<p>Flossy, what your intent was is your business but you did, in fact use the words silly and nonsense to describe this situation. You passed judgment on the family and its lawyer, and you made the quote I just posted. All pretty ugly things to say and bearing no relationship to what you are now claiming.</p>
<p>Good grief! You don’t like my tone? But we basically agree on the facts?</p>
<p>I can live with that.</p>
<p>I did use the words silly and nonsense but you’re taking them out of context. I explained the little quote. Maybe, you misunderstood my intent. I’ve actually been pretty consistent. </p>
<p>It’s a sad situation.
I’m skeptical about the families advisors.
This happened weeks ago. It’s enough.</p>
<p>Sevmom, just because you didn’t say something doesn’t mean it wasn’t said.</p>
<p>Zoosermom, you need to quit going after Flossy. Let it go or this thread will probably be shut down. You have made your point over and over again. Continue the discussion but ignore Flossy if you don’t like her tone.</p>
<p>You can ignore my posts, onward, but if flossy claims to not have said something that is present in the thread, I am going to call her on it. She can ignore my posts, too.</p>
<p>electonblue This child seems to be brain dead, not the same issue for most end of life situations. My 91 year old MIL was in hospice for 15 months (designed to be for people with much less than that). She/ her family did nothing to prolong that. It really was agony for those of us who loved her for that process to take that long. To prolong the life of a 13 year old girl who is brain dead seems cruel.
wow, zoosersmom, your post 163 is uncalled for.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They are not prolonging ANYTHING because there is no life. They’re slowing down the decomposition process. That’s it.</p>
<p>Agree. Bad choice of words but there are some here who may be still questioning that .</p>
<p>Since it looks like the states differ in their definitions of “death”, I was curious what CA’s definition was:</p>
<p>[CA</a> Codes (hsc:7180)](<a href=“http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=07001-08000&file=7180]CA”>http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=07001-08000&file=7180)</p>
<p>From what I’ve read so far, the apnea test has 100% sensitivity and 100% selectivity in determination of brain death, and there are other tests in addition to blood flow etc. I wonder if this is what the family wants - more tests to be performed?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.onelegacy.org/site/docs/OLMDNewsletter_BrainDeathPronouncement_071910.pdf[/url]”>http://www.onelegacy.org/site/docs/OLMDNewsletter_BrainDeathPronouncement_071910.pdf</a></p>
<p>Three doctors including a Stanford neurologist have run a battery of tests and all 3 declared her brain dead. One was independent and appointed by the court.</p>
<p>Right now, they want time to have her moved to another facility. But can’t find one willing to take her. Several have backed out.</p>
<p>I don’t think the parents understand that their child will not come back to life. Is this because they refuse to listen to social workers and doctors that explain it to them , or just can’t accept this horrible news ?</p>
<p>Either way, it is unethical for any medical personnel to take this on and give the parents any sense of false hope that she will return or recover…and yes the expense to the taxpayer should come into play. Sadly , this will turn into a malpractice suit and will be dragged not only through the medical system , but the legal system as well</p>
<p>What I don’t understand is why anyone is continuing to pay for this. According to one article I read, the deceased child’s care, if she’s moved to another facility, would be paid for by “private insurance.” But what private insurance company would ever fund something like this??? The physicians say someone has died; the family members disagree; and the insurance company says, “Sure, why not? We’ll just continue to pay for whatever you want.” Sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever.</p>
<p>Insurance companies generally restrict coverage to care that is “medically necessary” - a phrase which is more often than not construed in favor of the insurer rather than the insured. How in the world does this qualify?</p>
<p>In a society where many of our fellow citizens have no health insurance and little or no access to health care, this is a ridiculous waste of resources.</p>
<p>I admit I didn’t read all the posts. But I did see an interview with the Mom and another relative.( not sure if it’s the dad or not.) They stated that some of the girls body showed movement and that on the machine that keeps track of her breathing it can tell when she is breathing and when the machine is doing it and she supposedly is doing more of the breathing by herself than before. So in their eyes they believe she is recovering. I just can not imagine what they are going through.</p>
<p>How can anyone on here comment what is best for this family? They are the ones going through this unthinkable tragedy and no one (other than a court of law) should be evaluating their decision.</p>
<p>So, if they are doing talk shows and seeking donations people are allowed to have opinions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This has gone way past what is best for this family . . . the conversation should be about what is best for society. And when we’re unwilling to fund expensive or newly developed treatments for the child victims of rare diseases who still have some hope of recovery, paying for 24-hour care for a child who died two weeks ago is outrageous!</p>
<p>How can you go in for a tonsillectomy and end up dying? I don’t get it. Did the doctors screw up the operation? Was there some kind of malpractice involved here?</p>
<p>Goldenpooch, you might want to read this:</p>
<p>[When</a> routine surgeries go wrong - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/19/health/routine-surgery-complications/index.html]When”>http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/19/health/routine-surgery-complications/index.html)</p>
<p>GP- It was not a simple tonsillectomy. She had sleep apnea and three procedures. Later, in recovery she began to bleed profusely and went into cardiac arrest. Dec 12th she was declared brain dead. …and here we are. The hospital obviously can’t comment much due to privacy concerns but a malpractice suit eventually won’t surprise anyone.</p>
<p>Sleep apnea in a child is rare. I’m guessing she had other health problems going into this surgery which would make the surgery riskier. I’m interested in hearing what doctors on this thread think were some of the possible risks she faced going into surgery.</p>