<p>
</p>
<p>And the middle name will be “uninsurable” (as in “a charlatan who can’t get malpractice insurance coverage at any price”).</p>
<p>Not so sure Dolan understands public opinion as well as some people think he does as I think many people out there think he’s very misguided in this. As far as the family goes, of course they are grateful to him. He is doing this now for free. His big payday will probably come later (probably in a settlement) . That’s the way it works.</p>
<p>Of course, you’re right. However, there is also a stunningly large group of people who truly believe the hospital is trying to kill this child and whatever happens in the end that’s what they will believe happened. No way around it. He’s not booking them on every available talk show because he thinks the story is not selling to a significant audience. It’s baffling. But it’s real.</p>
<p>Flossy, Even with that , after over a week of fundraising they still have only about 1300 people who have contributed anything online to their fund. I really think that is a very small amount of people, considering anybody from anywhere could probably be contributing (and you can contribute even very small amounts like $5 or contribute anonymously and you would still be counted). There should be MANY more contributing to the mother’s efforts if more people really thought this was a worthwhile effort ( to maintain Jahi on life support and transport her to a facility).</p>
<p>In this day and age, if there was ANY widespread support of this, the donations would’ve piled up very, very quickly.</p>
<p>Aren’t they up to nearly $50,000? I dunno Sevmon I hope you’re right.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s about donations right now. It’s about pressure. And, there are people marching around that hospital in purple Jahi t-shirts with picket signs. But, I hope you’re right, too.</p>
<p>I think they were at 46000 plus earlier today, yes, but from only about 1300 + donors worldwide. Not many people at all.</p>
<p>How many people are currently marching outside? I don’t have a real sense of that. I did see an article about how disruptive it has been to have all of this going on ( to other families, staff, security, etc.).</p>
<p>Is keeping her on " life support" going to compromise the results of an autopsy ( if & when, it is ever done?)
It seems to me, that it has.
Apologize if this has already been asked & answered.</p>
<p>Today, there were children protesting out there. It looked like a good size crowd.</p>
<p>I guess what I’m still not grasping then- are there a hundred out there, 2 hundred, thousands?</p>
<p>emerald, I do think the medical people here have said the autopsy has probably been compromised because of all the time on “life support.”</p>
<p>Not thousands. I mean I don’t know, I saw video but a hundred or more is probably accurate. It’s hard to tell, really. It’s just bad. And it’s not 3 people with signs. It’s an event.</p>
<p>Most articles about these things say hundreds. It looks like a lot in a small community. Worldwide it’s not a lot. But, I don’t know if worldwide matters.</p>
<p>Also, most people are not analyzing this the way people have on this thread. They read or hear the headline. That’s it.</p>
<p>Oakland has almost 400000 people so doesn’t sound like that many people in the community are protesting. I think that so few donating from across the US or world does say something. It’s a potential precedent that most people just don’t want to support.</p>
<p>And yes, most people only read or hear the headline but many people that do will quickly give money to a cause if they support it. That does not seem to be happening here.</p>
<p>The reporter (Laura Anthony) tweeted 11 hrs ago a copy of the current agreement <a href=“https://twitter.com/LauraAnthony7[/url]”>https://twitter.com/LauraAnthony7</a> If a transport team is found (not yet reported) they will be permitted to use the Dover St. entrance, trnasfer her IV a bag and other fluids to their IV pole, transfer the endotrach tube and hose to their vent, transfer her to their gurney, take her meds, a status report and her vitals noted at that time. This agreement ends when the current TRO ends (assuming nothing changes with any other court extension) 5 pm Tuesday.</p>
<p>THe latest update on the San Jose Mercury News recports this, but has a ludicrous comment about the lack of a feeding tube. it says
The last sentence is irrelevant since she has already suffered irreversible brain damage.</p>
<p>The list of stipulations is also at the bottom of the latest update [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)</p>
<p>Too late to add this to above post:</p>
<p>This article from NBC has a (redacted) copy of the independent evaluation done by Dr. Fisher. Looks like the recommendations were removed at the end. Who released that? Thats a violation of HIPAA. [Extension</a> Granted to Keep Jahi McMath on Life Support | NBC Bay Area](<a href=“Extension Granted to Keep Jahi McMath on Life Support – NBC Bay Area”>Extension Granted to Keep Jahi McMath on Life Support – NBC Bay Area)</p>
<p>And how’d they test her gag reflex if she was intubated? Anyone? They turned off the vent to test her, but did they remove the tube?? That would be surprising.</p>
<p>Also, video in the above link (from Dec 31) shows the mom saying she “isn’t trying to hold onto a corpse”. They also have apparently told the family not to release videos until after the Jan 7 deadline.</p>
<p>And the atty, in that TV video, claims it “doesn’t make sense” that the hospital says " that the child is dead but won’t give us her body. They say that she doesn’t live but they want conditions on her being moved. It just doesn’t make sense". That seems like a thin argument, but was what he purported at the time. It is not one that he is currently putting forth.</p>
<p>The current stipulations say the hospital will allow a transport team to come in and do the transfer in the ICU. Assume that they will have the mom sign the waiver and understanding that the minute a transfer team touches any piece of equipment, that constitutes their taking over, and that the mom is wholly responsible at that time. It would not be unexpected that something could happen during that transfer off the hospital’s vent and onto the transport teams, or also as they move her onto their gurney, and the hospital does not want to be held responsible for anything at that time, nor would they want to be expected to respond medically to any change in the girl’s vital signs or to any change in her stats. It is all so sad.</p>
<p>And here we are at the weekend again. Have to wonder if there really is a transport team willing to take her, or where they would be taking her. There was what almost seemed like a flip comment in the newspaper update, saying In the first paragraph of the quote below, that no one would do the procedures in a moving vehicle. Well, lets hope not! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Will insurance pay out for further treatments on a dead person?</p>
<p>That was discussed pages back, m2ck. Zoos addressed it, and several of us discussed it. In essence, its likely that there will be a difference between what is authorized and what may or may not be paid when a claim is submitted. Doubtful, though, that insurance would pay, especially with a death certificate now produced by the coroner, dated Dec 12.</p>
<p>Also have to wonder, now that there is an official death certificate, if they will really be able to find any transport team or facility willing to do what they want.</p>