January 4, 2014

And the nominees for Worst Playing of the Race Card in the Year 2014 are...

#1:
Conservatives Are Awfully Silent About Jahi McMath

After Terri Schiavo, you’d think more conservatives would be lining up to side with the 13-year-old’s family....

For some reason, Jahi’s condition doesn’t seem to resonate the same way. The silence from the right is rather deafening, with almost no political movement—other than the Schiavo family’s personal outreach—for Jahi. It's easier, apparently, to move legislative mountains for a white woman in conservative Florida precincts than it is for a black girl from ardently liberal, urban Oakland, Calif.
The Schiavo case involved a conflict between parents who wanted to keep their daughter alive and a husband with the legal power to procure her departure.

58 comments:

Clyde said...

Those folks over at The Root should try watching a little more Fox News instead of MSNBC. Fox News was all over the story last week, providing sympathetic coverage to the mother, although the network's medical news contributors noted that the difference was that Terri Schiavo was in a profound vegetative state but not "brain dead", while Jahi McMath was declared brain dead. She's gone, and sadly, she's not coming back. I can empathize with her mother's pain at the tragic loss of her daughter, but keeping her hooked up to machines with no hope of recovery is a hideously expensive travesty.

mccullough said...

It's possible Republicans learned their lesson from the Schiavo ordeal. Compassionate Conservatism at its zenith.

ddh said...

Another difference in the two cases is that the husband wanted to withdraw food and hydration from his wife, who was in a persistant vegetative state, whereas the hospital says the girl is brain dead.

ddh said...

A huge difference between euthanasia and reallocating medical resources to the living.

MathMom said...

Perhaps they need to enlarge their blogroll: The gifts of Jahi by Michelle Malkin, and Jahi McMath update: Hospital finally agrees to let family take her by Michelle Malkin.

Sean Gleeson said...

Yeah, the main difference, from an ethical perspective, is that Terri Schiavo was alive, as opposed to dead. I will freely admit to a bias in favor of living persons.

MaxedOutMama said...

Conservatives aren't silent on this. It's taken a while, because most conservatives do believe in the concept of brain death, and it was only Jahi's prolonged survival well after the time expected if the hospital's claims were true (that brain stem death had occurred) which gradually began to trigger the realization that something might really not be on the up and up.

This is completely off the mark.

If the child were in fact dead, that would be one thing. But since we now have a good guess that the hospital was wrong in one claim, now many are starting to doubt the entire thing.

I notice also that judge is becoming skeptical or something.

The logjam, if reporting can be believed, is really doctors. I'm not sure that the reporting can be believed.

Basil said...

Schiavo was not brain dead or any other dead. Her husband just wanted to starve her to death. This little girl, God rest her soul, is actually dead.

Phil 3:14 said...

To echo Clyde, Fox has been all over this story.

David said...

There has been restraint, an unusual quality these days. One immediate reaction is "just let the poor girl go." But the parents have enough to burden them without a bunch of strangers telling them what to do via the internet and the news media.

Darrell said...

You expect the Left to tell the truth? Garage will be around soon to link it with Walker and the Koch brothers.

Jane said...

OK, so this is flaky, on multiple counts: both the fact that there's a difference between minimally conscious and brain dead, and the fact that conservatives are in fact talking about her; what they're not seeing is politicians intervening in a court case, because the court system does appear to be working.

Of course, this does seem to indicate that The Root is falling into the murkiness that is the concept of "brain death" if they equate it with PVS and see the McMath girl and Terri Schiavo as equivalent cases.

And the more I read about it, the concept of brain death does seem murky and seems more about a legal construct than "real death."
http://janetheactuary.blogspot.com/2014/01/legally-dead-or-dead-dead.html

Sorun said...

People who put everything in the context of race lose their critical thinking skills. It's a mental illness.

Revenant said...

Aren't people disconnected from life support thousands of times a year without any accompanying media frenzy?

Lyle said...

The Root needs a better editor perhaps.

timkb4cq said...

Terri Schiavo, while technically alive, was missing most of her brain. CT scans showed fluid where nearly all the cerebral cortex is supposed to be.
Yes, the brain stem was still functioning but there was no consciousness or hope of recovery. The ridiculous Executive & Legislative actions in her case did indeed cost Florida Republicans support from those who were paying attention.

Much less is publically known about Jahi McCath's condition so I can't judge whether the doctors or the family have the right of it.

SGT Ted said...

What are they complaining about? They press got their media Circus.

Conservatives did exactly what the leftists wanted them to do in the Shiavo case; butt out.

And now they bitch that conservatives haven't inserted themselves in this, when they wanted them to go away during the Shiavo case?

How about they just STFU about what conservatives should do?

donald said...

When they told my my wife was brain dead, I asked repeatedly exactly what that meant. The doctor was forceful in his response that her brain was gone. Hat there was no activity and there was no scenario outside of a real live can't possibly be accounted or scientifically miracle that it work in anyway again.

That's what brain dead means.

donald said...

Me, they told me.

Big Mike said...

Terri Schaivo's parents played a bunch of Republican politicians, to the latter's eventual regret. Now it's racism that they don't want to get played again?

William said...

I have been in a persistent vegetative state for many years now, and I wouldn't want anyone pulling the plug on me.

Inga said...

Revenent, it makes news when families want to keep alive a person who is brain dead, indefintly. Anyone who has ever taken care of a dead body kept alive by machinery knows just how dead that body really is. The human body cannot be kept "alive" on "life support" forever without physiological breakdown and that's pretty awful.

Darrell said...

Terri Schiavo died because she was denied water and food. She would have lived a normal lifespan (about 40 more years) had that not happened. She was not on life support of any kind except a feeding tube. A legally blind probate judge viewed all the evidence in her case and his stated rationale for reaching his decision is filled with factual errors (regarding Karen Ann Quinlan). She was given a single bite at the apple from a judge who normally decides who gets the silverware and no additional reviews in what was in reality a capital case. She had parents and a brother that were willing to take care of her and before she was murdered, had a trust fund set up for her parents to do so by a millionaire. Everyone who opposed what was going on was right then, and right now.

Fuck you assholes that didn't follow the case. I hope this happens to you.

Gahrie said...

If the child were in fact dead, that would be one thing. But since we now have a good guess that the hospital was wrong in one claim, now many are starting to doubt the entire thing.

Jahi is dead. The only reason her heart continues to beat, and lungs move, is machines forcing those actions. Terri Schiavo was only being supported by a feeding tube, she was still alive.

Conservatives are avoiding this case because while they sympathize with the family, they do recognize brain death as death. Also, there is a lot of support for the idea that if the family has the resources to preserve her body in a forlorn hope for a miracle, they should be allowed to do so.

timkb4cq said...

I did follow the Schiavo case. And if my cerebral cortex had turned into fluid like Terri's Schiavo's had there would be no "me" there to want anything. The "me" now would not want my family trying to keep the husk alive.

Gahrie said...

If the child were in fact dead, that would be one thing. But since we now have a good guess that the hospital was wrong in one claim, now many are starting to doubt the entire thing.

Jahi is dead. The only reason her heart continues to beat, and lungs move, is machines forcing those actions. Terri Schiavo was only being supported by a feeding tube, she was still alive.

Conservatives are avoiding this case because while they sympathize with the family, they do recognize brain death as death. Also, there is a lot of support for the idea that if the family has the resources to preserve her body in a forlorn hope for a miracle, they should be allowed to do so.

SteveR said...

Sometimes Fox News is the voice of conservatism, unless its not

Cedarford said...

Darrell said...
Terri Schiavo died because she was denied water and food. She would have lived a normal lifespan (about 40 more years) had that not happened.
==============
Not true. The prognosis for most warehoused vegetables is under 10 years due to infections...mainly respiratory or systemic ones from bedsores. It apparantly was only from the diligence of Michael Schiavo personaly, or directing others paid from money from the million-dollar malpractice suit in daily care to clean the husk and move it to avoid bedsores that "life" was prolonged. As was, autopsy showed more than no brain left other than rudimentary stem activity - it showed many of her bones, notably spine, ribs, and legs, were barely there due to constant calcium loss. "they were the consistency of wet sponges". The husk had puddled and pancaked down

More Darrell- "Fuck you assholes that didn't follow the case. I hope this happens to you."

It would be better if you lost a loved one to an end state condition just like Schiavos and you couldn't pull the plug because one relative backed by religious fanatics disagreed. And that loved one had no living will. Then you would understand.

Gahrie said...

How about the turnabout question?

Where are all the leftists who supported pulling the plug on Schiavo? How come no one on the Left is demanding that we stop using medical resources keeping a corpse breathing?

Anthony said...

I've been thinking Gahrie's question for a while now. Jahi's case is why we can't have nice health care, or at least cheaper health care - Children's Hospital is going to spend more on this than they'd have paid out on a wrongful death claim.

Herb said...

yup was just going to say I guess they haven't read Malkin's pieces. MathMom beat me to it

Herb said...

yup was just going to say I guess they haven't read Malkin's pieces. MathMom beat me to it

Cedarford said...

ddh said...
A huge difference between euthanasia and reallocating medical resources to the living.

=====================
The difference between Schiavo and McMath is smaller than many think. Once the rest of the brain is gone and only the primitive brain stem survives to "order" other bodily functions - there is no consciousness, no emotion, no memory - no recovery.

Researchers, highly interested in how the brain "connects" to the rest of the body in signals and endoctrine function have had more and more success in keeping rats,rhesus monkeys "alive" with their heads cut off for months. Machines connect electric signals through the spine nerves to order heartbeat and breathing. Blood is monitored for hormone changes and more knowledge is gained on how the brain regulates other endoctrine organs, even what master chemicals help form the system.

It seems clear that we can use machines, sensors, and substitute hormones to replace the brainstem - at least for months, sometimes over a year.

For sake of simplicity, call it the "brainstem machine" as opposed to the respirator machine or feeding machine.

Would a person with their head cut off after their brains were blown out or destroyed in other trauma.. hooked up to such a device ....be alive??

Perhaps soon the definition of brain death will have to change to reflect technologies march. Could a husband who shot his wife in the head and her becoming what used to be brain dead demand a "brainstem machine" be installed and her head cut off so as to avoid murder charges??

To me, what was McMath or Schiavo and any chance of return was permanently ended when the rest of their brain died. That may become the definition of brain death in the future.

Darrell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Darrell said...

Terri Schiavo WASN'T a warehoused vegetable, Cedarford. That's how much you know about the case. She was ambulatory and there were videotapes of it that the judge would not view. Now would he view tapes of her watching the Sunday Mass on her television and "responding" to what she was seeing that her nurses shot. Of course, being legally blind may have played a role in that. Medical experts testified that she should live a normal lifespan. But do go on . . .

jr565 said...

Look, if families want to keep their kids alive who are brain dead because they disagree with the diagnosis or hope that a cure can come in the future let them. Can they pay for it? So, keep the kid alive.
The issue with Shiavo was her husband MAY have had a hand in offing her. There was NO written note about what she wanted to be done in these cases.
And the husband got money to care for her after promising the court that he would keep her alive.
But then he decided to off her.
At the time her family was more than willing to take control to keep her alive.
And he was remarried at that point.
He should have ceded authority to the people who cared for her at the moment. If they are suffering delusions about their daughter and think there's a chance to save her let them.
If the husband had a written contract that said "in the event of me being brain dead, here's what i want' it would be different.

But there was no such paper.
The husband was a major league douche. And I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't put her in the coma in the first place.

Cedarford said...

DArrell - "ambulatory", reacting to Catholic Mass on TV, in the sworn testimony of a RTL fanatic nurse "reacting to stimuli and as cognitive deep down as you or me"....

Yep, all with a liquified and gone brain cortex and cerebellum. It must be a Holy Miracle!!!

jr565 said...

It sounds like he gave up on trying to treat Terri, and then suddenly came up with the claim that she would have wanted this. Only, why then would he have gone through all the steps he did if she said Do Not Resuscitate.
In any event there was no proof that she said any such thing.
At that point what should have happened was the decision get transfered to the family members that want to keep her alive if there is such choice.
THe husband or wife should be looked at and the courts should see where they are in their lives. If they are getitng remarried, you know what, give the choice over her actual family members.

jr565 said...

Cedarford, just as viability may change thus changing the whole concept of when its right to kill a baby during an abortion, so too may our concept of brain injuries.
If family members want to keep her alive, and there is no actual written consent that she did want to a DNR then what is your problem with the family members being able to assume the responsibilty?
If they are deluding themselves let them make that choice.
Not the guy who decided to move on with his life.
And, as I stated, earlier, he won a lawsuit against a doctor where he received a million dollars and said he would take care of her with that money.
In other words, the idea was not that she wanted a DNR, rather that he would continue to try to care for her. At a certain point he gave up.
Suddenly coming up with a conversation she had about wanting to not be resucitated is awfully convenient absent corroboration. And even moreso, why then did he tell the court he would continue to care for her and get money to do so? If she had truly wanted a DNR, wouldn't have have told the court that at the time?

Maybe he lost faith in a cure. Maybe he moved on with his life. But she still had family mamembers who were willling to take care of her. Whny then did he insist in sticking the knife in the wound. What a heartless bastard.

jr565 said...

Cedarford wrote:
It would be better if you lost a loved one to an end state condition just like Schiavos and you couldn't pull the plug because one relative backed by religious fanatics disagreed. And that loved one had no living will. Then you would understand.

She had no living will. Let me repeat. She had no living will. If the cousin wants to assume responsibility why not let him? If Terri was truly brain dead it's not as if she would notice, right?

What turned the case for me was that he won a lawsuit and a million or so dollars and said the money would be used for her care. That files in the face of the idea that she wanted a DNR. Please explain that discrepency.
If you can't then the cousin who wants to make the choice should be able to.
If there were a living will, then of course it should be honored.

Inga said...

"How about the turnabout question?

Where are all the leftists who supported pulling the plug on Schiavo? How come no one on the Left is demanding that we stop using medical resources keeping a corpse breathing?"

1/4/14, 12:00 PM

Gahrie, I'm a leftist who says this brain dead child should not be kept on "life support". Ive heard NO ONE on the left calling for her to be supported in such a way. Do you seriously think that because the family is black, that leftists would be in agreement with this families' mistaken belief that this child be kept "alive" this way?

EDH said...

Darrell provides a concise summary of how I came to view the Schiavo case, despite the media narrative: that it was a state-ordered execution at the behest of a rakehell.

Is there a picture of Jahi McMath without a smile. So sad.

cubanbob said...

jr565 said…

As you alluded to in the end it was only about the money. The money that was awarded to keep her 'alive' so to speak. The husband could of just legally divorced her and walked away leaving the parents to continue albeit hopelessly but in the end he wanted the money.

As for Jahi McMath thats a different story. We don't know the full facts and so why the rush to judgment? Assuming that her entire brain is in fact dead then keeping her on a ventilator and tube feeding her but otherwise not providing any drug regiments she suffer suffer systemic organ failure followed by cardiac arrest soon enough.

From what I read the mother in her grief is also guilt struck by having her daughter's nightmare come true and watching her daughter die in front of her eyes in terror. Can't imagine a worse torture for a parent.

Inga said...

I'm not certain, but I highly doubt she is on a tube feeding. Her metabolism and certainly her digestion, which depends on her brain for hormones, would most likely not be functioning. She may have IV nutrition going. Blood flow to her digestive tract is probably very compromised as well as her kidney function.

Inga said...

Also adding that I'm pretty darn sure she isn't on a tube feeding, aspiration of the feeding would undoubtedly occur.

MayBee said...

Everyone can afford it now because there is no lifetime limit for coverage.

Revenant said...

Revenent, it makes news when families want to keep alive a person who is brain dead, indefintly.

No, not usually.

Inga said...

Revenant, yes actually it does, it's incredibly unsual.

Gahrie said...

Anybody remeber the novel Coma?

cubanbob said...

@Inga would it be so terrible to feed her by IV and keep her on a ventilator without the drug regimen for a few more weeks until she succumbs to multiple organ failure and cardiac arrest so her family can come to acceptance?
She was just a kid who was otherwise healthy and suffered a catastrophic outcome from what should have been a routine surgical procedure. Why not give the family a few weeks to come to the acceptance of the inevitable without having them become the executioners so to speak by pulling the plug now?

Inga said...

I'm not against giving the family the time to come to grips with this. It will be harder on the family watching her multiple organ failure and what comes with all that. However, for those people out there who are giving her false hope, shame on them.

Big Mike said...

Do you seriously think that because the family is black, that leftists would be in agreement with this families' mistaken belief that this child be kept "alive" this way?

For most of them, yes, of course.

Inga said...

Big Mike, you don't really believe that, do you? You don't know leftists as well as you think.

Renee said...

My Twitter feed had the story from several peo-life outlets.

Renee said...

Haliegh Poutre

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/02/27/haleigh-poutre-speaks/

Ipswichie said...

I was against Terri Schiavo being starved to death, and when I learned about Jahi from Fox News 2 weeks ago, I got all fired up about the culture of death in California. I do hope this family wins their battle to keep their daughter on life support, and I'll be donating to the fund that is most effective in helping them.

Ipswichie said...

And if that's just too simplistic and FauxNews for y'all, I'll go a step further: I told everyone in my family and extended family that if they didn't want - in a PVS or "brain-dead" state - to be kept alive with at least tubes for hydration and nutrition, they'd better lawyer up and get a rock-solid living will.

Darrell said...

Schiavo-- the husband--said he came home and found his wife unconscious and hardly breathing--yet called her brother, wasting valuable time. The brother came over and when he saw what had happened said "Call a fucking ambulance! Why the Hell did you call me?" Schiavo worked for the local sheriff's office and had taken some paramedica training. After he won that lawsuit against the ER doctors, he propmptly had a doctor lie and got her put into a taxpayer-funded hospice for the terminally ill. She was not terminal--expected to live 6 months or less, according to their definition. Her co-workers testified that during the Karen Quinlan case, she berated them about telling jokes about it and said she would do anything to live and hold out hope for a cure or miracle. Even though hubby testified that she wanted to die if anything like that happened, a coworker of his said that Sciavo said that he and Terri never talked about it. Said something like--who the hell talks about stuff like that at our age? The judge disregarded all of that when he made his judgement.