JAHI McGRATH’S REAL DEATH WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY FOCUS LEGISLATIVE ATTENTION ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF BRAIN DEATH AS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF DEATH

d4bd4-ans_30_01_2

Legacy of Jahi McMath – More Brain Death Conflicts

FEEDBLITZ

01 JUL 18

{Commentary by Abyssum}

While Jahi McMath is now definitively dead, the ongoing federal and state lawsuits brought by the McMath family may still clarify or alter traditional understandings of brain death. But even without any judgments or verdicts, the cases have already had an enormous impact.

The McMath cases have very publicly demonstrated that families can successfully resist brain death diagnoses. I have written about this. Furthermore, just yesterday, McMath attorney Chris Dolan saidthat “he has fielded more than a dozen inquiries from families, around the world, asking for help battling a brain death declaration.”
There has always been a “crack” in the door of brain death. The McMath cases have opened that door a bit further, showing other families that they can: (a) refuse permission to conduct brain death tests {which frequently cause real death, the total cessation of vital functions such a circulation of blood and breathing}, (b) dispute the accuracy of tests already conducted, (c) deny the legal validity of brain death tests, or (d) assert religious objections.

About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to JAHI McGRATH’S REAL DEATH WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY FOCUS LEGISLATIVE ATTENTION ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF BRAIN DEATH AS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF DEATH

  1. millerent@charter.net says:

    Perhaps in Jahi’s final death some good may have been granted to those who value the truth of life and of human dignity. IF a postmortem has been performed, some potential findings would be of real meaning for the further protection of the “brain dead”. 1. The finding of viable brain tissues would belie the validity of the tests for “brain death”. 2. The particulars of non-viable brain tissues are equally important: liquifactive necrosis is found when final true death occurs, but if reparative gliosis, calcifications, fibrosis, neo- vascularization, etc. are found, they constitute scientific evidence that the prior court determined “death” was factually impossible. (Cadavers can’t heal or repair tissues; much less can they years later need abdominal surgery, suffer physiological complications, nor die a SECOND time by different criteria!) 3. Both, or indeed either, of the above postmortem findings should at last put stop to the “brain death” ruse of both bioethics, and of law. Roger W Miller, MD

    —————————————–From: “ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP” To: millerent@charter.net Cc: Sent: Sunday July 1 2018 9:13:47PM Subject: [New post] JAHI McGRATH’S REAL DEATH WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY FOCUS LEGISLATIVE ATTENTION ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF BRAIN DEATH AS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF DEATH

    WordPress.com

    abyssum posted: ” Legacy of Jahi McMath – More Brain Death Conflicts FEEDBLITZ 01 JUL 18 {Commentary by Abyssum} While Jahi McMath is now definitively dead, the ongoing federal and state lawsuits brought by the McMath family may still clarify or alter traditional “

Comments are closed.