Are hospitals "organ harvest happy"?

Home Forums In The News Are hospitals "organ harvest happy"?

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 52 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #617275
    Mammele
    Participant

    This from ABC News: Teen Survived Kalamazoo Shooting After Being Pronounced Brain Dead

    The article goes on to relate how right before the 14 year old survivor was prepped for removal of her organs, she squeezed her mother’s hand, then again when prompted by her mom to prove she could hear her, followed by two thumbs up when asked to by her doctor.

    Now this girl was declared brain dead shortly after arriving at the hospital and was literally about to be butchered alive. Unfortunately she’s still critical and most such patients don’t end up making it, but murder is murder.

    Regardless of whether brain death really equals death, this is brutality according to all standards. We hear such stories every once in a while, but who knows how many more victims still feel fully and have brain function but can’t hear or respond or have no family member nearby and their organs are harvested while actually very much alive.

    So I’m wondering, are medical staff truly clueless or are they simply blinded by the prospect of doing some transplants to save others, organ donor be damned?

    #1138782
    Mammele
    Participant

    Thanks Mods by the way for giving me a cute subtitle — without me having to beg…

    #1138783
    Joseph
    Participant

    And Tendler wants to change the Halacha to permit harvesting the organs of living people.

    #1138784
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    OOH we havent doen this in a while

    I’m not sure what you mean by change halacha see Yoma 85a.

    There are poskim who allowed brain death at least in theory if not practice.

    As an aside does anybody know of a posek who doesn’t allow a person to receive a heart transplant?

    Thanks

    As to your question

    “So I’m wondering, are medical staff truly clueless or are they simply blinded by the prospect of doing some transplants to save others, organ donor be damned?”

    PArtly the former. Though the bigger problem is lack of understanding among laypeople regarding “brain death” which is often used interchangably with coma and persistive vegetative state. I dont know if this patient was actually declared brain dead or not media reports dont mean much though of course it is possible she was declared.

    See for example a recent AMI piece on brain death where the author wrote “… Doctors where convinced that many of those who where breathing and whose blood was still circulating were really dead beacuse their brain function had ceased entirely.” and ” … patients who are brain-dead but whose circulatory and respiratory symptoms are still working.”

    I assume this fellow researched his article yet he does not understand the abc’s of brain death. By definition a brain dead pateitn is not breathing rather a ventilator is breathing for him. By defintiion if he can breathe he isnt brain dead. Yet ths mistake is repeatedly made even by somehwat knowledgeable people.

    #1138785
    Joseph
    Participant

    Mistake? The hospital nearly murdered this girl!

    #1138786
    Mammele
    Participant

    Joseph: Ubiq is referring to a general mistake in terminology, not a mistake by Bronson Methodist Hospital in particular.

    Ubiq: so assuming the author of the article (Emily Shapiro) was wrong about the girl being brain dead, what are the laws regarding when organs may be harvested from an accident / shooting victim? How do they determine clinical death? Can she be breathing on her own and still be a donor of a vital organ? Are brain scans done and how reliable are they?

    #1138787
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    The “mistake” I was reffering to was calling anything besides brain death “brain death” This is a very common mistake often found in media (and even among medial people) and I provided a recent example of this mistake. I was not reffering to misdiagnoses by medical people

    As for this case

    Was she actually declared brain dead?

    What do they mean by “prepped for removal of her organs” She was on the operating table and as the surgeon got ready to cut ” she squeezed her mother’s hand” or is the “prepped fort the removal of her organs” hyperbole to make the story more exciting?

    #1138788
    theroshyeshiva
    Participant

    The short of it is that physicians do their best to apply the Harvard criteria…most of the time. Some physicians are also more liberal with determining brain death. To be clear, brain death is not reversible. Search the medical annals, you wont find a case. However, what does happen though is that someone who is not actually brain dead is mistaken to be brain dead by misapplication of criteria.

    As Ubiq mentioned, the media and other low-information folks confuse the terminology and think that brain dead patients are coming back to life. Not applying criteria strictly does lead to these crazy stories we keep hearing though!

    #1138789
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Mamale

    “what are the laws regarding when organs may be harvested from an accident / shooting victim?”

    ALl 50 states recongnise brain death. Once dead, with the families permission, when a recipient is identified the organs are removed.

    ” How do they determine clinical death?”

    The exact criteria vary slightly state to state and often hospital to hospital.

    Basicly the sequence is as follows:

    1)casue is identified to ensure there is no reversibility.

    2) There are certain prerequesites such as normal temp and blood pressure

    3)a neuro exam is performed to ensure absence of brain stem reflexes including lack of spontaneous respiration

    some hospitals have guidelines as to who can perform the above: any physician, an intensivest, neurologist, many require two exms spaced a certain number of hours apart. But to the best of my knowledge no medical body makes these recommendations nor does any state specifically require them.

    Some hospitals require anicallry testing such as EEG to look for brain waves of angiography for blood flow but these are not generally required nor done.

    “Can she be breathing on her own and still be a donor of a vital organ?”

    By definition, no. And I cant stess this enough because I see this mistake repeatedly. If someone is breathing then they are not brain dead. To be brain dead, by definition, the person cannot be spontaneously breathing.

    ” Are brain scans done and how reliable are they?”

    They are generally not done and are have variable reliablility as both false positives and negatives are not uncommon. Brain death is a clinical diagnoses much like “regular” death.

    #1138790
    Mammele
    Participant

    Sorry, I used the word prepped at the wrong place, the article actually said “preparing her organs for donation” (which wrongly makes it seem like the organs were no longer part of her body) but the facts still stand. Here’s the full text, and was reported/copied by many news sources.

    Teen Survived Kalamazoo Shooting After Being Pronounced Brain Dead

    By EMILY SHAPIRO

    Feb 22, 2016, 1:43 PM ET

    A 14-year-old girl wounded in a deadly shooting spree in Michigan this weekend was initially pronounced brain dead at the hospital before she squeezed her mother’s hand and was rushed to surgery, her family told authorities.

    She is now in critical condition and “fighting for her life,” her family said.

    The teen, who was shot in a Kalamazoo Cracker Barrel parking lot Saturday, was pronounced brain dead shortly after arriving at Bronson Methodist Hospital, Michigan State Police Lt. Dale Hinz told ABC News today.

    The mother then asked her daughter to squeeze her hand again if she could hear her, and she did, Hinz said. The doctor asked the girl to give a thumbs up if she could hear him, and she gave two thumbs up, he added.

    The hospital then immediately started prepping the 14-year-old for surgery, the lieutenant said.

    #1138791
    Matan1
    Participant

    Rabbi Tendler. Show some respect.

    #1138792
    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I support killing and harvesting organs from all who support organ donation from brain dead people.

    I figure this should solve all the issues.

    #1138793
    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Rabbi Tendler. Show some respect.

    no.

    #1138794
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    mamale I saw the story.

    These stories come up from time to time. It is hard to determine what actually happened. Granted this is partly because the hospital is covering itself.

    This line is telling “was pronounced brain dead shortly after arriving ” Brain death is never “shortly” pronounced it usually takes a day or more. Though Michigan may be different than NY

    Keep in mind though if a brain stem death pt actually recovered it would make for an amazing case report. The fact that there are none is interesting.

    (The hospital cant stop a physician from publishing a case report)

    PBA

    killing them when they are alive or brain dead?

    #1138795
    👑RebYidd23
    Participant

    Arguing shows respect.

    #1138796
    Mammele
    Participant

    Popa: you crack me up…

    Ubiq: Thanks for your detailed reply. However, I did some more research and it’s obviously not so simple. It’s easy to say that the diagnosis (read: verdict) was wrong, and true brain death is actually irreversible. However, if medical personnel keep on making the same mistake, something is fishy. I understand no one is perfect, but when it comes to life and death issues such as capital punishment there are numerous appeals dragging on for years. Here a diagnosis must be made within hours (or risk organ death which is the whole point) so there should be zero tolerance or possibility of human error. That’s assuming all involved are actually acting in good faith.

    There was a 2012 WSJ article about this topic titled “What You Lose When You Sign that Donor Card”. Contrary to what you are saying, there was a documented case of organs being harvested AFTER THE PATIENT STARTED BREATHING SPONTANEOUSLY AS HE SUPPOSEDLY HAD NO CHANCE TO RECOVER.

    It’s also troubling that they can react to the pain, and may be given light anesthesia. The cortex — or thinking part of the brain — is generally not tested for waves as current law doesn’t require it. (The logic is that if one’s brain stem controlling breathing etc. isn’t functioning the higher part of the brain surely isn’t, although prior studies have shown this to be wrong in a percentage of cases.)

    Finally each body’s organs can be valued at over $2 million, so yes, legal organ harvesting is a major business -to the tune of $20 billion in 2012 – in the US. (G-d forbid you help match live kidney donors for a buck though…)

    #1138797
    takahmamash
    Participant

    And Tendler wants to change the Halacha to permit harvesting the organs of living people.

    I assume you have a source or citation for this idea? I’m sure we’d all love to see it.

    #1138798
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Mamale

    “However, if medical personnel keep on making the same mistake, something is fishy”

    There are no documented cases of a perosn being declared brain dead and “Waking up” There are severla reports in lay media (Zack dunlop, and Gloria Cruz come to mind) However as I said it is hard to know waht actually was “declared” Just last week I told a pateint’s family member that their loved one was in a cooma and unlikely to recover After discussing it extensivly and the family member seemed to have gotten it another family member later said “so you told my siter Dad is brain dead” He was not. IF the media where to ask what I said persumably she’d have said the same. Sadly the patient didnt recover but if He had this would be another “survival after brain death” when in fact the patient was NEVER declared brain dead.

    If there where a documented case the Physician documenting it would achieve instant fame. Journals would fight over the case report it would be a landmark report. There is no reason if such a case existed it wouldne be published. outside of Tabaloids and news sources that generally repeat each other

    “Here a diagnosis must be made within hours (or risk organ death which is the whole point)”

    Many hospitals requitre repeat testing 24 hours apart (though this is becoming less common)

    “Contrary to what you are saying, there was a documented case of organs being harvested …”

    I dont have access. Though I think i have it saved at home. I dont rmeeber what it said. So i’ll have to get back on specifics.

    However by definition, And again I cant repeat it enough since it is a mistake made by many including in halachic pieces on the subject. A brian dead person cant breathe

    “It’s also troubling that they can react to the pain,”

    I’m not sure why it is troubling. Have you seen a chicken after shechted it reacts to pain too yet is dead lekulay alma! (I dont chas veshalom mean to compare peopel tpo chickens, just give a real life physiologic example that you and others may be familiar with please dont misunderstand my comparison)

    “(The logic is that if one’s brain stem controlling breathing etc. isn’t functioning the higher part of the brain surely isn’t, although prior studies have shown this to be wrong in a percentage of cases.)”

    Do they cite any such studies?

    “Finally each body’s organs can be valued at over $2 million,”

    Thats an underestimate. Ask the recipents what they are worth to them…

    #1138799
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    BTW Mamale

    Keep in mind I am not reffering to wrongful diagnoses of brain death. I.e say a person has cornela reflex or breathes/gasps during the apnea test yet is declared brain dead incorrectly either due to incompetnace or negligence on the declaring physician’s part.

    while important, those limited cases are only tangentially related to the subject at hand.

    I am reffering to when protocol IS followed and a patient is declared brain dead based on exisitng criteria/guidleines and subsequently recovers.

    As another aside.

    Dont forget people recover from “cardiac death” all the time.

    In fact many teshuvas on the subject such as The Chasam Sofer’s are regarding the opposite situation. Where the in vogue thing was to wait a few days prior to burial since pt’s occasionaly awoke after being declared dead sometimes in a coffin or even underground (“saved by the bell”. governments wanted to ahve waiting periods of a few days to ensure the pt wouldnt recover from “cardiac death” To which the Chsam Sofer insisted if a person has a heart beat and/or bretahing he is alive otherwise dead and no need to wait

    #1138800
    Mammele
    Participant

    Ubiq: the trouble I have with someone reacting to pain is that unlike the chicken (which btw we have a Torah right to kill and benefit from) the person’s skin color and temperature are that of a live person and he is actually breathing, his heart still pumping — albeit assisted mechanically — when the organs are cut out from him (except for the heart which is briefly stopped first). So any so reaction to the knife such as rising blood pressure is truly troublesome to me, and excuse the pun, heartless.

    This is the part about higher brain activity after no basic heart stem functions:

    And this is the documented case I mentioned regarding spontaneous breathing, also from the same article:

    “What if there is sound evidence that you are alive after being declared brain dead? In a 1999 article in the peer-reviewed journal Anesthesiology, Gail A. Van Norman, a professor of anesthesiology at the University of Washington, reported a case in which a 30-year-old patient with severe head trauma began breathing spontaneously after being declared brain dead. The physicians said that, because there was no chance of recovery, he could still be considered dead. The harvest proceeded over the objections of the anesthesiologist, who saw the donor move, and then react to the scalpel with hypertension.”

    The only possible caveat is that this author later went on to write a book about this subject, so some considered it a way to drum up business — although his evidence seems sound, and those on the other side have their own motivations.

    #1138801
    Mammele
    Participant

    And Ubiq, if you’re not troubled by the status-quo, worse is yet to come. The same progressive types who condemn us for shechting a chicken (hey, you brought up this analogy) have scarier assessments about the future.

    This guy in particular really got me riled up. His name is James Leonard Park and while unofficially advocating for more so called “optional” ways for people to donate he reminds me of German euthanasia of the unwanted. Among other stuff he’s spouting about people losing capabilities reverting to what he calls a “former person”. There are always people with crazy views, the problem is if Moshiach doesn’t come quickly he’ll probably turn out to be right down the road.

    It’s a long copy paste but very informative to see where we are likely heading. And see how he progresses from #1 where we are at now (and you seem to be on board with it) to go downhill from here.

    “by James Leonard Park

    ….1. BRAIN DEATH

    The practice of declaring patients to be dead

    on the basis of the death of their whole brains

    has been well recognized in medical circles since the 1980s.

    Actually the first proposal along this line took place in 1868.

    Since the beginning, there have been continual refinements

    in order to declare a patient to be fully and irrevocable dead

    on the basis of cessation of all brain functions.

    We will not go into these technical methods of determining death.

    The bibliography linked from the end of this essay

    allows the careful reader to look as deeply as wanted

    into the continuing controversy about just how to declare brain-death.

    But most of us will just accept that someone is really dead

    when he or she has been declared to be brain-dead

    by a physician who in well-versed in the necessary tests that must be used

    before brain-death can be officially and legally declared.

    The definition of brain-death usually means

    that all of the functions of the human brain

    have come to a permanent stop.

    Drowning and freezing must be ruled out,

    since these ways of almost dying

    show most of the same signs as brain-death.

    However, in the Western world,

    brain-death has been accepted in all modern medical practice.

    Laypersons do not always understand

    (since they can see the body still breathing and the heart still beating),

    but with enough explanation most people can accept

    that their loved one has now passed over into death.

    Some states in the United States have now created laws

    explicitly permitting death to be determined on the basis of brain-death.

    But even in states where no such change of law has occurred,

    doctors routinely declare human beings to be dead

    when all of their brain functions have ceased

    Organ-transplantation has been allowed from brain-dead donors

    for a number of years in places where modern medicine is practiced.

    A few countries with strong folk-traditions concerning life-and-death

    have not yet accepted brain-death as a definition of death.

    But even countries slow to adopt will eventually agree:

    When the whole human brain is dead, this person is dead.

    Also, the news media no longer have any problems reporting

    that organs have been harvested from brain-dead donors.

    At least this is true of news media in the most advanced parts of the world.

    2. COMA OR PERMANENT UNCONSCIOUSNESS

    It is more controversial to consider transplanting organs from donors

    who are ‘merely’ in a coma or who are permanently unconscious.

    Such conditions are harder to define and more difficult to certify.

    Just what tests must be performed by the neurologist

    to make certain that this unconscious patient will never awaken?

    Sometimes people have returned to consciousness

    after very long periods of deep sleep.

    What if their organs had been harvested at some earlier time?

    They would have died as the result of having their vital organs removed.

    So, in order to follow the dead-donor rule,

    we must be 100% certain that this donor is really and truly dead.

    How long will it take before modern medical practice

    recognizes permanent unconsciousness as death?

    In the early days of considering this new definition of death,

    it will probably only be used in those rare cases

    where the patients have given approval in advance

    for using this definition of death for themselves.

    If a specific patient and his or her proxies are all in agreement

    that permanent unconsciousness can be certified as death,

    then the doctor who is called upon to declare death

    will merely have to determine scientifically that there is

    no chance that consciousness will ever return to this body.

    I have given this permission in my own Advance Directive for Medical Care.

    A comprehensive Advance Directive should include a definition of death.

    Here is the relevant Question from my book on Advance Directives:

    Question 19: Which definition of death should apply to you? 152

    A. Brain-Death. 153

    B. Coma or Permanent Unconsciousness. 154

    C. Persistent Vegetative State. 155

    If you click the link for Question 19 above,

    you will see the complete explanation.

    And my own Advance Directive is also published on the Internet:

    http://


    Scroll down to Answer 19.

    This explains why I prefer permanent unconsciousness

    to be used as the definition of death in my own case.

    My proxies are in complete agreement with this definition.

    Therefore there should be no problems after my death.

    My body can be used as I have directed

    after my death has been declared

    on the basis of permanent unconsciousness.

    My plans for donating my body as a living cadaver

    can also be carried forward if and when I am declared brain-dead.

    The news media might not be as cooperative.

    Some conservative writer might declare that

    the use of my body after my death was not appropriate.

    This is a good reason for keeping my medical records private.

    3. PERSISTENT VEGETATIVE STATE

    A more controversial definition of death

    would allow patients in persistent vegetative state (PVS)

    to be officially declared to be dead.

    Persistent vegetative state has only recently been identified and defined.

    It has emerged as a end-of-life condition

    because of advances in medical science and technology.

    Our advances in understanding how the body operates

    have empowered us to keep the biological functions of the body going

    even when the life of the person is completely over.

    Terri Schiavo was proven to have been in a persistent vegetative state

    when the autopsy was performed.

    But popular opinion before her feeding-tube was removed in 2005

    came down heavily on the side

    of believing that she was still ‘alive’ in some sense.

    Thus, historically-speaking, it will be some decades

    before PVS will routinely be recognized as equivalent to death.

    And here again, such a definition will first be used

    only for those patients who have given their permission in advance

    for the PVS-definition to be used in their own cases.

    But because being in PVS is such a hopeless state,

    and because future advances in neurological science

    will make it even easier to certify this condition,

    eventually well-proven PVS will be accepted

    as an adequate definition of the death of a human person.

    Such a change will have tremendous implications

    for the practice of human organ transplants.

    Because there are 10,000 patients in PVS at any given time in the USA,

    this would become a huge pool of potential organ-donors.

    With the advance approval of these donors (while they were full persons),

    appropriate medical measures could be taken to achieve a merciful death.

    And after death has been officially declared, certified, & recorded,

    the reusable organs of PVS donors could be transplanted

    into the bodies of patients who are on the verge of death

    because their original organs are failing.

    This new practice could save the lives of many people

    whose minds are still functioning perfectly.

    Without new organs, the potential recipients will soon die.

    If the patient in PVS can be declared dead by acceptable medical criteria,

    then harvesting the useful organs would not violate the dead-donor rule.

    And the PVS donor (after being officially declared and recorded as dead)

    could be maintained on ‘life-support’ systems

    while all the necessary tests and preparations are performed

    to make the best possible use of the organs that can save other lives.”

    #1138802
    Mammele
    Participant

    One more thing Ubiq: your mention of the Chasam Sofer’s ruling about not waiting after death for burial was informative, but quite ironic as he was advocating for Kavod Hames, not the opposite.

    #1138803
    apushatayid
    Participant

    the mother was present as they were prepared to harvest her daughters organs?

    #1138804
    Mammele
    Participant

    In case my post wasn’t long enough, I forgot about his #4… So here it is:

    ” 4. ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE

    People with Alzheimer’s disease eventually lose

    all of the capacities that make a human being a person.

    But the millions of people in the USA with various degrees of dementia

    However, when we foresee Alzheimer’s as the last phase of our own lives,

    we can leave detailed instructions about what should be done,

    including a voluntary death or a merciful death followed by organ donation.

    This is the route I have chosen for myself.

    I choose (now while I am fully a person) to have my life peacefully terminated

    if ever I sink to the level of a former person.

    Just when I might lose personhood is defined in my small book called:

    When Is a Person? Pre-Persons and Former Persons:

    http://


    This book offers about 200 questions that can be asked by proxies

    when discussing the level of personhood in anyone they know.

    These questions are organized around 4 capacities that make us persons:

    (1) consciousness, (2) memory, (3) language, & (4) autonomy.

    If and when I lose most of these capacities that make me a person,

    it is the responsibility of my Medical Care Decisions Committee

    to decide what should happen to James Park next.

    My proxies must make all further decisions for me,

    since by the fact of my advancing loss of autonomy, language, & memory

    I will no longer be able to make my own medical decisions

    #1138805
    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    When Is a Person? Pre-Persons and Former Persons:…

    This book offers about 200 questions that can be asked by proxies

    when discussing the level of personhood in anyone they know.

    These questions are organized around 4 capacities that make us persons:

    (1) consciousness, (2) memory, (3) language, & (4) autonomy.

    Here are some things my mother did while she was a “former person”:

    *She let me hold her hand knowing I may never do so again

    *She listened to us tell her we loved her and were grateful for the life she gave us

    *She allowed us to ask mechila with a whole heart

    *She shed a tear as we said goodbye

    *She brought to mind all the things I still “needed” her for, reminding me to have hakoras Hatov to those people in my life who deserve it

    *She reminded us how precious life is even though it is fleeting

    I am sure there is more. I am also sure that many “full persons” fail to impart such critical and deep seated lessons to their children and students. Perhaps their “personhood” is not so full after all.

    #1138806
    Mammele
    Participant

    Thanks mods. Didn’t mean to overload…

    APY, not quite. They were making preparations to harvest the organs according to the article. I don’t know exactly what the doctors were doing or at which point they give next of kin the boot. Most likely she was saying her goodbyes before traumatic aspects begin, and they were doing stuff to keep the organs in good shape.

    #1138807
    Mammele
    Participant

    Syag, touching and true. You are so strong and positive. The gift of life should never be taken lightly.

    #1138808
    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    thanks. i found that article fascinating. makes you wonder what kind of depth can be contained within someone who believes that what you provide is the basis of life.

    #1138809
    apushatayid
    Participant

    “They were making preparations to harvest the organs according to the article. I don’t know exactly what the doctors were doing or at which point they give next of kin the boot.”

    Why assume the doctors were doing anything? Perhaps they had discussed organ donation and were taking care of paperwork etc. and while they were discussing this the hand squeeze etc happened?

    The impression you give is of a bunch of blood thirsty doctors, scalpels in hand, saliva drooling out of their mouth, just waiting for a chance to start yanking out those organs.

    #1138810
    Mammele
    Participant

    APY: my assumption is based on this quote mentioned in the ABC News article:

    This after being pronounced brain dead shortly after arriving at the hospital, again per the article. And they obviously were in a hurry or they wouldn’t have made this grave “mistake”.

    So things were progressing very fast, bloodthirsty or not…

    #1138811
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    MAMAel lote of comments I’ll do my best.

    However first and foremost, you amde the mistake many do and I reiterated several times not to make.

    You said regarding the brain-dead individual “…and he is actually breathing, his heart still pumping — albeit assisted mechanically -…”

    No ! while his heart is still pumping he is not still breathing. His chest may rise from the ventilator blowing in and out but so would a football if connected to a ventilator. I mentioned this a few times. A brain dead person, by definfiion is not breathing. This is key because according to R’ Moshe’s Family members including R’ Dovid, R’ Shabsi Rappaport and of course R’ Tendler this is why R’ Moshe recognised brain death as death.

    Granted he heart is till beatig but there are cases with a heart beat where les man dipalug the person is dead eg decapitation. Which ARGUABLY can apply to a brain dead person. A body;s reaction to pain while [perhaps disconcerting is not an idicator of life even according to those who reject brain death.

    “This is the part about higher brain activity after no basic heart stem functions:…”

    Wny are brain waves a sign of life? A heart that stops is often declared dead even with an organized rhythm. It isnt like TV where pt flatlines. Quite often you wouldnt tell from the heart monitor that the heart stopped. The patient lacks a pulse and if DNR or after trying to revive but not succeeding the patient is declared dead with a heart rythm on the monitor.

    “And this is the documented case I mentioned regarding spontaneous breathing, also from the same article:…The only possible caveat is that this author later went on to write a book about this subject, so some considered it a way to drum up business — although his evidence seems sound”

    The caveat is sound. And the author left out a crucial part of the article. The article he cited is “A matter of life and death” and in that case “…upon subsequent review of the patient’s chart the anestesiologist had learned that the donor had gasped at the end of the apnea test…” The authro of the article left out the part that changed the entire story.!! There is still no documented case of someone actualy meeting criteria for brain death and recovering.

    I skimmed your article by James Leonard PArk. You seem to be making a slippery slope arguemnt. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’m not much a fan of slippery slope arguments. We are discussing brain death which some poskim say is dad either because like decapitated or because not breathing. Neither of those apply to Coma, PVS or Alzheimers. So bringing them up just confuses the issue there are alll sorts of nuts out there I dont think every meshugana opinion should be used to shape policy becasue of a slippery slope.

    “our mention of the Chasam Sofer’s ruling about not waiting after death for burial was informative, but quite ironic”

    Fair, though the bigger irony is he wanted death to be declared sooner than was in vogue now it used for the opposite. Also almost nobody says kavod hames is an issue. Most poskim allow transplants from a dead patient.

    ” don’t know exactly what the doctors were doing or at which point they give next of kin the boot. Most likely she was saying her goodbyes before traumatic aspects begin,”

    More likely is, it is hyperbole to make the story more exciting. Do you believe the media doesnt do that?

    #1138812
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Mamale

    As mentioned, I have met more than one patient’s family member (most recently last week) who said they were told a patient was “brain dead” when nobody had told them that. And brain death is never “shortly declared” at least not in NY. Almost every hospital has a time period to allow for possible recovery prior to being delared brain death. (Though again, this may differ in Michigan, and I suppose “shortly” is relative)

    #1138813
    apushatayid
    Participant

    Preparing organs for donation have nothing to do with removing organs, or even preparing to do so. The donor body must be kept in a proper state to ensure the organs remain viable, among other things it means ensuring the body is properly hydrated, is oxygenated and so on. (Medical info courtesy of what I understand my med school student neighbor explanation) The article is focusing on the fact that the doctors basically gave up hope and moved into preserve the cadaver for donation mode and that they were wrong in their prognosis. I hardly see any indication of an organ harvesting operation.

    #1138814
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Well said APY

    BTW from a NBC news story “Doctors first thought Abigail could become brain-dead and had started planning to harvest her organs for donation when she squeezed her mother’s hand. Her mother, Vicki Kopf, described the moment as “breathtaking.” “

    Not quite the same as reported elsewhere

    #1138815
    Mammele
    Participant

    Ubiq and (APY somewhat): Yes, I know the media lies, but it’s not the norm for them to revise the number of dead people downward, which they based on numbers given by the police.

    I can’t figure out how quickly things progressed, the hospital is now saying something else entirely, which is a little suspect. MLive quoting the medical director “…but said the nature of her injuries and the efforts to sustain her life, led doctors to discuss the possibility that she may become brain dead. But he said Abigail is not brain dead.” this while the mom is mentioning her daughter squeezing her hand as “breathtaking”. Go figure out whom to believe.

    Thanks for clarifying the point about the ventilator and breathing.

    My documented example was not to illustrate that true brain death is reversible, but that despite knowing the patient failed the breathing test, they still went ahead with harvesting his organs, because the doctor said the patient won’t recover.

    Which leads me to yes, the slippery slope argument. Some of this is already happening, meaning life with a terminal illness is meaningless to some — donating organs before pulling the plug is the logical next step for those that don’t believe that life in essence is valuable, regardless of the person’s condition.

    I didn’t hide the fact that this Park guy may be crazy, it was his cold, calculated logic (that he also uses to try to influence others) which quite frankly unnerved me. I don’t think he’s alone with his agenda, and it must be addressed and fought or life will indeed become dispensable and we’ll only have ourselves to blame.

    #1138816
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Mamale

    “the hospital is now saying something else entirely, which is a little suspect. MLive quoting the medical director “…but said the nature of her injuries and the efforts to sustain her life, led doctors to discuss the possibility that she may become brain dead. But he said Abigail is not brain dead.” this while the mom is mentioning her daughter squeezing her hand as “breathtaking”. Go figure out whom to believe.”

    Not suspect at all. It happens all the time. People often use “brain dead” to refer to any brain damage, coma, PVS etc although they are different. It is entirely plausible the mother was told “she is severly brain damaged and we will initiate testing to determine if she is dead” and interpreted that as she is brain dead” and that’s the story she shared with the media. I have seen similar occurrences many many times (minus the media part)

    “My documented example was not to illustrate that true brain death is reversible, but that despite knowing the patient failed the breathing test”

    The patient didn’t fail in that example! The neurosurgeon should be sued for malpractice and the surgeon tried for murder. That in no way affects the majority of patients who are correctly diagnosed as “brain dead” much like the few who are diagnosed as “regular dead” that are misdiagnioesd doesn’t lead to rejection of “cardiac death” So much so that the Chasam sofer doesn’t even require a waiting period even though misdiagnosed “cardiac death” was a very real concern in his day (more so than today)

    “I don’t think he’s alone with his agenda, and it must be addressed and fought or life will indeed become dispensable and we’ll only have ourselves to blame.”

    Agreed!

    #1138817
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Mammale (and anyone else) I have a thought experiment for you

    Imagine the following two scenarios:

    1) Reuvein is quite sick and one by one his organs are failing. Luckily for him Shimon is compatible and Reuvein recieves Shimon’s pancreas, kidney, lung, intestine and heart (none of this is sience fiction, though all to one patient hasnt quite happned). Obviously Reuvein’s Posek recognises brin death otherwise he would be inconsitent if he allowed him to recieve the Heart. Well unfortunalty Reuvein gets badly burned and undergoes a face and hand transplant as well. (Still no science fiction) Reuvein now looks like Shimon, has Shimon’s fingerprints and the bulk of his internal organs where once Shimon’s. Who is Reuvein? Whose wife should eh go home too Mrs. Reuvein or Mrs. Shimon?

    2) Instead of giving Reuvein all of Shimon’s organs. The Doctors figure lets just remove Reuvein’s functioning brain and put it in Shimon’s body (Now this is science fiction, but who knows…)”reuvein” now wakes up and he too has Shimon’s fingerprints and the bulk of his internal organs where once Shimon’s. Who is Reuvein? Whose wife should he go home too Mrs. Reuvein or Mrs. Shimon?

    Now granted this doesnt prove anything. And all the “thought excercises” in the world are irrelevent to since only halacha matters.

    But I think all would agree that the Brain is the seat of personhood and since Shimon’s brian was reomved in the second case although the rest of his organs including heart are still functioing. shimon has died and Mrs Reuvein Should get used to being married to a guy who looks like Shimon

    thoughts?

    #1138818
    Health
    Participant

    Mammele -“My documented example was not to illustrate that true brain death is reversible, but that despite knowing the patient failed the breathing test, they still went ahead with harvesting his organs, because the doctor said the patient won’t recover.”

    Search Lazarus phenomenon & you’ll see that it’s probably already happening!

    #1138820
    charliehall
    Participant

    “To be clear, brain death is not reversible. Search the medical annals, you wont find a case.”

    A review of 1,311 first diagnoses of brain death in New York during 2007-2009 was published in the journal *Neurology* in 2011. They found that in no case did a second diagnosis, on average 19 hours later, differ from the first diagnosis.

    #1138821
    charliehall
    Participant

    “despite knowing the patient failed the breathing test”

    The poskim who disagree with Rabbi Tendler mostly hold that cessation of breathing constitutes halachic death.

    ‘misdiagnosed “cardiac death” was a very real concern in his day’

    Other poskim hold that cardiac death is the halachic definition of death. That is difficult, as blood circulation was not discovered until about years ago. Chazal would not have been able to create this definition.

    #1138822
    charliehall
    Participant

    “despite knowing the patient failed the breathing test”

    The poskim who disagree with Rabbi Tendler seem to mostly hold that cessation of breathing constitutes halachic death.

    ‘misdiagnosed “cardiac death” was a very real concern in his day’

    Other poskim hold that cardiac death is the halachic definition of death. That is difficult, as blood circulation was not discovered until about years ago. Chazal would not have created this definition.

    “his heart still pumping — albeit assisted mechanically”

    A heart transplant can only happen if the donor’s heart is beating and the donor’s lungs are breathing (possibly with mechanical assistance). If your halachic definition of death is anything other than brain death, then all heart transplants should be mamesh murder al pi halachah.

    If you go to the heart transplant page at the web site of Montefiore Medical Center, you can see a video of an actual heart transplant.

    #1138823
    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    The poskim who disagree with Rabbi Tendler mostly hold that cessation of breathing constitutes halachic death.

    Charlie, earlier, ubiquitin wrote “By definition a brain dead pateitn is not breathing rather a ventilator is breathing for him.”

    Is that incorrect?

    #1138824
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    charlie

    The definition of death by chazal doesnt really matter.

    The question is indicator. Namely does heartbeat signify life? Yoma 85a can be understood that way. Alternativly even the absence of breathing is only an indicator of death if he “mutal kaeven” (Rashi) i.e. obviously a polio sufferer in an iron lung isnt dead becasue of absence of spontaneus breathing. The question is if a heartbeat in someobody who is not breathing precludes him from being dead(as in a brain-dead patient) since he isnt “mutal kaeven” I beleive this was R’ Elyashiv’s main objection to brain-death.

    The Chacham Tzvi has a teshuva that is quite relevent in which he clearly uses the heart as the main indicator of death. However as you point out, he is basing on the mistaken view that the heart is a respiratory organ that pumps air throughout the body. Even if a mistaken assumption however that doesnt neccesary matter (according to brain death opponeents).

    what I do fintd surprising about brian -death opponents is how excited they get when somebody reportedly “recovers” from brain-death. As in this thread. Never mind the fact that these reports are never well documented and are allways based on hearsay, usually ciopy/pasted across various media outlets.

    Even if it did happen once in a while (it hasnt ever, people survive cardiac-death literally daily. Even wihtough the “lazararus phenomenon” Health mentioned. Every cardiac arrest that survives CPR, every Heart transplant, and Every CABG all had a stopped heart which subsequently restarts.

    Is Cardiac death then not death?

    #1138825
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    DY

    It is accurate

    From NYS dept of health website guidleines for determining brain death.

    (i cut some parts to cut it for size and remove some of the technical details, for more details it is freely available on google and of course I would be happy to elaborate.)

    Step 4: Apnea Test

    Generally, the apnea test is the final step in the determination of brain death, and is performed after establishing the irreversibility and unresponsiveness of coma, and the absence of brainstem reflexes.

    the physician should conduct the apnea test as follows:

    ?…

    #1138826
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    DY

    From the American academy of neurology (a national as opposed to local source)

    Evidence-based guideline update: Determining brain death in adults

    Checklist for determination of brain death

    Prerequisites (all must be checked)

    ? Coma, irreversible and cause known

    ? Neuroimaging explains coma

    ? CNS depressant drug effect absent (if indicated toxicology screen; if barbiturates given, serum level < 10 ?g/mL)

    ? No evidence of residual paralytics (electrical stimulation if paralytics used).

    ? Absence of severe acid-base, electrolyte, endocrine abnormality

    ? Systolic blood pressure ? 100 mm Hg

    ? NO SPONTANEOUS RESPIRATIONS [emphasis added)

    [As for details:]

    IX.Apnea.

    ?

    Absence of a breathing drive.

    Absence of a breathing drive is tested with a CO2 challenge. Documentation of an increase in Paco2 above normal levels is typical practice. It requires preparation before the test.

    Procedure:

    ?

    Preoxygenate for at least 10 minutes with 100% oxygen to a Pao2 >200 mm Hg.

    ?

    Disconnect the patient from the ventilator.

    ?

    Preserve oxygenation ….

    ?

    ?

    If no respiratory drive is observed, repeat blood gas (Pao2, Paco2, pH, bicarbonate, base excess) after approximately 8 minutes.

    ?

    If respiratory movements are absent and arterial Pco2 is ?60 mm Hg …the apnea test result is positive (i.e., supports the clinical diagnosis of brain death).

    #1138827
    Health
    Participant

    Mammele -“Terri Schiavo was proven to have been in a persistent vegetative state

    when the autopsy was performed.”

    And this was murder!

    “But popular opinion before her feeding-tube was removed in 2005

    came down heavily on the side

    of believing that she was still ‘alive’ in some sense.”

    She was alive!

    “Thus, historically-speaking, it will be some decades

    before PVS will routinely be recognized as equivalent to death.”

    And this will be murder!

    From Dr. Parnia in AOL’s newspaper:

    “Neurologists have started to discover that contrary to the old dogma, supposedly vegetative patients may actually be conscious and aware of their surroundings and can carry out mental tasks on command.”

    #1138828
    Sam2
    Participant

    Health: I don’t think removing a ventilator would be murder. Gram Retzicha at worst and probably just an Issur of Lo Sa’amod Al Dam Reiacha.

    #1138829
    Avram in MD
    Participant

    Sam2,

    I don’t think removing a ventilator would be murder.

    In the case of Terri Schiavo, which Health was referring to, a ventilator wasn’t removed; rather, they removed a feeding tube.

    #1138830
    Health
    Participant

    Sam2 -“Health: I don’t think removing a ventilator would be murder. Gram Retzicha at worst and probably just an Issur of Lo Sa’amod Al Dam Reiacha”

    It could very well be Retzicha! It depends who you hold like:

    “The poskim who disagree mostly hold that cessation of breathing constitutes halachic death.

    Other poskim hold that cardiac death is the halachic definition of death.”

    #1138831
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    I know nobody said otherwise, but to ensure no confusion please note that Terri Schiavo wasnt brain dead (neither were Karen Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan)

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 52 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.