Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reconciling the Case of Jahi McMath

  • Current Opinion/Arguments
  • Published:
Neurocritical Care Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The case of Jahi McMath has captured the attention of the public, healthcare professionals, and ethicists. Jahi was declared brain dead in late 2013, but her family transferred her to New Jersey to continue organ support. A lengthy legal battle has been ongoing since then. Jahi’s family and two neurologists, Drs. Calixto Machado and Alan Shewmon, believe that she is not brain dead. Her family and Dr. Shewmon think that she is capable of following commands, thus making her minimally conscious.

Methods

Review of case materials.

Results and Conclusion

Because brain death is an irreversible coma, one of three conclusions must be drawn: 1) Jahi was never dead; 2) Jahi met the criteria for brain death, but she isn't dead now; or 3) Jahi's movements are not purposeful responses, and she has been brain dead since 2013. The possibility that a person who was declared brain dead is now following commands threatens to erode the notion that brain death should be considered legal death. The discordant ideas that Jahi is brain dead and is following commands can only be reconciled if a formal evaluation for determination of death is repeated by reputable examiners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aviv R. What does it mean to die? [Internet]. New Yorker. 2018 [cited 2018 Feb 10]. Available from: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/05/what-does-it-mean-to-die.

  2. RG13-707598. Latasha Winkfield vs. Children’s Hospital Oakland. 2013.

  3. Nakagawa TA, Ashwal S, Mathur M, Mysore M, Committee for Determination of Brain Death in Infants and Children. Guidelines for the determination of brain death in infants and children: an update of the task force recommendations-executive summary. Ann Neurol. 1987;2012(71):573–85.

    Google Scholar 

  4. RG15-760730. Latasha Nailah Spears Winkfield, Marvin Winkfield, Sandra Chapman and Jahi McMath vs. Frederick S. Rosen, MD and UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland. 2015.

  5. Wijdicks EFM, Varelas PN, Gronseth GS, Greer DM. There is no reversible brain death. Crit Care Med. 2011;39:2204–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lewis A, Bernat JL, Blosser S, et al. An interdisciplinary response to contemporary concerns about brain death determination. Neurology. 2018;90:423–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Powner DJ, Bernstein IM. Extended somatic support for pregnant women after brain death. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:1241–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shewmon DA. Chronic “brain death”: meta-analysis and conceptual consequences. Neurology. 1998;51:1538–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mattiesen W-RC, Tauber SC, Gerber J, Bunkowski S, Brück W, Nau R. Increased neurogenesis after hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in humans is age related. Acta Neuropathol. 2009;117:525–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Shewmon DA. Brain death and the controversial case of Jahi McMath: A neurologist’s view. Boston, United States: Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics Annual Bioethics Conference; 2018.

  11. Giacino J, Whyte J. The vegetative and minimally conscious states: current knowledge and remaining questions. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2005;20:30–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 3:15-CV-06042. Jahi McMath and Nailah Winkfield vs. State of California, County of Alameda, Alameda County Department of Public Health, Muntu Davis, MD, MPH, Alameda County Coroner and Medical Examiner, Alameda County Counsel, David Nefouse, Scott Dickey, Alameda County. 2015.

  13. Shemie SD, Hornby L, Baker A, et al. International guideline development for the determination of death. Intensive Care Med. 2014;40:788–97.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Sprung CL, Truog RD, Curtis JR, et al. Seeking worldwide professional consensus on the principles of end-of-life care for the critically ill. The Consensus for Worldwide End-of-Life Practice for Patients in Intensive Care Units (WELPICUS) study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;190:855–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Neurocritical Care, Departments of Neurology and Neurosurgery, NYU Langone Medical Center, 530 First Avenue, HCC-5A, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Ariane Lewis

Authors
  1. Ariane Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AL was responsible for manuscript conception and drafting.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ariane Lewis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lewis, A. Reconciling the Case of Jahi McMath. Neurocrit Care 29, 20–22 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-018-0561-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-018-0561-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation