<p>Even if she is not legally dead, the insurance company is not required to pay for unnecessary treatment. I’m pretty sure the insurance company would argue that treatment for dead people counts as unnecessary.</p>
<p>CF, I agree, and Im sure the insurance co will refuse to pay. I bet the family will fight with the insurance company over that coverage.</p>
<p>They are going to sue the doctors and hospitals for pain and suffering and all medical bills associated with keeping their daughter on life support. I really doubt the family is thinking about the cost and I doubt they will have to pay any of it when all is said and done.</p>
<p>True. But it has to be a factor for the next facility to consider.</p>
<p>They’re thinking about cost to some degree. They’re fundraising with picket signs.</p>
<p>If we think healthcare costs are crippling now, just wait till every other person decides to keep a dead loved one “alive” as long as possible. This would be a really, really impossible precident to set. I find it to be creepy already. My first reaction back when was that they were having the unimaginable happening and they needed a couple of days to accept it. Now, it’s embarrassing that they are continuing this farce. Most unfortunately, the child has died. Her body is being artificially maintained. She is not alive. Poor child, poor family, it is the worst that can happen. But the thing is, it did happen. Past tense. They need to allow their child the dignity now of closure.</p>
<p>As others have stated, any surgery is a risk, any. Thus the extensive paperwork explaining the risks and signatures required. Anything you have questions about, are hesitant or unsure, ask and it will be fully explained before you give consent. Even tests given to your child in the ER have required releases with a list of risks that make you pause (CAT scans, etc). She had one additional risk/complicating factor that we know of. Until an autopsy can be preformed (two weeks or two years) there’s no chance to even discover additional risks or complications previously unknown, reactions, etc. Again, the delayed autopsy means discovery is less likely. </p>
<p>Nothing is without risk. Read a bottle of ibuprofen. Millions of Americans take antidepressants to the point many think nothing of popping a Prozac. A percentage of people who take them will develop urges to hurt themselves, prominent in children and teens. This led to black box warnings on many meds previously thought fairly ‘safe’. This isn’t news to anyone. My point is even things we get comfortable with have risks, sometimes deadly.</p>
<p>The facility in NY that is reported to be willing to take the girl is New Beginnings Community Center in Medford, N.Y. The funds they have raised would apparently cover the flight alone. Nothing more. And interesting comment from the hospital spokesperson that any transport would need permission of the coroner. It is a truly horrible situation.
</p>
<p>[Girl</a> declared brain dead remains on life support](<a href=“http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/31/jahi-mcmath-brain-dead-girl/4265377/]Girl”>Girl declared brain dead remains on life support)</p>
<p>“Girl declared brain dead remains on life support.” If this weren’t so tragic, that statement would be comical. So sad and hope the mother gets better counsel (family, friend, spiritual advisor) and changes her mind on continuing to pursue this. I agree with others that it is creepy.</p>
<p>Counsel is a pro bono medical malpractice attorney so my guess is they are in this for the long haul. Unless nature intervenes.</p>
<p>
This situation already exists, except that the loved ones are frail octogenarians and nonagenarians with Alzheimers, bedsores, incontinence, constant pain, etc. It’s an everyday situation which costs billions - which nobody wants to talk about. (Remember “death panels?”)</p>
<p>Flossy,I was thinking as much about counsel from a trusted friend, relative, or pastor,not necessarily her lawyer (counsel). Interesting info about the lawyer being a pro bono malpractice attorney.</p>
<p>California caps malpractice awards at $250k. This case will likely be used by those hoping to raise that cap.</p>
<p>*My Quote:
The parents need help coping so that they can do the right thing. Right now, they’re in disbelief that their healthy kid ended up dead from a routine surgery.
If some very good therapist could step up and help these folks out, maybe this can have a reasonable, but still very sad end.</p>
<p>==========</p>
<p>PG quote:
No one disbelieves that the parents are living their worst nightmare. But there is no other situation in which a dead person is given “life support” services. A stillborn baby is a traumatizing event - but a mother gets to be with her stillborn for, say, a day or two, and then the hospital takes it away to be properly buried. Any death is a traumatizing event - but you can’t throw yourself at the foot of your beloved’s hospital bed and insist that you never be moved.*</p>
<p>PG…did you think that I think this should go on? No. I don’t. I think that the parents need to take their D off life support. I think that the family’s clergy member (if they have one) should help them. The hospital should bring in a counselor or something to help them thru this. </p>
<p>Yes, this sort of thing can happen with a tragic car accident. In that case, if a parent is a driver, probably the same conflicts go on. I think the parents are blaming themselves (at some level) because the procedure wasn’t necessary. And, if the girl’s weight was an issue, they probably are also angry at themselves for not considering/knowing that.</p>
<p>Does anyone know what the law is about this situation in California? if the law clearly allows the hospital to discontinue life support, can the attorney be sanctioned (hit with attorney’s fees, etc.0 for bringing a frivolous suit.</p>
<p>He should know better.</p>
<p>I doubt that this case would be helpful to those who wish to raise the malpractice cap. It seems to me public opinion is running against the family.</p>
<p>Public opinion is running against the family’s effort to prolong the situation but there are many who believe the family should be able to receive more than $250k for the life of their daughter. Most people are never touched by the situation but this allows them to put themselves in this family’s place, with regard to the malpractice case. They will ask themselves whether a like is worth more than $250k. That is not the right question to ask but it will be asked.</p>
<p>Just to be clear, the publicity-seeking, ambulance chasing s.o.b. who’s representing this family is NOT acting pro bono. A medical malpractice attorney is allowed in California to act on contingency: the client wins, he gets a share. Likely a very large share.</p>
<p>Here’s a different way to handle the awful situation of losing a child:</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.donatelifenc.org/content/chris-henry-story-8-min-cbs[/url]”>Chris Henry Story - 8 min (CBS) | Donate Life NC;
<p>Please consider signing up to be an organ donor.</p>
<p>Right, Dodgersmom. But he claims to be working pro bono. Of course, it’s not a malpractice case, yet.</p>
<p>He wrote a big op ed about how wonderful he is in a CA paper.</p>
<p>What is this lawyer saying? Does he really think this young girl should be kept on a ventilator indefinitely, even though she has been declared brain dead by multiple sources? It really is mind boggling when I think about it. What is he trying to accomplish here?</p>