"Had to post this latest entry from the Radiologist who examined the CT codeblueblog:"
I want everyone to know that I am not ignoring this thread. I will try to address as many questions as I can as soon as I can. I am flying to the West Coast tomorrow so my blogging may be delayed.I have not been inactive. I've been in touch with Terri's legal team and have offered my ideas and given a deposition.
If she has hydrocephalus then she needs periodical CT's and regular shunt monitoring.
If she is NOT shunted it is my contention that there is no physician ANYWHERE who could say, definitively, that she did not have hydrocephalus at the time of that particular CT slice.
What does this mean? Everything.
Nonshunted hydrocephalics can experience improved mental functioning after shunting. I am not saying this would be the case with Terri (because of how long this has gone on); however, what I AM saying is that if they DON'T shunt her and PROVE there is no function improvement, then they are killing her.
Basically, given THAT image the onus is on them to prove she is NOT hydrocephalic -- meaning she needs a repeat CT, and they need to reinsert the feeding tube.
If they proceed as is, with that image out there on the internet, the person(s) who pulled that tube had better be aware that they are in jeopardy of actuating a death when there were standard medical procedural methods that had yet to be deployed.
Posted by: CodeBlueBlogMD | March 23, 2005 08 http://codeblueblog.blogs.com/codeblueblog/2005/03/csi_medblogs_co.html#comments
>If they proceed as is, with that image out there on the internet, the person(s) who pulled that tube had better be aware that they are in jeopardy of actuating a death when there were standard medical procedural methods that had yet to be deployed.<
Please tell me this doesn't mean Michael could sue some doctor for his "wife's" wrongful death! If this could help the parents, great, but Michael???