On Friday, March 16, the Alameda County Superior Court will conduct a major case management conference in Jahi McMath's medical malpractice action.One key management issue will be whether the parties will first litigate whether or not the guidelines utilized to determine Jahi dead meet the statutory definition of ''dead" under the Uniform Determination of Death Act.
Among the other issues the court will address is whether defendants can reassess whether Jahi is dead. Plaintiffs object because "the test would subject Jahi to grave injury or death" since the test means Jahi would be disconnected from her ventilator for 10 minutes.
Notably, the plaintiffs argue that "the notion that the current guidelines for the determination of death may not be appropriate after more than 30 years of use is not novel." They cite the recent New Yorker article and the upcoming Harvard Medical School conference.
Citing a staff writer for the New Yorker who teaches a course on narrative medicine as some sort of expert on brain death criteria is ludicrous. She wrote an emotional first person opinion piece not some medical journal entry.
ReplyDeleteFrom the medical perspective, McMath is alive , her body has not disintegrated since being declared dead four years ago. The ultimate irrefutable evidence for is the passage of time, and continuation of being alive.
ReplyDeleteThe only unanswered question if the medical definition of brain death invented 50 years ago should continue to accepted as the legal definition.
human life is more than a bunch of organs being kept alive by machines.
Deleteare medics defining if a person is alive or dead based on her quality of life??
Deletewhy all theses test ?
DeleteHer body is alive but she isn't living.
ReplyDeletethe quality of life determines if you are alive or dead !
ReplyDelete