Posted on 06/29/2018 1:05:26 AM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: Jahi McMath, the teen declared brain dead by doctors in 2013, has died undergoing surgery in New Jersey after a five-year bitter legal fight by her mother who insisted medics were wrong and she was still alive
A girl at the center of the medical and religious debate over brain death has died after surgery in New Jersey, her mother said Thursday.
Nailah Winkfield said doctors declared her daughter Jahi McMath dead on June 22 from excessive bleeding and liver failure after an operation to treat an intestinal issue.
McMath was declared dead in December 2013 when she was 13 after suffering irreversible brain damage during routine surgery in California to remove her tonsils and a coroner signed a death certificate. Several specialists concurred after neurological tests.
Winkfield refused to accept the conclusion. She said her Christian beliefs compelled her to fight for continued care for her daughter, who she said showed signs of life through toe wriggles and finger movements.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Suffocation is such a pleasant way to go.
Right?
And re-read post 5.
It says only about not being able to breathe on their own.
As I pointed out, plenty of comatose people can’t breathe either.
Yes, removing ventilation IS euthanasia.
Playing semantics games in this instance is like saying “RU486 isn’t an abortion, it’s birth control”.
She wasnt in a coma
Its not a cutesy game. She was not in a coma
Your post 5 says only “she couldn’t breathe on her own”.
Funny, as stated repeatedly there are plenty of other people who can’t.
Very sad.
You are playing way over your head. Run along and let the adults have a conversation.
It is a cutesy game.
And as I note, the pro-euthanasia people are rather alive.
Guess they don’t have the conviction of their position to lead by example.
Why, because you have no response?
Cannot debate the point so you’ll insult instead?
We have some pro-euthanasia people in thread.
Seems they don’t like that being pointed out.
And then there are people with sleep apnea, people on oxygen, at what point do we say that they are not alive because a machine is either helping them breath or is breathing for them?
In this case as some have pointed out, if she had been dead her body would have started decaying. It did not so that shows that mom was right and she was alive.
If we must error, let it be on the side of life.
No because you are so far off base its not worth a reply. By your argument 95% of people that die are euthanized because they are not hooked up to ventilators and dialysis and ecmo prior to death.
If you cant see the difference between actively ending a life (and yes RU 486 and plan B are abortion) and withdrawing artificial support allowing someone to die a natural death then there is no basis for further conversation
No doubt.
Her mother must be emotionally devastated and physically exhausted.
Exactly.
But look at the posters trying to rationalize how disconnecting ventilation isn’t the same as starving them or injecting them with a potassium overdose.
Because it’s “a natural death” as they state it.
The person cannot breathe without the ventilation, correct?
You remove the ventilation, in effect suffocating them.
Your action directly leads to death.
But call it what you want, what matters is how you feel about it afterwards.
Right?
By your argument, comatose people who can’t breathe on their own are okay to just switch off because after all they can’t breathe on their own and would die “naturally”.
Yes, it is euthanasia.
Being honest about it would be best.
Yes, she will be for some time.
As I said you are way off base and there is no further basis for conversation
No, I’m not off base.
You just have no real response.
Deliberately causing death is something you must never do, whether by action or by omission, in every instance. Comatose persons, per se, are not dying (unless there's something else going on.) To remove the ventilator with the intention of causing death, is morally wrong (euthansia).
There are morally relevant differences between assisted breathing and assisted nutrition, though. Here's something to consider:
Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Sixth Edition
56A person has a moral obligation to use ordinary or proportionate means of preserving his or her life. Proportionate means are those that in the judgment of the patient offer a reasonable hope of benefit and do not entail an excessive burden or impose excessive expense on the family or t he community.
57 A person may forgo extraordinary or disproportionate means of preserving life. Disproportionate means are those that in the patients judgment do not offer a reasonable hope of benefit or entail an excessive burden, or impose excessive expe nse on the family or the community.
58 In principle, there is an obligation to provide patients with food and water, including medically assisted nutrition and hydration for those who cannot take food orally. This obligation extends to patients in chronic and presumably irreversible conditions (e.g., the persistent vegetative state) who can reasonably be expected to live indefinitely if given such care.
59 Medically assisted nutrition and hydration become morally optional when they cannot reasonably be expect ed to prolong life or when they would be excessively burdensome for the patient or [would] cause significant physical discomfort, for example resulting from complications in the use of the means employed.
59 For instance, as a patient draws close to inev itable death from an underlying progressive and fatal condition, certain measures to provide nutrition and hydration may become excessively burdensome and therefore not obligatory in light of their very limited ability to prolong life or provide comfort.
61 The free and informed judgment made by a competent adult patient concerning the use or withdrawal of life - sustaining procedures should always be respected and normally complied with, unless it is contrary to Catholic moral teaching.
62 Euthanasia is an action or omission that of itself or by intention causes death in order to alleviate suffering. Catholic health care institutions may never condone or participate in euthanasia or assisted suicide in any way. Dying patients who request euthanasia should receive loving care, psychological and spiritual support, and appropriate remedies for pain and other symptoms so that they can live with dignity until the time of natural death.
The two goals are both to avoid futile, burdensome, unwanted over-treatment, and to avoid involuntary euthanasia by under-treatment (including starvation/dehydration.)
Best advice:
This is so essential. Nothing can take the place of a personal advocate/proxy who is of one mind with you and whom you can gladly trust.
The point is Jahi McMath has been dead since 2013.
Not in a coma, not sleeping, but dead.
Dead, dead, dead.
There is no way around that fact, and it has nothing to do with euthanasia.
Prayers to the McMath family and RIP to Jahi...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.