That would indeed be terrible healthcare policy. That isn't what is happening tho is it?

yup child is brain dead and has been for a while. Its a tragedy but they need to let go

I meant the 'until the parents eventually reach acceptance' bit. I am surprised their isn't already a legal precedence on this situation tho.

This story has me pretty rustled for a lot of reasons.

First off we have a dead kid from an elective tonsillectomy which is just awful however you look at it.

Now we have this circus over her remains.

I have no idea the details, but Im betting that when things first turned south after the procedure the hospital/health care providers were probably sugar coating things (either consciously or subconsciously) to the family because nobody wants to believe they were involved in a kid's death from an elective procedure. So I'm guessing the family had unrealistic expectations and then suddenly people are telling them their daughter is dead even though she looks exactly like she did X hours / days ago.

Since then the hospital has also probably been unreasonably lenient about letting these shenanigans continue because they know they are likely going to be facing a huge malpractice case so they are trying to do everything they can to appease the parents. I may be wrong, but if this child had been killed by something the hospital didn't feel at fault for, then there is no way they would be ventilating her.

I think this qoute from the hospital admin is actually a pretty good assessment of the situation from the little bit I have read.

"We have done everything to assist the family of Jahi McMath in their quest to take the deceased body of their daughter to another medical facility," hospital spokesman Sam Singer said. To date, they have been unwilling or unable to provide a physician to perform the procedures necessary, transportation, or a facility that would accept a dead person on a ventilator. "

Who is paying for the care?

I find it hard to believe her parents had a "keep dead children technically alive" insurance policy. Is the hospital footing the bill? Parents paying out of pocket?

Surgery is always a risk even routine surgery. The obesity adds to the risk. We all know the parents will sue and settle and the doctors premiums will go up.

Though transferring a brain dead child's body to another facility cant be an easy thing. Especially if the news reports are correct and it is a facility in New York. So no other facility will take this child close to home? Reality is no as they all realize the child is dead


Another great question.

I'm totally guessing but I think the hospital are responsible unless or until they show the reason she is in this condition is not there fault and/or they can legally file the papers pronouncing her dead. (Added) Or have another hospital take responsibility for the child.

The huge cynic in me wouldn't be surprised if the NY place is just in this for the media attention knowing full well that it is unlikely she will ever be transferred to them.

Lol so it's the parents fault right!!

PS it's about a million times more likely a screw up caused the death than obesity.

Ikes,

if this was a surgical screw up as you suspect, would you be behind the parents getting a large cash payment (which isnt to say it will replace their kid)?

Cos in the past you have backed tort reform that would significantly limit the amount the parents would be awarded.

Gotten over it?

Sent from my Hudl HT7S3 using 2+2 Forums

Hmmm I remember arguing that the current tort system focuses on outcomes instead of actual malpractice. This is likely a result of actual malpractice.

My ideal tort system would be vastly different though.

You seem so upset that I put some of the blame on the parents for allowing the child to become so obese that the child required the surgery. Obesity is becoming a serious issue in both the USA and Canada and puts a huge strain on our medical systems

It may be medical malpractice.Reality is will never find out Though any surgery has risk and I am just saying that the obesity adds to the risk. Lets face it chances are this will never see a trial and if it does crying parents will win out over the facts in front of 12 jurors.

lol some of the blame? Because I remember you posting this:

And by some of the blame, you mean the correct answer I'm sure, which is an absurdly small part of the blame.

Your posts here amount to mocking parents about the death of their child while ridiculously blaming their childs death on them. It's time to stop posting.

Just get someone to blow air into her lungs with a tire pump when the parents visit.

You have no clue if her obesity caused it.

Sure, it may be likely, but there are plenty of cases of sleep apnea where the patient is not overweight, and plenty of cases where an overweight person with sleep apnea would still have it even if thin.

I read what you wrote. I fear my point sailed over your head.

I'll try and make it simpler for you: The point was that one could argue is that there is no medical treatment taking place here. Medical treatment is what living people get. Corpses don't get medical treatment. So your "clear set of procedures for discontinuing treatment" would not apply.

Therefore, if someone "pulled the plug" (I don't really like that term because it is so non-specific, but it's being thrown about here), they would not be violating any ethical principles (legal ones are a different matter) regarding the discontinuation of medical treatment since that is not what they are doing.

As I mentioned fully exploring this topic is going to require more posting than I have time for, but hopefully it makes sense to you now.

Ill agree with you that comment was to strong . I feel for the parents losing a child and have never been in that position and never will. Though I do not understand the families not letting go. If they truely believe in a higher power the child is going to a better place.


the leading cause of sleep apnea is being overweight

You know very well, or will learn in a class at some point in med school, that the US/state laws on doctors' ability to pull the plug due to futility (in the absence of clear consent) are murky, at best.

Judges, as we've seen in this case, have tended to err on the side of keeping the life support on.

Can we really say this yet. I thought the hearing was not scheduled until January 7. I think that keeping the body on the machines until the hearing doesn't really tell us what way the judges are going to err.

Hmmmm might want to explain how that contradicts anything I've said

I blame Ronald McDonald for all of this.

He declared the girl dead and then ordered the hospital to extend "life" support twice.

He's already erred on the side of the family.

Compared to other countries, what the US provides is unlimited, limited only by the family's will to fight the doctors in court.

Dude basically every hospital in the US has the same system you described in your post about Canada. Hell, this case even illustrates how you're wrong. The idea that the US has unlimited life support is just ****ing wrong.