended weeks ago. I wonder if he ever thinks about what his original ruling has done to set some very scary precedents.

I'm not so sure about that. Are there actual laws in place that state that when a person is declared brain dead, life support must be removed within a certain time frame? I thought the whole point of this was because the hospital was trying to force the removal of life support and the family didn't want that to happen?

I've said many times that I wasn't thrilled with how the family (mainly the uncle) went about this. I don't like their lawyer either. However, I will continue to stand by their right to remove life support from their loved one when they want. I don't want that right to ever be taken away from anyone. If they have a facility that is willing to continue to keep her heart beating with machines and the family is comfortable with that, it should be their right. I wish it hadn't become a circus and I am glad they aren't in front of the cameras any longer.

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

I'm not so sure about that. Are there actual laws in place that state that when a person is declared brain dead, life support must be removed within a certain time frame? I thought the whole point of this was because the hospital was trying to force the removal of life support and the family didn't want that to happen? I've said many times that I wasn't thrilled with how the family (mainly the uncle) went about this. I don't like their lawyer either. However, I will continue to stand by their right to remove life support from their loved one when they want. I don't want that right to ever be taken away from anyone. If they have a facility that is willing to continue to keep her heart beating with machines and the family is comfortable with that, it should be their right. I wish it hadn't become a circus and I am glad they aren't in front of the cameras any longer.

Actually the hospital has the right to remove life support immediately, from what I've read. They do the family the courtesy of allowing more time for them to call anybody that would want to say goodbye.

 

[SeaSpray]

I don't know if it varies state to state, or hospital to hospital, but last year DH's brother fell into a coma and essentially became brain dead. He had been in the hospital for about 2 weeks at that point, although he was coherent when he was first admitted. During the 2 weeks his various organs began to shut down.

When the tests indicated that there was no longer brain function, the hospital (very tactfully, I should say) told the family that we would need to either to decide to remove life support OR arrange for him to be moved to a "long term care facility". When asked, they indicated that they weren't sure that he'd even survive the move. Everyone knew that he would never want to be kept alive like that.

This was a sudden thing, none of us knew that he was even near death just a few weeks prior to this. He was what I consider young; he was just 47 when he died.

Anyway, my point is, the hospital did give us approx 2 days to make a decision. The decision was made to remove him from life support; he died within 2 hours.

In this girl's case, her family couldn't accept that she was already gone, even though the body's heart was still beating. I can't blame them for that; it was enough of a shock when it was a 47 year old man, nevermind a young girl.

I wonder though if, after this, laws will be brought forth where it can be made where once a person is declared brain dead, and it has been double, triple, and even quadruple verified, that the hospital has the LEGAL right to remove life support after a short period, such as 2 days. No courts or judges involved.

 

[John VN]

I don't think this is realistic at all. If this facility could possibly have it's funding withdrawn then it never would have taken the girl in the first place. It is not a dead body. It is a girl who is brain dead who currently is being artificially vented but has a beating heart. She is not a corpse. She is BRAIN DEAD. Once her heart stops beating she will be dead, a corpse.

I think the girl very well may have died already but the family asked the facility to not say anything and they could have quietly had her buried or cremated. But I do think if they are seeing dollar signs and actually want to win a lawsuit they need to allow the body to be autopsied.

IMO, there is no longer a girl. A body is being artificially kept in a state of animation. Remove the mechanical devices and let nature take its course. Harsh but reality. We should all be prepared for a situation like this because with life comes death. There is no cheating that fact.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

I don't put the blame on the judge.

Essentially what happened in court --


the hospital told the family that the hospital was going to turn off the vent. The family filed in court to prevent that from happening. The judge held a hearing,heard testimony from witnesses. Ruled that Jahi is dead and that the hospital could turn off the vent, and refused to order the hospital to insert the trach tube and feeding tube. And gave the family time to appeal his decision by entering a temporary restraining order preventing the vent from being turned off.

So, what should he have done differently? He can't just tell the family tgey are wrong without evidence, can he? Especially when dealing with "life or death" issues, and a family that claims their daughter is alive but not getting proper medical treatment.


Do you accept that she's dead without holding an evidentiary hearing? Hypothetically she coukd be in a persistent vegetative state, not brain dead as the hospital asserts, and by discontinuing treatment you could kill a living patient.

And the TRO? Well, what if the judge was wrong, and the appellate court reverses his decision and orders the hospital to leave her on the vent? It's a phyrric (sp?) victory if the hospital already turned off the vent.



Basicaly this judge did what judges do. He gave the parties time to work it out between themselved.

 

[hereyago]

I don't put the blame on the judge.

Essentially what happened in court --


the hospital told the family that the hospital was going to turn off the vent. The family filed in court to prevent that from happening. The judge held a hearing,heard testimony from witnesses. Ruled that Jahi is dead and that the hospital could turn off the vent, and refused to order the hospital to insert the trach tube and feeding tube. And gave the family time to appeal his decision by entering a temporary restraining order preventing the vent from being turned off.

So, what should he have done differently? He can't just tell the family tgey are wrong without evidence, can he? Especially when dealing with "life or death" issues, and a family that claims their daughter is alive but not getting proper medical treatment.


Do you accept that she's dead without holding an evidentiary hearing? Hypothetically she coukd be in a persistent vegetative state, not brain dead as the hospital asserts, and by discontinuing treatment you could kill a living patient.

And the TRO? Well, what if the judge was wrong, and the appellate court reverses his decision and orders the hospital to leave her on the vent? It's a phyrric (sp?) victory if the hospital already turned off the vent.



Basicaly this judge did what judges do. He gave the parties time to work it out between themselved.

So this was Judge Grillo right? He could have used some common sense, you know that she is dead, doctors aren't going to make that up. I have said I have no problem with her wanting a second opinion or an independant opinion.

. What I don't get is when they had agreed to the independent doctor come look at her, when that doctor agreed she is dead, why not have an emergency hearing to tell the judge yes, she is still dead can we pull the plug now? Instead of waiting for a few days longer?

I have to wonder as other posters have written will this incident change the way that this or any other hospital who has the same issue change their policy of how long they will wait until they pull the plug?

 

[Lorelei Lee]

So this was Judge Grillo right? He could have used some common sense, you know that she is dead, doctors aren't going to make that up. I have said I have no problem with her wanting a second opinion or an independant opinion.

. What I don't get is when they had agreed to the independent doctor come look at her, when that doctor agreed she is dead, why not have an emergency hearing to tell the judge yes, she is still dead can we pull the plug now? Instead of waiting for a few days longer?

I have to wonder as other posters have written will this incident change the way that this or any other hospital who has the same issue change their policy of how long they will wait until they pull the plug?

You have the sequence wrong. He ordered the independent evaluation before the evidentiary hearing. Based his order on that evaluation.

 

[hereyago]

You have the sequence wrong. He ordered the independent evaluation before the evidentiary hearing. Based his order on that evaluation.

Oopsie. Ok, now I am more confused. So he ordered the indpendent eval, then after hearing what was said by now a few doctors had all come to the conclusion she is dead.

Then still hearing that she is brain dead, still said, you have a certain amount of days to move your dead child before she is taken off support?

If that is the case, honestly why not say she is gone, end of story? I totally get trying to comfort the family, but how long had she been gone at this time?

While I am here: what is your theory of how the lawsuit by Erick Munoz the husband of the brain dead pregnant woman in Texas will go? One of the writer's of the law has said openly on the news that it is being misinterpited by the hospital and only should apply to women who are alive. He wants her to be taken off "life support" because she had stated that she didn't want to be on it if something had happened.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

Oopsie. Ok, now I am more confused. So he ordered the indpendent eval, then after hearing what was said by now a few doctors had all come to the conclusion she is dead.

Then still hearing that she is brain dead, still said, you have a certain amount of days to move your dead child before she is taken off support?

If that is the case, honestly why not say she is gone, end of story? I totally get trying to comfort the family, but how long had she been gone at this time?

While I am here: what is your theory of how the lawsuit by Erick Munoz the husband of the brain dead pregnant woman in Texas will go? One of the writer's of the law has said openly on the news that it is being misinterpited by the hospital and only should apply to women who are alive. He wants her to be taken off "life support" because she had stated that she didn't want to be on it if something had happened.

The TRO essentially said "the hospital has the right to remove the vent but may not do so until December 30." And he extended the deadline until January 7 because the family said another facility would take Jahi and they just needed more time. Basically he maintained the status quo. And the parties ultimately settled the matter amoung themselves. I don't see a problem.

As for Marlise Munoz, I have a problem with the law as applied to living patients. But even if you accept the validity of the law I think the hospital has misinterpreted the law.

 

[bittybabygrower]

They will go strictly by the notes in the chart is there is not an autopsy. The jurors will hear and see what was written in the chart by the nurses and doctors. There is no story telling or elaborate goings on like there is on TV. I have been on cases for my work and the jurors only get what the lawyers want them to get. They will not get a whole copy of the chart, so without an autopsy it will be hard to determine what caused the death or precipitated it.

My heart hurts for the nurses who will be called for this trial , it is going to be a cluster you know what for them.

 

[Lisa_C]

I don't think this is realistic at all. If this facility could possibly have it's funding withdrawn then it never would have taken the girl in the first place. It is not a dead body. It is a girl who is brain dead who currently is being artificially vented but has a beating heart. She is not a corpse. She is BRAIN DEAD. Once her heart stops beating she will be dead, a corpse.

I think the girl very well may have died already but the family asked the facility to not say anything and they could have quietly had her buried or cremated. But I do think if they are seeing dollar signs and actually want to win a lawsuit they need to allow the body to be autopsied.

As others have said, she is dead. A corpse. What this "facility" is doing is abuse of a dead corpse. I can't believe that after all the info bring linked into this thread that you would even think otherwise? :-/
There is a death certificate issued for this girl. You only get one of those when you are indeed, dead. They can't bury her as it says there needs to be an autopsy to determine the cause. She is decaying before their very eyes. Dead = corpse.

 

[hereyago]

The TRO essentially said "the hospital has the right to remove the vent but may not do so until December 30." And he extended the deadline until January 7 because the family said another facility would take Jahi and they just needed more time. Basically he maintained the status quo. And the parties ultimately settled the matter amoung themselves. I don't see a problem.

As for Marlise Munoz, I have a problem with the law as applied to living patients. But even if you accept the validity of the law I think the hospital has misinterpreted the law.

Thanks for better explaining the process, because I got it all mixed up.

I also agree about the case of Marlise Munoz, I also have issue with a law in her case, I do feel like you and as one of the creator's of the law said it was meant for living patients. I don't believe anyone has a right, law, hospitals, etc to tell me that my rights and wishes will be ignored because they don't like them or believe in them.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

I think we walk a fine line in this country on end of life issues. We don't believe in euthanasia or assisted suicide, but we do believe in a patient's right to refuse medical treatment.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

Interesting

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/201...paign=Feed:+paliban/RDkF+(Secular+News+Daily)

 

[carissa1970]

Interesting http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2014/01/ffrf-asks-for-probe-of-oakland-charter-school/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+paliban%2FRDkF+%28Secular+News+Daily%29

Oh, wow. I wonder how that will turn out??

 

[hereyago]

but we do believe in a patient's right to refuse medical treatment.

Yea, sometimes that is up in the air as well. Scary.

 

[Lisa_C]

Interesting

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2014/01/ffrf-asks-for-probe-of-oakland-charter-school/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+paliban%2FRDkF+%28Secular+News+Daily%29

I will not say me religious view on here, it's not the place. But I FULLY support this. The girl is dead. No amount of prayer or science will bring her back. The school are wrong and need to apologise for giving fause hope.

 

[lauradis]

Speak for yourself. I actually like Lorelei lees posts because they provide good information.

 

[Lorelei Lee]