Posted on 12/24/2015 6:52:06 PM PST by kathsua
As the state court has permitted Jahi McMath’s mother to present evidence from a doctor who has examined Jahi and believes she does not meet brain death criteria, lawyer Christopher Dolan is making a federal case out of it. From his press release:
After exhausting all available avenues to work with the State Department of Vital Statistics, Alameda County Department of Public Health, County Coroner’s Office and County Counsel, to have Jahi McMath’s incomplete, and invalid death certificate (not even signed by an attesting physician) rescinded, and her basic human rights restored…
The suit requests that the Federal Court order restoration of Jahi McMath’s fundamental Constitutional rights and declare that she is not brain dead as per the criteria established under California Law.
The lawsuit also seeks to have the Court deem unconstitutional the brain death statute as it provides no mechanism by which evidence can be presented that the original determination of brain death is no longer valid in the face of significant scientific and medical evidence of brain function like that currently demonstrated by Jahi McMath.
That last bit seems a potentially winning argument to me regardless of Jahi’s condition.
I believe in brain death and once thought Jahi was certainly dead–to the great irritation of many who usually agree with my positions.
But I also wrote that my eyebrow would raise if her body didn’t deteriorate as usually happens pretty quickly in brain death cases.
Now, two years later, Jahi has not deteriorated–not unprecedented, but rare–and a prominent neurologist who I know and trust has personally examined her, believes she no longer meets brain dead criteria. My eyebrows are past the crown of my head!
I think the proper course here is for there to be a full-bore, transparent reopening of this case.
If Jahi is not dead, she deserves it.
Please support LifeNews and our pro-life news with a year-end donation!
So does neurological science, because if her brain function has indeed reversed from “dead†to “profoundly disabled,†it is unprecedented and requires intense study.
So does the integrity of the system. No one should be forced to stay dead if facts on the ground change. Moreover, if the facts have not changed, it is important for the public to know.
Let me be clear. I am not saying she is alive. But I am saying there is sufficient doubt to warrant another hard look. And I don’t understand why some are so angrily and emotionally invested in her being dead.
Thanks.
Right. However, they did not have extensive brain damage.
That article from the SF Chronicle is an opinion piece written by someone who has no direct knowledge of the condition of Jahi Mcmath’s body. It is just a speculative piece.
(Note: that article is behind a pay wall, and I will not pay to read drivel from the SF Chronicle. Last time I saw that article, it was free access. Maybe it was reprinted on a different web site.)
Once again, I ask: where is there current, verifiable evidence that Jahi is still hooked to machines so as to maintain an illusion of life? Where are there even recent photos? Where are any medical experts who have examined Jahi and determined that her brain is, in fact, functional?
Expecting dead bodies to decompose is *not* a sign of retreating to fantasyland! Quite the contrary—those who think that a dead body can come back to life have some serious issues with perceiving reality.
You have qualified for truther status.
Congrats.
Have fun with your Krazy Kornspiracy Krapola.
Ah, right. So insisting on proof of a claim that a dead body has returned to life makes me a kook. Gotcha. Sounds like projection to me.
I’m curious, are you the person who posts crazy things on Jahi Mcmath threads, often as “John Benton” or similar names, who sometimes must be banned from forums due to obsessive posting of inane material?
Thank you so much for your odoriferous holiday condescension!
You are sadly mistaken in every way, except that the facts have always supported my memory.
Your Jeb! talked big about saving her and had every power as governor to save her, but cowardly failed to act to save her.
I also read many other opinions here that stated “Jeb did everything he could”, so you are not alone, but happily in a decided minority here who praise Jeb! and his brother’s complicity in Terri Schiavo’s murder.
Happy New Year, POS!
You provide yet more evidence for your divorce from reality and flight in to fantasy.
Why is this McMath issue so hard for you?
You said her heart would stop beating soon due to brain death.
It did not happen.
She continued on the ventilator via tracheal tube and unlike what would happen in clinically defined brain death, her heart continued much longer than ever observed (as per references you provided).
You respond by spinning fantasist stories and saying your fantasist stories must be disproved.
You accept and cite over and over a brain scan done well after the time you said her heart would cease, so you cannot deny her heart beat months longer than any recorded case of brain death.
Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge you were wrong?
Why the utter lack of scientific curiosity?
It did not happen.
So, you have verifiable evidence that the heart is still beating? Please don't be modest--post it here for everyone to see!
In brain death cases, the heart does not stop beating because the brain is dead, it stops because the general deterioration of the body releases toxins (degradation products, cell debris, etc.) into the circulatory system, and those poison the heart. In the medical literature, in one case, a heart continued to beat for 52 days after death occurred. Since Jahi was a child at the time of her death, it could take longer for the heart to stop (for a number of reasons), but it will still happen. As I have already mentioned several times, I have no evidence that it has not happened.
When people make extraordinary claims, for instance that dead people miraculously come back to life--or even that a dead body is kept hooked up to machines in a semblance of life for 2 years, longer than has ever been documented in the medical literature--they MUST provide verifiable evidence of those claims.
Videos taken soon after Jahi's death demonstrating that she had some reflex activity in the peripheral nervous system are not proof of life and cannot prove that her body is in a condition to maintain the heart in functional status.
Undated pictures, which show clear signs of tissue death (necrotic patches on the fingers and near the eye, bloating of tissues), are also not proof of life.
Publicity about a lawsuit to overturn the medical finding of death (as if death can be reversed by a legal ruling) proves only that the family is angling to get a large sum of money, but does not prove that Jahi somehow returned to life.
Why do you want so much to believe that a brain-dead person is alive? Why does no evidence on the matter make a dent in your belief? What do you, personally, stand to gain by this? Are you, in fact, the person who often posts using a variant of the name "John Benton", who seems obsessed with denying that death is really death? Or are you a lawyer involved with the case, trying to get a feel for the kinds of medical/scientific arguments that support the determination of death, so that you can try to find a rebuttal for them that will hold up in court?
Hint: if you want to get me to "admit" I am wrong, just provide evidence that Jahi is alive. I can't even find objective evidence that she is still being maintained on an IV and respirator, much less that she has actually returned to life.
1). You accepted the brain scan. What date was that done?
2). As far as, “Why do you want so much to believe that a brain-dead person is alive?”
I have made no claims she is not brain dead and even two years ago I stated I had no problem with her being called brain dead.
But brain does not mean a person is a corpse or a cadaver etc...
In response, people, such ad you and others, made very specific claims as to what will happen due to her brain death.
I took a wait and see attitude.
Clearly your, and other predictions, did not occur.
This means she was either not brain dead but severely brain damaged. Or it means the determination of and brain death definition are not as straightforward or understood as thought.
Perhaps there is no difference between those two possibilities.
2a). As far as these things you think:
“What do you, personally, stand to gain by this? Are you, in fact, the person who often posts using a variant of the name “John Benton”, who seems obsessed with denying that death is really death? Or are you a lawyer involved with the case, trying to get a feel for the kinds of medical/scientific arguments that support the determination of death, so that you can try to find a rebuttal for them that will hold up in court?”
I am obviously not anything of the sort and your thinking so us an indication of paranoia on your part.
You are losing rationality.
As far as this: “Why does no evidence on the matter make a dent in your belief?”
What “believe” would you be referring to and cite a post by me to support your attribution of a “belief” to me.
I vaguely remember that story but don’t think I read the entire situation. I assume Dad had a reason for doubting the diagnosis?
Yes, dad thought he had had a seizure and would pull out of coma, which is indeed what happened.
BTW, I’m sorry I neglected to convey my condolences on the loss of your daughter.
Thank you. The doctors involved did everything they could. They thoroughly explained the criteria & shared all results with us. We had the added benefit of having an MD in our family who was allowed to observe and review all testing.
Even then - it is a very difficult thing to “let go”
So when I see stories where the patient doesn’t quite fit the criteria - I feel for them.
Hope may seem foolish to others - but when it’s your child, you want to give them every possible chance - no matter how remote.
May I ask how old she was?
3 - almost 4
That must have been so hard.
Google is your friend.....look it up yourself.
Of course - it was 17 yrs ago, but she’s always close to our hearts.
I hope someday they discover new ways to treat such injuries. In her case - bleeding at the base of the brain (car accident)
If people are so quick to give up - or to harvest organs - then how will we know if there will ever be a new way to help these patients?
I guess after you’ve buried a beloved child, not much else is scary in the world.
Forgive me if I’m imposing with the comment. It just seems like such a hard thing to walk through and I know you must miss her.
I didn't know we had any Jeb Bush supporters on FR.
Jeb DID NOT do anything to save Terri, he failed at EVERY opportunity.
Bush absolutely DID NOT remove Terri.
perhaps you can explain what more you would do.
Both the United States Constitution and the Florida Constitution FORBID the taking of life without a trial for capital crimes. There is no provision ANYWHERE for a judge to order the death of someone for physical disability.
Jeb Bush IGNORED the following parts of the Florida Constitution:
Article I, Section 2
Basic rights.-All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.Article IV, Section 1
Governor.-
(a)The supreme executive power shall be vested in a governor, who shall be commander-in-chief of all military forces of the state not in active service of the United States. The governor shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, commission all officers of the state and counties, and transact all necessary business with the officers of government...(d)The governor shall have power to call out the militia to preserve the public peace, execute the laws of the state, suppress insurrection, or repel invasion.
Jeb Bush had the authority, power, constitutional obligation and moral imperative to save Terri and he didn't.
He’s a weak man without moral character.
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.