FaceBook 48x48   Twitter 48x48   Feed 48x48

 

 

Headline News Around the World

Read More

Search

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Life or Death in the Brave New World

Written by 
Rate this item
(46 votes)
Expendable! Expendable!

Update: Brian McCall Answers His Critics at the End of this Article

It is easy to sit here in 2014 and criticize the general populace of Nazi Germany. How could they allow such insanity? How could doctors participate in the torture and execution of the helpless and innocent? We need look no further than a neighborhood hospital today to find the answers.

The secular media loves to denounce with righteous indignation the human atrocities committed by the Nazis before and during World War II. Now the problem with their self-righteous indignation is not the condemnation of these atrocities, which deserve denunciation, but rather the utter hypocrisy of the oligarchy that rules our country with its ink (or more recently digital) fist. As it drones on about the past it repeats it all over again in the present.

History repeats itself and most people remain blind to it. The media oligarchs of our time who love to dig up memories of the Nazi atrocities promote and protect the new Gestapo entrenched firmly within the bowels of the Healthcare system.   Meanwhile the Southern Poverty Law Center distracts everyone by attacking people like Father Nicholas Gruner and his conferences on the Path to Peace and says not a word about an industry which starves little children to the point of death.[1]

One story that must not be swept under the rug is the brutal treatment of young Jahi McMath and her family. The story sounds unbelievable when revealed in all its gory detail. But we must not be like the well intentioned in Nazi-ruled Germany and simply dismiss the reports as unbelievable. Following conversations with members of the McMath’s life saving team and one doctor involved in the attempts to rescue Jahi I have learned first-hand of the depths of the depravity involved in this sad tale.

Jahi is a 13-year-old girl who until recently lived and played and went to school in California. She was admitted to Oakland Children’s Hospital for a routine tonsillectomy. Nothing about her experience should seem routine but sadly in a medical industry out of control it is most likely more routine than we might think.   In connection with the surgery she began to bleed profusely. The family was told it was normal bleeding, but it was not. The bleeding caused her to go into cardiac arrest which caused injury to her brain, resulting in a comatose state. She was put on a ventilator to allow her to continue to breathe, but, within four days, Oakland Children’s Hospital tried to pull the plug on the ventilator. They told the family that she was dead already and so they wanted to disconnect the machinery. Simultaneously a team of organ harvesters pressured the family to release her vital organs so they could be sold for amounts typically near $100,000. Jahi’s mother refused. She could not believe that after only a few days had elapsed since a violent trauma (cardiac arrest and brain injury) the hospital simply wanted to give up for dead, paving the way to sell her organs for a profit.

Unable to disconnect the ventilator over the family’s objections the hospital staff tried to starve her to death. They refused to feed her for over three weeks. Although they did provide hydration, one professional on the case likened what they gave her to feeding someone nothing but 7 Up for three weeks. The family asked that a feeding tube be inserted but the hospital refused, claiming that they do not perform those types of procedures on a deceased individual.

In contradiction to the claims that this little girl is dead, she was able to process oxygen supplied by the ventilator. Although the ventilator enables Jahi to inhale she processes the oxygen without assistance and exhales the carbon dioxide without aid of machinery. Although unable to swallow food, Jahi can digest food and excrete waste generated from digestion. Even my eight-year-old son understands that dead people don’t, ugh, go the bathroom [well he used a more vivid description but you get the point].

In addition Jahi’s family, who have kept vigil with her in the hospital, have witnessed her limbs moving. The Oakland Children’s hospital attempted to claim that these were not really movements. Yet, even if not consciously intended from a moral point of view, an organism lacking any life cannot move, even involuntarily. My son’s third grade science book explains one of the differences between living and non-living things is that only living things can move. The book explains that although the movements of plants can be very slight (the opening of a flower) they nonetheless constitute a sign of life. The family’s observations of movement have reportedly been confirmed by an independent neurologist not associated with the Oakland Children’s Hospital.

It has been evident to her family that Jahi is still alive. The hospital in which her severe injuries occurred did not want to keep her alive. They were starving her and wanted to suffocate her to death. Jahi’s family logically concluded that they needed to move her to a facility that would provide health and not death care. Yet, like the camps of Nazi Germany, in this Brave New World Order you cannot simply leave the death camps. The hospital refused to release Jahi to her parents. They demanded that she could only be released if a pediatrician accepted to take over her care and if the receiving facility performed a tracheotomy (a procedure to insert a permanent breathing tube to replace the temporary one used in connection with the surgery) and inserted a feeding tube.

Now, these demands obviously highlight the insanity and hypocrisy of the hospital’s story. They had been heartlessly telling the mother of little Jahi that she was dead. According to reports from the McMath legal and public relations team the hospital and other state officials refused to call Jahi by her name and would refer to her as the deceased or the cadaver. Now the same hospital that called her the deceased refused to release her unless the dead body, according to their story, was going to have a feeding tube and permanent ventilation tube inserted! They were trying to claim, out of both sides of their mouth, that they “would not release a dead body to you unless you feed it and help it breathe!” If I had to guess, I would bet such hospital officials would likely have much to say about those in World War II Germany who claimed the people on whom they performed barbaric human medical experiments were not human. Yet, they now require a family to feed and provide oxygen to what they are calling a cadaver!

The family and their team of advisors attempted to find a facility to care for Jahi that would accept the demands of the hospital to feed and oxygenate the “deceased.” Coincidentally, or not so coincidentally, facilities all across the country would at first accept Jahi and agree to the demands and then a few hours later run scared and reverse their decision. The decisions were reversed after it appeared that someone associated with the receiving facility had been contacted by someone associated with Oakland Children’s Hospital or the county coroner’s office, according to the McMath family advisors.

In one case after a New York care facility had agreed to take care of Jahi, one of the lawyers on the case was contacted by a local hospital asking for information on the case to be prepared in case Jahi would present herself at their ER. Nobody on the McMath team had contacted this hospital but apparently someone familiar with the case in California had done so in an apparent attempt to scare the local hospital. Apparently scaring the actual facility accepting her was not enough. Another door to food and oxygen slammed shut.

In another attempt to move her to a Midwestern state, a doctor from a surgery center agreed to have the center where he works perform the tracheotomy and then transfer her to a nearby long-term care facility. Someone associated with the Oakland Children’s hospital then went on the surgery center’s website to find personal contact details for a different doctor associated with the facility (who although aware of the situation had not been directly involved in the conversations to move her) and attempted to intimidate him with threats of liability and illegality if the center performed the tracheotomy and thereby assisted in her transfer to the long-term care facility.

Meanwhile, as reported by the Associated Press, the hospital attempted to get a death certificate out of the local coroner’s office to back up their story that Jahi was already dead. Yet, the revealing details of this phony death certificate have not been reported according to The Wrongful Death and Injury Institute, which has been involved in the case. A fact not reported by the mainstream media is that the coroner in this case is not a physician. He’s a member of the state law enforcement division. The coroner in this case is the Sheriff of Alameda County. Technically, the Coroner’s Office is the Sheriff’s Office. While the Sheriff's Office utilizes Deputy Sheriffs as Coroners’ Investigators to confer with forensic pathologists to determine cause and manner of death in those deaths that fall under their jurisdiction, coroners and deputy coroners are not physicians. They have no authority to determine cause and manner of death. In California coroners issuing the death certificates are not medical experts. The coroners are not charged with determining cause and manner of death but rather simply signing the death certificate which states cause and manner of death that has been determined by a medical examiner or the last attending physician. The attending physician at Oakland Children’s hospital could have signed a death certificate. Any of the attending doctors trying to convince Jahi’s mother that her daughter was dead had the legal capacity to sign a death certificate.

Yet, none of them did. Instead they attempted to get the coroner to sign a death certificate rather than signing a death certificate themselves. Contrary to the reported claim of the coroner’s office, the county coroner could have signed a death certificate without an autopsy being performed, and, according to The Wrongful Death & Injury Institute, he could have signed it listing the cause and manner of death as pending.

In Jahi’s case the hospital wanted her to be dead but their own attending physician would not sign a death certificate. They attempted to push off responsibility to the county coroner by trying to get him to sign an unsupported death certificate. The coroner would not do so, and so he now appears to haveprepared a death certificate but never actually signed it. Despite the media reports that the coroner’s office has issued a death certificate, that death certificate by all accounts is not only “incomplete,” but unsigned and not registered electronically. Clearly from their hesitancy we can presume that the coroner’s office is afraid to act, sensing something is not right in the case.  

Understandably the hospital and the coroner are afraid to put their names on the line because of what could potentially transpire when Jahi actually dies in another county or state.  Another coroner or medical examiner in another state will be requiredto issue and sign a death certificate. Neither the hospital northe coroner want to be in the absurd position of officially signing a legal death certificate of someone who will be declared dead at a later time, perhaps years from now. So they attempted to deceive the world by partially preparing an incomplete and unsigned death certificate, counting on the media to be none the wiser.

Thus, a team of professionals who presumably swore an oath to do no harm have starved a little 13-year-old girl for three weeks. They tried to rip her beating heart, her oxygenating lungs and her working liver out of her body to sell them, and, after the family refused to cooperate, they tried to suffocate her by removing her source of oxygen. Just like the doctors in Nazi death camps performing their sick experiments, clearly these people have no concept of an oath to do no harm! Then their hospital allegedly intimidatedanyone else willing to feed and care for the girl and refused to release her until they were finally compelled by a federal court to do so. Finally they attempted to push off legal responsibility for their attempt to call a living body dead on a career law enforcement official holding the office of county coroner.

Why would those associated with Oakland Children’s hospital act so barbarically?

Beyond sustaining the lie of “brain death,” which is essential to keeping the lucrative organ transplant business running, Oakland County Hospital may have a more particular pecuniary interest in making sure little Jahi is dead. If the hospital and its doctors are found to have been negligent in the original tonsillectomy and their negligence caused the cardiac arrest and brain injury they would be potentially liable under California tort law for millions of dollars in costs to care for Jahi for the rest of her life. If she fails to recover from her severe injuries and needs permanent institutional care, her legal team estimates that the hospital could be liable for damages in the range of $10-15 million.

Yet, if she dies, California law caps the negligence liability at $250,000. Thus, the people who have successively tried to kill Jahi by starvation or suffocation and then tried to convince her family to believe it and to pressure the local coroners’ office to issue a death certificate had a direct financial interest in her death. Now I obviously cannot get inside any of their minds to prove this was their explicit intention. I am not saying that anyone at the hospital is actually guilty of attempted murder. Yet, there seems to be circumstantial evidence that they were attempting to end Jahi’s life and they have millions of dollars of motive. I doubt any prosecutor is likely to bring such a charge, but it does seem certain that Jahi would likely be dead at this point, without the eleventh hour injunction of a federal court liberating her from the hospital.

The Wrongful Death & Injury Institute cut through the issues in the case and called a spade a spade when they concluded that the issues have nothing “to do with giving the family false hope. It has nothing to do with the family’s unwillingness to face facts. It does have everything to do with a hospital’s fear of liability for what might later be proven to have been abotched surgery and their subsequent premeditated attempt to minimize that liability by attempting to hasten her death. . . . Brain Death Criteria should NOT be used by medical and governmental staffers as the tool to cut costs, and deflect and/or minimize liability.”

Just like in Nazi-ruled Germany, people are willing to do barbaric things to the innocent to advance their own lust for power or wealth. Any group perceived to stand in the way of Nazi domination had to be removed. Anyone standing in the way of the lucrative organ transplant business or who poses a financial threat to the hospital has to be removed. Just like the officials put on trial at Nuremburg, the hospital and government officials run for cover and try to pass around the legal buck to others standing in the chain of authority.

It is easy to sit here in 2014 and criticize the general populace of Germany. How could they allow such insanity? How could they accept being told these people were not human? How could doctors participate in the torture and execution of the helpless and innocent? We need look no further than a neighborhood hospital today for the answers to what happened back then. But for the resistance of her family, supported by a committed team of legal and professional experts and a brave federal judge, Jahi’s life would have been snuffed out, the hospital’s potential liability capped at $250,000, and her organs sold at great profit. Nobody would have known… or cared. We look back and admire the few individuals, the few judges, the few officials who did not simply follow the reigning propagandized agenda but who stood up and called an outrage an outrage in Hitler’s Germany.

Thank God for Jahi and her family, for this has now happened in her case. According to lawyers on the case, Jahi is safe in a facility which has committed to her care but the location of which must be kept secret because the family has allegedly received death threats. Again the irony seems fictitious. People are threatening to kill a supposedly dead person! Thank God for those who have saved this one innocent life! How many more Jahi’s lie in hospital beds starving to death or waiting fortheir beating hearts to be ripped out of the bodies. They suffer because their families have not seen through the lies of unscrupulous hospital officials that their little baby (or elderly grandmother) is dead, never realizing the major financial conflicts of interests that potentially drive those in whom they place unwarranted trust.

Welcome to the Brave New World Order! With what righteous indignation will future generations condemn the insanity and barbarity of our people, living today?


[1] I am not suggesting that every doctor and medical facility in the country is complicit in this evil. Obviously in Nazi ruled Germany there were many good judges, lawyers, doctors and soldiers who did not participate directly or indirectly in the violations of justice and decency. Likewise, there are brave and valiant healthcare professionals who refuse to kill for organ money or to protect their bottom line. Sadly as in the past, the character of the industry is dominated not by them.

A Response to Critics by Brian McCall

Since this abbreviated version of the article appeared on The Remnant website (the full version will appear in the next print edition), both The Remnant and I have been bombarded with a deluge of voice and electronic messages.  Some of the comments posted on the website give a hint of the tone of hatred that permeates many of these communications. 

I received one voicemail from an unidentified man calling from a New Jersey area code which contained a four-letter word on average every other word.  I am relieved I was not listening to my messages in the presence of my six children! 

Ironically the most common theme of these tirades is accusing The Remnant and myself of “hatred” and in particular hating little Jahi.  Nothing could prove more forcefully how so many in the American public (including those of good faith working in the medical industry) have been brainwashed (pun intended) to accept the novel invention of brain death.  They lash out in anger when I merely suggest that this mother of a little girl, who sees her breathing daughter showing some signs of reacting to her environment, be permitted to decide when it is time to remove the extraordinary means keeping her little girl alive. 

I am well aware that six doctors declared her brain dead.  That is the very point I was trying to make.  Brain death and death are not the same thing.  For over three thousand years we have understood that death is evidenced by the total cessation of bodily functions and decomposition.  Brain death was invented in recent times to be able to call dead a person that for the past three thousand years would be considered alive.  Is it so outrageous that the mother of a little girl should not be forced to remove the equipment from her little girl before the mother is certain she is dead, not simply labeled “brain dead”? 

I never suggested that anyone should be forced to receive extraordinary measures to be kept alive.  We are not morally obligated to take extraordinary measures to continue to live.  We are morally permitted to take such measures, however.  The issue in this case is not about forcing extraordinary measures upon this family.  It is about allowing the mother of this child to decide whether to keep using the extraordinary measures or allow her child to die by removing them.  I’m only asking the question: Who should make that decision to provide the extraordinary measures, the mother of little Jahi or a hospital that stands to financially benefit by a quick death since their liability, if they were proven to be negligent, is limited if she dies but unlimited if she lives?

Even giving the greatest benefit of the doubt to the motives of the hospital and doctors involved, such a situation creates an obvious conflict of interest.  Is it not safer, more prudent and more compassionate to let Jahi’s mother make this decision rather than the hospital and doctors? Are my critics pro-choice only when it comes to stopping a beating heart? Why can’t this woman, little Jahi’s mother, make this choice on her own? Because she’s a woman?  Because she’s black?  What’s the problem with letting her decide?   I’m only defending this woman’s right to choose what's best for her family, and I wonder why my critics are so opposed to the idea of this woman making her own choice.

Finally, as stated in the article, there is no signed death certificate.  One was drafted but nobody—not the coroner nor the attending physicians—would sign it.

Some of my critics are outraged at my comparison of this case to the treatment of fellow human beings in Nazi Germany.  My only point, proven by the violent reaction, is that we are very judgmental of a population which believed the propaganda 60 years ago in Germany that these people were not living human beings and could therefore have their biological life terminated without moral scruple.  The same phenomena repeats itself today as we have allowed those with a significant financial stake in redefining death so that they can harvest people’s functioning organs for profit to convince us that someone who for millennia would have been considered alive, albeit very ill, is “brain dead.” 

I repeat I am not suggesting at all that anyone be forced to receive extraordinary means of sustaining life; all I plead for is our freedom to use those means to make absolutely certain there is no chance of survival without a doctor or hospital forcing us to withdraw life sustaining measures.  To those who are offended by this plea, I apologize but bear you no hatred nor would I ever dream of calling or emailing you with threats and vile obscenities. 

Brian M. McCall

Viewed 4863 times Last modified on Sunday, February 2, 2014
Brian McCall | Remnant Columnist

 Brian M. McCall holds the Orpha and Maurice Merrill Endowed Professorship in
Law
at the University of Oklahoma College of Law. A Professor of Law, he received his B.A. from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa, 1991He also received his M.A. from Kings College University of London, Fulbright Scholar, 1992 and his J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, Summa Cum Laude, Order of the Coif, 1997.  Brian has been a regular contributor to The Remnant since 2004 and his most recent book, The Church and the Usurers, was published in 2012. Along with his wife and six young children, he lives in Oklahoma.