On December 9, 2013, 13-year-old Jahi McMath
underwent a tonsillectomy at a children's hospital in Oakland, California. She
suffered postoperative hemorrhage and became comatose. She was declared
brain-dead by doctors at that hospital on December 12th. This was later confirmed by a court-appointed outside
consultant.
There are many issues surrounding this case. Was the
tonsillectomy indicated? Some stories reported that it was done to improve her
obstructive sleep apnea. Why wasn't she successfully rescued from her
complication of bleeding? I can find no discussion about how she could have
bled so much without intervention in any article about the case.
But one of the most distressing aspects of this poor child's
demise is that despite many years of experience with brain death, it is still
misunderstood by laypeople, the courts, and even some medical providers.
As of December 26th, 14 days after the brain
death declaration, the child remains on a mechanical ventilator with apparently
stable vital signs.
A lawyer for the family had petitioned the court for
the outside expert's consultation and to prevent the hospital from
disconnecting the child's life-support.
After all this time, a judge has finally ruled that the
hospital may remove the life-support but not until December 30th to give the
family time to appeal to a higher court.
What a shame. It is bad enough that this girl has died. But
to realize that in 2013, society still cannot deal with the concept that brain
death is "death" makes it sadder.
It may be a problem of terminology. When we say
"brain-death," it somehow does not sound like real death.
The problem is compounded by other words used in this post
such as "life-support" and "vital signs." These terms
perpetuate the mistaken notion that life is still present.
The Harvard Criteria for brain death were written in 1968.
That is 45 years ago. Why are we still debating this in court?
The answer is, we have failed to properly educate the public
about this relatively straightforward fact.
It must be extremely difficult for this child's
family to accept that the girl is dead after what many have called
"routine" surgery. I feel very bad for them.
Something that has not been mentioned in any report about
this case is another issue that society has trouble handling—organ donation.
Perhaps the family should consider this. Those who have been in similar
situations say that donating organs gives them some comfort in that part of their
loved one lives on and that someone else has been helped.
I hope the higher court does the right thing and declines to
review the case and that the family can eventually find peace.
UPDATE: December 27, 2013
According to the
San Jose Mercury-News, the family says it has found a facility willing to provide long-term care for the girl. They want doctors at the Children's Hospital to perform a tracheostomy and a gastrostomy (semi-permanent feeding tube), which they have declined to do because it is futile.
The child's uncle is quoted, "
It looks like we may have found a miracle to keep Jahi alive and to give her another fighting chance to wake up." I'm sorry to say that is not going to happen.
Also, the original surgery was much more than just a tonsillectomy. The girl underwent a full obstructive sleep apnea operation consisting of the following: adenoidectomy, tonsillectomy, uvulopalatopharyngloplasty (UPPP), and submucous resection of bilateral
inferior turbinates of the nose.