<p>Yes,jym, that is what is maddening. On what planet is a dead person considered disabled?</p>
<p>jym, this is horrible! He is well aware of the facts and is purposely not telling the entire story. To him, the situation seems to be frozen in time around just prior to the third opinion.</p>
<p>Imagine what kind of precedent it will set up if a deceased person will be legally found to be “disabled”?</p>
<p>In reading this, it appears to be what was filed Dec 29/30. In addition to requesting accommodations under ADA (p 14) they have a section entitled “prayer”. I’ve never seen this before in court filings. Anyone??</p>
<p>What accommodations? Is this about Medicaid?</p>
<p>I only ask that because I recently learned that disability qualifies you for Medicaid through a friend’s experience with her dying husband.</p>
<p>Not an attorney here, but isn’t it his job to throw everything but the kitchen sink in the hope that something sticks? Does he have the opportunity to add issues or points of complaint later? Does he run some risk of losing credibility by going to extremes?</p>
<p>That is definitely his job. We await the wisdom of the court.</p>
<p>Update - So now both sides are claiming victory. Next, the Federal hearing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Irrelevant, because this was not simply a tonsillectomy, routine or otherwise. Three distinct procedures were done.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, as far as arguments go (unless they’re clearly frivolous). But that does not give him the right, in a sworn declaration, to misstate the facts. As I posted earlier, he can say whatever he wants to the press, but when he files a declaration with the court, hyperbole, embellishment and misrepresentation don’t fly. I believe that his repeated assertion (in sworn declarations) that this was “a routine tonsillectomy” crosses the line.</p>
<p>P 14 of his complaint seems to be a strategy of claiming Jahi is handicapped under the Rehabilitation Act and is accusing the hospital of discriminating against her (and other brain injured individuals) on the basis of her disability, a violation of the ADA.</p>
<p>Per the reporters blog, the coroners office issued a “generic” death certificate this morning. Doesnt say what they listed as the date of death, and apparently they didnt list a cause.</p>
<p>The judge didn’t just fall off the turnip truck. In some decisions, the facts are taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Plaintiff attorneys tend to pick up that mantra and write as if that is the case no matter the circumstance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The operative word being “believe.”</p>
<p>From the twitter link that Flossy provided about ten minutes ago:</p>
<p>AlCo coroner confirms they did issue a death certificate for #Jahi McMath this morning. It’s “generic” with no specific information.</p>
<p>And “believing” someone is not dead does not make it so.</p>
<p>From the same twitter link, the hospital lawyer got choked up when talking about hoping/ wanting the family to accept that Jahi is dead.</p>
<p>[Jahi</a> McMath: Mom can remove brain-dead daughter from hospital, judge rules - San Jose Mercury News](<a href=“Jahi McMath: Mom can remove brain-dead daughter from hospital, judge rules – The Mercury News”>Jahi McMath: Mom can remove brain-dead daughter from hospital, judge rules – The Mercury News) Mom can take her HOME</p>
<p>
If they let her “die” at home, maybe the family can have peace.</p>
<p>Home-with an ET tube of over 3 weeks duration, a vent, and no feeding tube. With Mom and two family members who are licensed nurses but with unknown exposure to critical care. I have no words. So do they sneak someone into the home to perform surgery?!</p>
<p>Unless the plan is to disconnect her at home and allow her heart to stop so that at least the end comes on their own terms.</p>
<p>Wow.</p>
<p>Sadly, I don’t think peace in the near future. They will be blaming and fighting this hospital for a very long time. None of this makes sense.</p>
<p>How can you take responsibility for the health of someone who is deceased?</p>
<p>Am curious- are we sure both the aunt and grandmother are nurses? I read only the aunt. What does the nursing forum say, nrdsb4?</p>
<p>I read only the grandmother, but they don’t have a doctor wiling to be involved. Nurses cannot accommodate this situation. Any nurses. They need surgery. The “patient” is not getting nutrition. Wow.</p>
<p>This seems to follow the pattern of the Jessie Koochin’s story: the body of the brain-dead boy was allowed to be released to his parents’ home by a court order. Apparently, in that case, the parents and whatever hired help they had were able to take care of the body for a month until the heart finally stopped.</p>
<p>
I think this is an example of the kind of insensitive language that’s been used. We may be talking about a “dead person” but we’re really not talking about a “dead body.” That’s the basic problem - her body isn’t dead. There is a difference between living tissue and dead tissue and her body is composed of the former. By using that terminology one not only is being factually inaccurate, but denying the essence of personhood. The difference is significant: a dead person is still entitled to the dignity and respect of a person; a dead body is just a lump of rotting flesh.</p>
<p>The hospital’s repeated reference to the girl as a “dead body” offends me, and I think she’s dead. One can only imagine the impact of the repeated used of that terminology on the family.</p>