<p>artloversplus,Doctors can be wrong, of course. That is what second opinions can be for. But more than two physicians have said the same thing- Jahi is brain dead. My MIL spent over a year in hospice before death-it happens. People hang on longer than was anticipated. Not at all a comparable situation to what has happened with Jahi. My mother was given 6 months and spent only days in hospice. How long a person takes to die is not an exact science. Brain death is and Jahi is dead. I wish you and your mother the best.</p>
<p>I’m trying to have an open mind about the doctors being wrong but…
No blood flow to the brain.
Failed the apnea test
Is passing necrotized tissue from her bowel
Has no electrical brain activity.</p>
<p>I’m not sure if this has been posted; a 1/2/2014 statement to the court regarding CHO’s Medical Ethics Committee report. It states that the hospital followed existing medical, legal and ethical standards in determining Jahi dead, both on 12/12/2013 and after consultation by a consulting pediatric neurologist 11 days later (the doctor from Stanford as agreed to during the closed-door court session). It makes for interesting reading. </p>
<p>The only thing that interests me now is why anyone is still interested in this story. There are thousands of people clinging to life at this very minute, along with others dying slow, prolonged deaths. There are people who died today who have not been buried. The family seems to have completely removed Jahi from the public eye. The consensus is that she is dead, and for all we know she has already been quietly buried by her family. There were so many people on the original thread blasting the family for seeking publicity, and now that they are not, the curiosity continues. I don’t understand it.</p>
<p>Sally, against my better judgment I’m going to try this one because admittedly I am very interested in this story for a number of reasons. I’m sure I won’t get to all of them.</p>
<p>The family went on television repeatedly and made some pretty inflammatory charges against a hospital that serves a good sized community and is very involved in charity work. The family’s story of what happened and how they responded does not add up. The family left the hospital with a dead body and has agreed to return it to the coroner at some point. Who is paying for this? T-shirt sales?</p>
<p>You are correct, they could have had a bonfire for all we know. But it does matter. They are continuing to raise money for the care of a person we do not know is actually receiving any care and we don’t know what they are thinking or planning except that they have said they intend to pursue a civil rights suit and also threw in privacy and religion. And, of course everyone expects medical malpractice. But it’s a safe bet this isn’t over and it may not be over for a very long time.</p>
<p>Now, I suppose we could just say, “Well, they didn’t believe she was dead so they took her home. What’s the big deal?” But, really. If they are waiting for a miracle…and that’s a big if… people are going to continue to be curious.</p>
<p>sally305, I doubt that you are above interest in this since you participated in the last thread and are now participating in this thread. If you truly don’t have an interest , why bother to read anything here or post at all?</p>
<p>There is something to be said for closure. This also continues to be interesting to me because of potential precedent that is being set, end of life issues in general, legal and ethical issues, the debate involved. Jahi has given an opportunity for ethicists to further weigh in on all of this. For that, I am grateful to her.</p>
<p>I don’t think they were being blasted for seeking publicity. Every step of the way their behavior was out of the norm. Tragedies happen. Causing this kind of public spectacle over a child’s death is rare and unusual. And, Sevmom is right, we are not yet at closure. Hopefully, they won’t just be able to turn off media interest at will the way they were able to turn it on. There is much more to this story imho.</p>
<p>I think it is understandable that people become interested in a story that is heavily publicized. </p>
<p>The part of this story that I find provocative is the issue of precedence. Precedence set by a court order that, I feel, was made under a great deal of pressure. I fear that this situation will impact future families in a way that is not in the best interest of anyone.</p>
<p>I’m listening to the interview linked above. The attorney says something like… the mother says if her daughter deteriorates or is obviously in pain, then they will take her off the ventilator. She truly doesn’t understand or is in the deepest kind of denial I’ve ever seen.</p>
<p>sevmom, I didn’t say I had no interest in the topic. I said the only thing that interests me about it at this point is trying to understand others’ continued fascination with the case. I think the idea of closure is likely. I guess people want to know how it is resolved. To me it is resolved: the family is now left to privately deal with a deteriorating body of their daughter. And it doesn’t bother me that they might continue to solicit funds for their legal or medical expenses any more than it does when anyone else seeks money from strangers using social media or other avenues.</p>
<p>“And it doesn’t bother me that they might continue to solicit funds for their legal or medical expenses any more than it does when anyone else seeks money from strangers using social media or other avenues.”</p>
<p>That would be in the uncle’s words the “chump change”. They’re looking for a lot more than that out of this debacle. This case has huge social implications, medical ethics issues, race, religion, and potentially frightening legal precedent. It’s also a big mystery and not at all surprising that people are not willing to call it resolved just because the family has decided that they now want privacy. That’s not how it works. And, it shouldn’t be.</p>
<p>Agree that if they really want privacy, they should own the responsibility of completely funding their decision to feed and oxygenate a corpse. Not to continue to collect funds form others (currently at almost $59K [Jahi</a> Mcmath Fund by Latasha Nailah Winkfield - GoFundMe](<a href=“http://www.■■■■■■■■■■■■/Jahi-Mcmath]Jahi”>Jahi Mcmath Fund , organized by latasha spears-winkfield))</p>
<p>Omari @<em>iamOMARI 10h<br>
@meghan</em>daum Your article was both insensitive & cruel. I pray you never experience what my family & I endured.</p>
<p>Uncle Tweet about LA Times article. He’s back.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t a hospice facility have to be licensed by the state? Wouldn’t caring for a person declared dead violate some aspect of their licensing or insurance? I don’t know, but this is why I continue to think she’s in some private residence somewhere. Perhaps there are people with medical experience who are volunteering to care for her, but it just doesn’t ring true for me that licensed medical professionals in a licensed and regulated setting are providing this care.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl - that’s what I keep saying. I own a medical business where I don’t even see patients and we have so much scrutiny for accreditation through medicare that there is no way I think any place could take in a dead body and not risk losing their license.</p>
<p>I was literally asked for an extra emergency plan if an asteroid hit my building (I would have sent that in to a radio show if I wasn’t afraid of being shut down) and I have to have instructions on how to handle soap spilling on the floor. I can’t imagine what you’d go through keeping a dead, decaying body on the premises amongst other patients and employees.</p>