Who is Being Kept Alive: Baby or Mother?
From Scotsman.com:
In a day of emotional highs and heartbreaking lows, Jason Torres yesterday gained a daughter but bid farewell to his brain- dead wife after she was kept alive on a life support machine for three months while their baby developed. …
…Last night, she was pronounced dead after her life support was finally switched off. …
…All the days from here on out are a gift," said Justin Torres just weeks ago. "We know that by some legal standards she's considered dead already, but we don't believe it. All you have to do is spend any time in the room with Susan, her doctors, her family or Jason. She's the strongest person in that room."
From CBC News:
A brain-dead American woman was disconnected from life support and died a day after giving birth to a girl in a hospital in Virginia.
From USA Today:
Susan Torres, the pregnant woman kept alive on a respirator for nearly three months after a stroke caused by cancer, died in a hospital here Wednesday, a day after delivering a premature but very active girl.
Torres, 26, died after she was disconnected from artificial breathing and feeding devices, her family said in a statement. She had been declared brain-dead May 7 after the stroke caused by an undiagnosed case of melanoma that spread to her brain.
Patients who meet the criteria for brain death are dead. In the United States this is the law and ethics. There is no further need for “life support” for the deceased patient. The stories are therefore misleading as they tell about “life-support” for the mother. The mother did not need “life-support” since she was already dead. It was her baby who was medically managed who needed life support to continue to live until delivery.It is sad that the news media have been consistent in this repetition of wrong information. Sad, because by presenting to the public unexamined and undocumented statements as facts, the U.S. public will be mislead but also will be lead to unfortunate consequences. Sad, because these words in the media may cause families with brain-dead members to request or demand continued treatment as if the member was actually alive and had a future. Sad, because a major source of needed organs for transplant, the brain-dead patient, will be diminished because of the family’s concern that the organs would be removed from a patient not as yet dead. As with the Terri Schiavo case, the media continues to contribute to the medical confusion of the public and it is a shame. Now that I got this off my chest, I feel better. ..Maurice.
posted by Maurice Bernstein, M.D. @ 8:59:00 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
I agree... I cringed every time I heard and read about Torres being brain dead and on life support; that a brain dead woman died after carrying her child for three months after being pronounced dead. I was equally annoyed when I read that a Boy Scout was “in critical condition and brain dead.” He was past critical care... These people were kept around to harvest babies and organs.
Being in the presence of a brain dead person is like being in the room with a ghost. I guess it's more like the opposite of a ghost: the life force has been expelled but the body remains, its skin warm and face peaceful.
I studied brain death in school and recognized it as an odd side effect of medical technology. At that time, I had never been in the presence of a brain dead person. The first time I did encounter a brain dead patient, I was so conflicted about how I should feel about the warm body that lay before me, with all the beeping, buzzing, breathing machines of every other patient in the ICU.
The patient's family and girlfriend guarded his bedside night and day, singing and clapping and praying for his recovery, refusing to believe that he was dead. When I feel conflicted about brain death, of course I expect those who do not have as much background on the subject to feel the discord of the situation. When we think of death as the permanent cessation of a heart beat and breathing, how is a family to believe that a breathing person with a heartbeat is dead? A flat EEG graph does not resonate with a family when they can hear the wheezing of the ventilator, the consistent beating of a heart monitor. How can healthcare providers expect death to be accepted when the warm body of their loved one is at their finger tips? How can the grieving process begin unless there is an acceptance that the end of life has truly, definitively arrived?
I am disturbed by the media’s portrayal of medical care and careless use of medical terminology. On the same note, most people learn about death through the movies. Has anyone seen a movie with a brain dead person receiving “life-support” treatments days, weeks, or months after their supposed death? I haven’t. Where are people to get their information? I believe that is the responsibility of the medical community to address this issue so that the media can stop taking the fall for faulty information. I’m not sure exactly how to start this healthcare communication revolution that I fantasize about, but the gears are turning. Unlike Maurice, I do not feel better with this off my chest. ...Alyssa
What can we do about educating the public, hopefully most of the public? Individually, we really can't do much except as members of hospital ethics committees explaining the biology of the criteria for brain death to the individual families. But organizations with clout and money could spread the valid word to the public thru the media.
Perhaps the media itself could send representatives to a conference on brain death and learn how to write the next pertinent article. And why just on brain death? Maybe the media should attend and learn from conferences on medical ethics and current law. Then the next time a Schiavo case or a Torres case comes along, the media will be prepared on what to say and how to say it. ..Maurice.
Post a Comment
<< Home