<p>I just looked into how many people believe in miracles and some studies reveal that an astonishing 4 out or 5 people profess to believe that miracles probably or definitely occur. If that’s true, then why aren’t all those people lined up behind the mother in favor of waiting for a miracle? Or do people only believe in miracles that are already possible without a miracle?</p>
<p>No miracle is going to give life to a deceased body.</p>
<p>Well I agree but how do people who believe in miracles distinguish? How can someone believe in miracles but not this particular miracle? Doesn’t that negate the whole idea of miracles? I’m just curious because I really had no idea that so many people actually believed in miracles.</p>
<p>Many people do believe in miracles but it’s usually in restrospect as in, “Wow! It was a miracle”. If you want a great new job you can’t just sit on the couch watching Judge Judy and waiting for a miracle. And, there are a lot people supporting this family’s wait for a miracle. You’d be surprised.</p>
<p>Admittedly, I have not viewed the youtube videos et. al.
But my impression is ( the only thing that makes sense to me) is that the family is hurt, angry & upset and trying to punish the drs and the hospital, because they want someone to be responsible.
Additionally, ( something that various religious groups have exploited), the more time and effort you put toward a course of action, the more difficult it is to walk away or reverse course.
Even if they now feel otherwise, they have made a big deal about a reversal of her condition, and its difficult to backtrack from that position.</p>
<p>A miracle would be someone waking up from a coma.
For the dead to come back to life, would take a miracle along the lines of the second coming.</p>
<p>So miracles only happen when the result was scientifically possible anyway? That was what I thought. There are no miracles, only long shots.</p>
<p>They are Christians. Easter is about someone rising from the dead. But, I don’t think most Christians would make this sort of leap. This is rare.</p>
<p>Interestingly, belief in miracles has little to do with religion. More people believe in miracles than are religious. I suspect people are afraid not to believe in them because they may be in a situation to wish for one some day. If this woman truly believes in miracles and not just long shots, then how can anyone convince her otherwise? I’m sure she’s angry and bitter and all those things but maybe she just really believes it can happen.</p>
<p>“But my impression is ( the only thing that makes sense to me) is that the family is hurt, angry & upset and trying to punish the drs and the hospital, because they want someone to be responsible.”</p>
<p>This is interesting because they must have had some sort of relationship with a doctor. This wasn’t just a routine tonsillectomy and she had sleep apnea. Doctors don’t do these procedures at the drop of a hat. But they are blaming the hospital. </p>
<p>Hospitals don’t operate on people, surgeons do.</p>
<p>I don’t think we totally understand everything from a scientific viewpoint.
For example, my oldest was very ill after she was born ten weeks early. She began hemorrhaging everywhere and needed many platelet transfusions. They told my h they were going to operate,( for suspected necrotizingenterocolitis) but didn’t expect her to survive.
She came home from the hospital 8 weeks later (2 weeks before her due date).
That, to me, was a miracle.:D</p>
<p>*Hospitals don’t operate on people, surgeons do *</p>
<p>I realize this. I just had major surgery 7 months ago.
But people don’t go into surgery because they have a great bedside manner.
And just like medications, it can be under/ over prescribed.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/questions-about-tonsillectomies-to-treat-sleep-apnea-after-a-child-falls-critically-ill/2013/12/24/8fb8f710-6cb3-11e3-aecc-85cb037b7236_story.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/questions-about-tonsillectomies-to-treat-sleep-apnea-after-a-child-falls-critically-ill/2013/12/24/8fb8f710-6cb3-11e3-aecc-85cb037b7236_story.html</a></p>
<p>Whatever happens in the end she will always blame the hospital for killing her child. Unless she gets that miracle.</p>
<p>Re: The cosmetic surgery argument earlier- When there is a severe shortage of blood for transfusions or when a hospital goes into alert for an emergency situation with lots of trauma patients expected, they do cancel all elective surgeries, including cosmetic surgeries, so resources are available. </p>
<p>This is the paradox I keep reading- she will always blame the hospital for killing her child but she doesn’t believe her child is dead, so the hospital couldn’t have killed the child.</p>
<p>I still think at some level she knows her daughter is gone. But, as someone said above, there is no turning back now.</p>
<p>IMO the family is fighting this fight to avoid facing the loss. When the focus is what to do next in fighting the hospital then they don’t have to address the tragic void of this girls death. Grief can make anyone do crazy things. The courts allowed this to become a circus. It’s just sad.</p>
<p>[Jahi</a> McMath: Case heads to federal court Friday - San Jose Mercury News](<a href=“Jahi McMath: Case heads to federal court Friday – The Mercury News”>Jahi McMath: Case heads to federal court Friday – The Mercury News)</p>
<p>I hope the family accepts reality sooner rather than later, and that there is some clarification before the next deluded family comes along.</p>
<p>I think she still in denial, but after a few months she’ll get it. I hope she’s not continuing for the money</p>
<p>These are so hard, as a parent I can understand their grief, not wanting to let go, but the reality is if she is really brain dead, they are keeping the tissues alive with a machine but that is all it is, tissues. I know there are moral and religious arguments, that even without a brain the body still has a soul, all the other arguments, but the problem is there also is the fact that resources that might be able to save someone who can make it may be denied; if the parents raise money to keep their daughters body alive, the money that was raised might have been used to save someone who really is alive. The reality is whether brain dead or as with Teri Schiavo, where there is just a brain stem, what made the person a living human being is no longer there…and then, you are forced basically to tell grieving parents that they no longer have the right to decide what happens, even the most hardened doctor or bureaucrat isn’t that cold…</p>
<p>As hard as it is, I think this one has to be handled by the law and legal precedent, because I don’t think the parents can make the decision rationally, and to allow the body to go on being maintained seems like a violation of medical ethics, the first rule of medicine is supposed to be do no harm, in this case, keeping the body going is doing harm, the parents and loved one s cannot grieve, funds are going to be used that could be used to perhaps save someone with any real chance, and so forth. Even if she were just in a persistant vegetative state, that means there is no higher brain function, and at that point, it seems cruel to keep the body going when what made the person a human being, awareness, is no longer there.</p>
<p>A sad situation, I suspect inevitably the courts will rule in favor of precedent and have the machines turned off.</p>
<p>I am on page 28, with the last page reading 35 as I post, it is 1 AM, my battery is dying, and I can’t seem to catch up. When I was training to be a pediatrician, the times that stands out for me most were the delivary room, and “transplant team”. What intense hopes and fears, all with the potential to change so qucikly. </p>
<p>Someone much earlier said a mother might spend a day ir two with a stillbirth. I have never seen that.</p>
<p>In the few minutes it took the post that, the last page increased to 51, and it is 1:06 in California.</p>