Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Routes Available | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Time to take brain dead patients off life support

January 3, 2014 - Andrea Johnson
Two tragic cases of brain dead patients are in the news this week.

In one case, a mother is fighting desperately to force an Oakland, Calif., hospital to keep her 13-year-old daughter, who was declared brain dead following a tonsillectomy in early December, on life support. In another case, the husband of a brain dead pregnant woman wants a North Texas hospital to disconnect her from life support. The hospital has refused, citing a state law that requires them to provide life support to save the fetus of a pregnant woman.

Erick Munoz, husband of Marlise, said his 33-year-old wife would never want to be kept alive on life support. Marlise, who suffered a likely pulmonary embolism in November when she was 14 weeks pregnant, was a paramedic like her husband. She made her wishes on the subject well known, according to her husband, who doesn't seem to want to keep his wife on life support even if it might save their unborn child. None of the articles have said so explicitly, but I imagine the family is concerned about the prospect of the baby being born with severe disabilities. Surely, this is not an ideal situation for a pregnancy and chances are high that the fetus has already sustained brain damage if the mother was without oxygen for several minutes. If he or she is born prematurely, there is also an increased risk of disability. Medical bills are probably also extensive. The Munozes already have a one-year-old son at home whom Erick Munoz will now have to raise on his own. But doctors at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas have told the family that state law requires that they must leave Marlise on life support until her pregnancy has reached 24 weeks or until she has miscarried.

Meanwhile, at Children's Hospital, Oakland, Nailah Winkfield has been waging a bitter battle to force doctors to leave her teenage daughter on a ventilator. Doctors have said 13-year-old Jahi McMath is brain dead, has no hope of recovery, and they have refused to do tracheotomy surgery or insert a feeding tube or assist in any way in moving the girl to a long term care facility. According to news reports, the county has already issued the girl's death certificate.

A judge ruled today that Winkfield can remove the girl from the hospital as long as she assumes full responsibility for the girl's body, according to news reports. Winkfield, who seems to be in a state of denial, still seems to believe that the girl will recover. There is apparently a long term care facility in Long Island that might take the girl, but first the family needs to find a doctor willing to insert a trach and a feeding tube.

I think it's probably time to disconnect both Marlise Munoz and Jahi McMath, both of whom are dead, from life support. While it may be crass to consider money, it is also true that medical resources are finite. Jahi McMath is occupying a bed in the intensive care unit at Children's Hospital that another child probably needs. Everyone can sympathize with the pain of a mother who has lost a child and with her need for time to come to terms with the loss, but I'm not sure that anyone can afford to give her weeks and months, at the cost of millions of dollars, to come to terms with that loss and to accept that what the doctors are telling her is true. In the case of Munoz, I would support her husband if he wanted to keep his wife on life support long enough to save his child, but I can also sympathize with his position that his wife would not want this and he does not want it for her. Taking her off life support is a choice that he should legally be allowed to make.

Who do you think is right in these situations?

 
 

Article Comments

(36)

AndreaJohnson

Jan-04-14 1:22 PM

Yes, partly because of money, but also because of the dignity that is due to the body of the deceased and the emotional cost to both families of leaving a brain dead person on life support.

In the McMath case, there are three other children for the parents to think of; in the Munoz case, the father must also think of his one-year-old son. I just read of another tragic case in Hawaii, where a three-year-old girl is severely brain damaged after being given too much anesthetic during a dental procedure. Her mother is taking her off life support because she doesn't want the child to live on in a vegetative state, with no hope of recovery. That must be heartbreaking, but I think it is the right decision.

Jan-04-14 1:21 PM

Depending on religion, is brian death the accepted proof of death of the body and soul?

rajiihammr

Jan-04-14 1:02 PM

Andrea's positions seem sensible to me. I can't imagine why Texas has a law mandating that a brain-dead person be made to carry the child to viability...unless the law was written under the cloud of abortion hysteria.

landslide14

Jan-04-14 1:00 PM

I highly suspect the Family had no choice but to take it to the media.. The hospital and the judicial system are stepping in and taking charge..

Does the pregnant dead ladies child not have a right to life?

landslide14

Jan-04-14 12:52 PM

she also shouldn't be allowed to keep her dead child on life support.

Because of money right????????????

AndreaJohnson

Jan-04-14 11:31 AM

How compassionate is it to feed into a mother's delusion that her child is going to wake up someday when she's brain dead? One of the parents of Jahi McMath is a Home Depot worker and the other is a truck driver. It costs around $2,000 per day to keep someone on a ventilator, at a guess, and insurance won't be paying for that past the point a death certificate was issued, which gives her date of death as several weeks ago. This family also has three other children. I can't imagine how devastated this mother must be, but she also shouldn't be allowed to keep her dead child on life support.

disgusted

Jan-04-14 8:21 AM

So much compassion and understanding.

AndreaJohnson

Jan-04-14 12:58 AM

The family members took it to the press.

landslide14

Jan-03-14 11:38 PM

if nature were allowed to take its course we wouldnt be killing millions of babies with abortion every year..

Death is a private matter.. The Media needs to stay out of it.. But like the Dead bodies coming back from War the media has to be their to View and disrupt family grieveing..

The media has become blood thirsty in every way..

Right now blood and guts sells so that is what we see read and hear...

AndreaJohnson

Jan-03-14 7:50 PM

The hospital isn't killing her. The child is already dead. The mother refuses to accept it and is racking up millions of dollars of medical bills in keeping the kid on life support.

The pregnant woman is also dead and has been dead for a month and a half. If nature were allowed to take its course, the baby would have died with its mother back in November.

landslide14

Jan-03-14 7:40 PM

feels right to think thaking them off is the right thing to do..

Unless of course you are that parent of that child..

Time for the media to back on out.. Quit with the media intrustion and let the family do what it feels they must do..

Media just puts additional strain on the family who is trying to come to grips with shutting off the breathing of their child..

On the baby thing.. Just another form of abortion.. The Moms dead..do we kill the kid too????

 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web