Does anyone else think this guy is further tarnishing the reputation of lawyers with his tactics in the Children's Hospital affair?

The whole thing is absurd. Do not know if it is the attorney or the family, but wow. Compassion for their loss, cannot understand their persistence, but we shall probably see down the line. Where is the angle? Follow the money trail with both family and attorney and you will probably find the answer. Still, very sorry for their unfortunate loss.

OdontoBear66;842253354 said:

---

The whole thing is absurd. Do not know if it is the attorney or the family, but wow. Compassion for their loss, cannot understand their persistence, but we shall probably see down the line. Where is the angle? Follow the money trail with both family and attorney and you will probably find the answer. Still, very sorry for their unfortunate loss.

---

I don't practice personal injury or medical malpractice law so someone in the know needs to chip in here but doesn't MICRA limit the damages to $250,000? A guy like Dolan doesn't get his beak wet with that so I'm thinking this is about massive free publicity.

He's a very definition of an ambulance chaser

As of now, there remains the $250,000 limit for 'pain and suffering' but there is no limit on future medical care or negligence leading to the patient's outcome so multi-million dollar settlements can still occur. Of course, that could all change with the current attempt to raise the limit as the real reason for the current push to put the proposition to randomly drug test doctors on the ballot-the important language underneath the headline is the attempt to raise the pain & suffering cap.

bearister;842253352 said:

---

Does anyone else think this guy is further tarnishing the reputation of lawyers with his tactics in the Children's Hospital affair?

---

Poor Children's Hospital.

Add this to the recent news that Stanford was opening up a children's medical center in Emeryville.

But, yeah, I agree with you.

This story, though, is beginning to get national attention.

Americans need come to grips with the fact that death is a facet of life. We need to have the courage to take Oregon's law to a national level.

Milking tragedy for personal gain is disgusting. The family and attorney should be ashamed of their actions.

This case is irritating as hell.

The problem is not that scumbag lawyer, though. The problem is that a JUDGE is forcing Children's to keep an ICU bed filled by a dead body as though the judge has no fucking clue or case law or law to look at. That guy should be fired yesterday.

Not only did that scumbag judge decide that more doctors should take a look (ok, marginally reasonable), but he extended the order to keep the body taking up lifesaving space after every facility the family talked to decided that, no, they dont actually accept dead bodies in their facility. Absolutely ridiculous.

"It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham."
---Woody Allen

71Bear;842253401 said:

---

Americans need come to grips with the fact that death is a facet of life. We need to have the courage to take Oregon's law to a national level.

Milking tragedy for personal gain is disgusting. The family and attorney should be ashamed of their actions.

---

Sounds to me that the family really believes that the daughter is still breathing and moving and that there is a chance for a miracle recovery.
Who are we to take that away from them as long as the law allows it.

As for the lawyer, who is to say that the family is not entitled to legal representation in their quest to keep their daughter alive (from their point of view). [Note: the lawyer might not believe that the daughter has any chance of recovery; but it is no his job to make that determination. Many lawyers represent defendants whom they know to be guilty of the crime with which they are charged. The rules of professional conduct merely prohibit the attorney from offering false testimony.]

This is the beauty of the American legal system (and sometimes its problem).
One person who can pay an attorney (or get an attorney to work for free) can pursue his/her right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (as that person perceives it) to the Supreme Court.

How would you feel if she were your child and if you believed that she had legitimate but very slim chance of making a recovery.

bearister;842253365 said:

---

I don't practice personal injury or medical malpractice law so someone in the know needs to chip in here but doesn't MICRA limit the damages to $250,000? A guy like Dolan doesn't get his beak wet with that so I'm thinking this is about massive free publicity.

---

they discussed this topic on NPR on Forum the other day and someone mentioned the ambulance-chasing angle and one of the guests pointed out that the family's lawyers are working pro bono. They implied that it meant the lawyer was working in the family's best interests which of course he isn't necessarily -- as you mention, the massive publicity in this high-profile case is worth a ton of advertising and marketing dollars, and it would be in his interests to maximize that exposure.

Been there...done that. You unplug them and if God wills it....they live. Right now the family has a blank check given by a judge. And Children's Hospital tells the other critically ill children "sorry...we have no room in our ICUs because we are feeding a dead body". Historically a minister talks with the family and Dr and eases the acceptance of loss. Discussion is held about donating organs and what the victim would want. Didn't happen here for some reason.

Langston Jackson...

Quote:

---

"He had almost complete liver and kidney failure and they wanted to pull the plug on him three different times. Based on his MRI, they said he'd always just be a vegetable and never wake up or be a human being."

---

Don't get me wrong. I think they should pull the plug. But the disproportionate expectation of miracles in the world(like winning the lotto), drives the system, and it shouldn't.

burritos;842253506 said:

---

Langston Jackson...



Don't get me wrong. I think they should pull the plug. But the disproportionate expectation of miracles in the world(like winning the lotto), drives the system, and it shouldn't.

---

...and when someone else is footing the bill there is no disincentive not to play the " lotto."

GivemTheAxe;842253455 said:

---

Sounds to me that the family really believes that the daughter is still breathing and moving and that there is a chance for a miracle recovery.
Who are we to take that away from them as long as the law allows it.

As for the lawyer, who is to say that the family is not entitled to legal representation in their quest to keep their daughter alive (from their point of view). [Note: the lawyer might not believe that the daughter has any chance of recovery; but it is no his job to make that determination. Many lawyers represent defendants whom they know to be guilty of the crime with which they are charged. The rules of professional conduct merely prohibit the attorney from offering false testimony.]

This is the beauty of the American legal system (and sometimes its problem).
One person who can pay an attorney (or get an attorney to work for free) can pursue his/her right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (as that person perceives it) to the Supreme Court.

How would you feel if she were your child and if you believed that she had legitimate but very slim chance of making a recovery.

Good post....there is way too much blaming the victim here...the hospital and doctor are to blame. The scenario will play it's way out- no one is gaming the system. The problem is the system was broken- an overweight girl with health problems should either not have that operation and/or it should be done correctly. it's children's hospital which looks bad for refusing to prepare the girl for transference. We keep rich people like Sunny Bullow on ice for years, but feel outraged when a Mom is clinging to any hope for her daughter a week after tragic news?

XXXBEAR;842253526 said:

---

GivemTheAxe;842253455 said:

---

Sounds to me that the family really believes that the daughter is still breathing and moving and that there is a chance for a miracle recovery.
Who are we to take that away from them as long as the law allows it.

As for the lawyer, who is to say that the family is not entitled to legal representation in their quest to keep their daughter alive (from their point of view). [Note: the lawyer might not believe that the daughter has any chance of recovery; but it is no his job to make that determination. Many lawyers represent defendants whom they know to be guilty of the crime with which they are charged. The rules of professional conduct merely prohibit the attorney from offering false testimony.]

This is the beauty of the American legal system (and sometimes its problem).
One person who can pay an attorney (or get an attorney to work for free) can pursue his/her right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (as that person perceives it) to the Supreme Court.

How would you feel if she were your child and if you believed that she had legitimate but very slim chance of making a recovery.

Good post....there is way too much blaming the victim here...the hospital and doctor are to blame. The scenario will play it's way out- no one is gaming the system. The problem is the system was broken- an overweight girl with health problems should either not have that operation and/or it should be done correctly. it's children's hospital which looks bad for refusing to prepare the girl for transference. We keep rich people like Sunny Bullow on ice for years, but feel outraged when a Mom is clinging to any hope for her daughter a week after tragic news?

---

I thought the hospital's stance in this matter kind of odd, especially when they could be found to be negligent in their treatment of the girl. Could it be the girl would cost the hospital less in a subsequent law suit if she was legally dead as opposed to being alive?

jyamada;842253555 said:

---

XXXBEAR;842253526 said:

---

I thought the hospital's stance in this matter kind of odd, especially when they could be found to be negligent in their treatment of the girl. Could it be the girl would cost the hospital less in a subsequent law suit if she was legally dead as opposed to being alive?

---

Yes, the future care portion of any damage award would be a large bullet to swallow in deed.

XXXBEAR;842253526 said:

---

Good post....there is way too much blaming the victim here...the hospital and doctor are to blame. The scenario will play it's way out- no one is gaming the system. The problem is the system was broken- an overweight girl with health problems should either not have that operation and/or it should be done correctly. it's children's hospital which looks bad for refusing to prepare the girl for transference. We keep rich people like Sunny Bullow on ice for years, but feel outraged when a Mom is clinging to any hope for her daughter a week after tragic news?

---

Sunny von Bulow was in a vegetative state, not brain dead. To doctors, Jahi isn't "not going to recover", she's actually dead, which is driving the current decisions of the hospital.

MilleniaBear;842253491 said:

---

Historically a minister talks with the family and Dr and eases the acceptance of loss. Discussion is held about donating organs and what the victim would want. Didn't happen here for some reason.

---

It did...

It even had a social workers asking them if they wanted anyone else to say goodbye before they pulled the plug (typically in a high census, they just pull the plug and you might say goodbye in the morgue).

They also had a meeting with multiple doctors, nurses and social workers and were upset that they were saying she was "dead".


Children's just got caught up in some POS judges stupid ruling after hearing a publicity chasing lawyers shitty argument against established law.

jyamada;842253555 said:

---

I thought the hospital's stance in this matter kind of odd, especially when they could be found to be negligent in their treatment of the girl. Could it be the girl would cost the hospital less in a subsequent law suit if she was legally dead as opposed to being alive?

---

She is legally dead. There is no blood flow in the girls brain. Verified by a doctor of the dead body's family's choosing.

Since I believe in science not magic, I would tell the hospital to disconnect the equipment and donate her organs to others.

I am a strong believer in ending life with dignity. Too many people simply refuse to face the fact that death is a facet of life....

.

burritos;842253506 said:

---

Langston Jackson...



Don't get me wrong. I think they should pull the plug. But the disproportionate expectation of miracles in the world(like winning the lotto), drives the system, and it shouldn't.

---

This is a HUGE part of the problem: People associate brain death with coma and vegetative states.

They are similar like the catching the flu and getting your head cut off are similar.

Jackson was not brain dead. He was in a coma. Very different.

Ignorance is the driver of this.

Shakespeare was right...

GivemTheAxe;842253455 said:

---

Sounds to me that the family really believes that the daughter is still breathing and moving and that there is a chance for a miracle recovery.
Who are we to take that away from them as long as the law allows it.

As for the lawyer, who is to say that the family is not entitled to legal representation in their quest to keep their daughter alive (from their point of view). [Note: the lawyer might not believe that the daughter has any chance of recovery; but it is no his job to make that determination. Many lawyers represent defendants whom they know to be guilty of the crime with which they are charged. The rules of professional conduct merely prohibit the attorney from offering false testimony.]

This is the beauty of the American legal system (and sometimes its problem).
One person who can pay an attorney (or get an attorney to work for free) can pursue his/her right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (as that person perceives it) to the Supreme Court.

How would you feel if she were your child and if you believed that she had legitimate but very slim chance of making a recovery.

---

After three doctors declared her dead? I would bury the poor child.



"It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham."
---Woody Allen

This

I don't get it, is he related to Fabiano Hale?

Fire Dykes!!!

Phantomfan;842253620 said:

---

This is a HUGE part of the problem: People associate brain death with coma and vegetative states.

They are similar like the catching the flu and getting your head cut off are similar.

Jackson was not brain dead. He was in a coma. Very different.

Ignorance is the driver of this.

---

I'm not privy to the specifics of Jackson's case, but here is the quote from the sister again...

Quote:

---

"He had almost complete liver and kidney failure and they wanted to pull the plug on him three different times. Based on his MRI, they said he'd always just be a vegetable and never wake up or be a human being."

---

If I'm interpreting your comment correctly, Jackson was merely in a coma state/not brain dead in which waking up was a likely possibility, why would she be told that he'd always be a vegetable and never wake up or be a human being? And why would "the plug be pulled" be considered on 3 separate occasions? It sounds like to me that some people thought he was brain dead.

burritos;842253669 said:

---

I'm not privy to the specifics of Jackson's case, but here is the quote from the sister again...

If I'm interpreting your comment correctly, Jackson was merely in a coma state/not brain dead in which waking up was a likely possibility, why would she be told that he'd always be a vegetable and never wake up or be a human being? And why would "the plug be pulled" be considered on 3 separate occasions? It sounds like to me that some people thought he was brain dead.

---

Wikipedia -- this describes Jahi but not Jackson:

Quote:

---

Brain death is the irreversible end of brain activity (including involuntary activity necessary to sustain life) due to total necrosis of the cerebral neurons following loss of brain oxygenation. It should not be confused with a persistent vegetative state. Patients classified as brain-dead can have their organs surgically removed for organ donation. Even after brain death, the working of the heart might continue at a slow pace, but there will be no respiratory effort.

Brain death is used as a legal indicator of death in many jurisdictions, but it is defined inconsistently. Various parts of the brain may keep living when others die, and the term "brain death" has been used to refer to various combinations. For example, although a major medical dictionary says that "brain death" is synonymous with "cerebral death" (death of the cerebrum), the US National Library of Medicine Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) system defines brain death as including the brainstem. The distinctions can be important because, for example, in someone with a dead cerebrum but a living brainstem, the heartbeat and ventilation can continue unaided, whereas, in whole-brain death, only life support equipment would keep those functions going.

---

burritos;842253669 said:

---

I'm not privy to the specifics of Jackson's case, but here is the quote from the sister again...

If I'm interpreting your comment correctly, Jackson was merely in a coma state/not brain dead in which waking up was a likely possibility, why would she be told that he'd always be a vegetable and never wake up or be a human being? And why would "the plug be pulled" be considered on 3 separate occasions? It sounds like to me that some people thought he was brain dead.

---

No, there is a difference on "pulling the plug" on someone in a vegetative state. It has nothing to do with brain death.

Brain death is a VERY specific thing and is medically testable.

The test that determines brain death is a blood flow test. No blood to the brain or brain stem = brain death.


A vegetative state is different. There are moral questions (what would the family or patient want), medical questions (How likely is it that this is recoverable). So, if .01% of people recover, there is a chance, but what is best? That is subjective. Jackson's doctors can advise, but the family chooses, because death has not happened. SOMETIMES they will refer to someone as "brain dead" because of lack of activity in the brain as a non-medical/non-legal term. Saying Obama or Bush is brain dead is about the same: it is using a very specific term to mean something else.

With Brain Death, there is no recovery. There is no example of someone recovering any brain activity after blood flow to the brain and brain stem is lost. There is a woman with ceribral brain death who has been kept fresh for 14 years or so. Most bodies cannot be kept alive longer than a few weeks or months.

There are stories of people who are "brain dead" waking up, but if you look into them, they were in a coma without brain activity, not brain dead.

XXXBEAR;842253526 said:

---

How would you feel if she were your child and if you believed that she had legitimate but very slim chance of making a recovery.

Good post....there is way too much blaming the victim here...the hospital and doctor are to blame. The scenario will play it's way out- no one is gaming the system. The problem is the system was broken- an overweight girl with health problems should either not have that operation and/or it should be done correctly. it's children's hospital which looks bad for refusing to prepare the girl for transference. We keep rich people like Sunny Bullow on ice for years, but feel outraged when a Mom is clinging to any hope for her daughter a week after tragic news?

---

I'm gonna chalk this comment up to "I have no idea what the f#ck I'm talking about, but I enjoy making inflammatory posts."

SLEEP APNEA IS LIFE THREATENING.
Sleep apnea CAUSES serious health problems.
Sleep apnea can cause decreased oxygen levels to the body and high blood pressure.
Decreased oxygen can cause death.
High blood pressure can cause stroke, which can cause death.
There are 2 types of strokes, ischemic (blocking blood flow to the brain) and hemmorhagic (blow out of the vessel causing bleeding).
Cardiac disturbances and arrest are common following a stroke.
There are 3 types of sleep apnea: Obstructive (ie big tonsils), Central (brain can not properly maintain breathing process) and Mixed (combination of Obstructive and Central).
Individuals that are overweight, large necks, large tongues and "kissing tonsils" likely have Obstructive Sleep Apnea.
Photographs show this patient to have large neck and be overweight and have a large powerful tongue as seen by large spaces between upper front teeth.
The surgery was for the removal of large tonsils and adenoids.
This patient had Obstructive Sleep Apnea.
She may have had central apnea as well.
This patient was reported to have an uncomplicated surgery.
The patient had a sudden stroke.
The stroke caused both blood flow termination, blow out bleeding, and cardiac arrest.

It is a very sad outcome, but completely explained by her disease.

Sadly, it likely could have been prevented by much earlier intervention regarding calorie intake and metabolism (exercise).

XXXBear, I hope you learned something.

XXXBEAR;842253526 said:

---

How would you feel if she were your child and if you believed that she had legitimate but very slim chance of making a recovery.

---

As someone once said, you're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. And the fact is that the girl is dead. She's been evaluated by 6 different physicians (including one independent, court-appointed physician) and has been judged to have met the criteria for brain death. The judge has ruled that she is, in fact, brain dead. She meets all legal and medical criteria for being dead. That is the fact.

The spineless judge who, on the one hand, ruled her brain dead but, on the other hand, is forcing the hospital to maintain her in the ICU is the real problem. There is absolutely no precedent for what he's done. He just made up case law and we will be paying the price for this in the future.

I understand that there are legitimate issues that merit consideration. However, the personal attacks on the judge by some posters are way off base.

Without dragging his name into this, I will say that I have appeared several times before him and his predecessors in the "law & motion dept." In my opinion, he is a terrific judge who applies extraordinary skill and analytic ability to resolve difficult issues.

GrandPa Bear;842254101 said:

---

I understand that there are legitimate issues that merit consideration. However, the personal attacks on the judge by some posters are way off base.

Without dragging his name into this, I will say that I have appeared several times before him and his predecessors in the "law & motion dept." In my opinion, he is a terrific judge who applies extraordinary skill and analytic ability to resolve difficult issues.

---

No.

The judge should be fired.

His rulings are detrimental to the community. He has appointed a doctor who has found the girl to be dead, and THEN rules that yeah, she's dead but ****-it - keep her body taking up much needed ICU space in a hospital for children.

He has gone against written and case law...for what? What is his reasoning? That his ruling that she is dead is...wrong? Is he contradicting himself? What skill and ability did he use to determine a person was dead, but should be kept on a ventilator? This Judge said she is DEAD. This Judge brought in a special doctor to confirm, then confirms it, then decides to force the hospital to keep her body hooked up to machines!?


Are you kidding?


This judge is the problem with the legal system.

Phantomfan;842254130 said:

---

No.

The judge should be fired.

His rulings are detrimental to the community. He has appointed a doctor who has found the girl to be dead, and THEN rules that yeah, she's dead but ****-it - keep her body taking up much needed ICU space in a hospital for children.

He has gone against written and case law...for what? What is his reasoning? That his ruling that she is dead is...wrong? Is he contradicting himself? What skill and ability did he use to determine a person was dead, but should be kept on a ventilator? This Judge said she is DEAD. This Judge brought in a special doctor to confirm, then confirms it, then decides to force the hospital to keep her body hooked up to machines!?


Are you kidding?


This judge is the problem with the legal system.

---

+1. As are many judges who put themselves bigger than life.

In fairness to Dolan, he at least makes a case for himself as being a true believer rather than a publicity whore. I disagree with him, but he made me doubt my original bashing of him just a little bit.

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_24865029/jahi-mcmath-streetfighting-lawyer-takes-heat-death-threats#

You have to keep scrolling down to get the original story after you read the paper's corrections.

Why do people care so much about this? I was reading some of the comments from the article, and there's just so much outrage. Some family endured a tragic event, and they're the problem, not the hospital or the doctors that were entrusted with the child's life?

Some were even suggesting people should sue the family for fraud against those who gave them donations. Who do these people think they are to dictate how a family should deal with this situation? The hatred directed towards the family is just baffling.

I swear, the public is ALWAYS looking to be outraged about something. A complete mob mentality that's only exacerbated by this digital age. Everybody has an agenda, but the bottom line is that this poor family lost their child. You'll have to excuse them for not trusting the very hospital and doctors responsible for their loss.