Archive

ShareThis Page
Mother: Girl at center of debate over brain death dies | TribLIVE.com
News

Mother: Girl at center of debate over brain death dies

The Associated Press
BrainDeadGirl57636jpge831d
FILE - In this Dec. 23, 2015 file photo, a recent photo of Jahi McMath is shown on a video screen next to her uncle Timothy Whisenton at a news conference in San Francisco. New Jersey officials say McMath, the girl at the center of the medical and religious debate over brain death, has died from excessive bleeding. The girl's mother said Thursday, June 28, 2018, that New Jersey doctors declared Jahi McMath dead after an operation to treat an intestinal issue. A California coroner in 2013 ruled the then 13-year-old died after suffering irreversible brain damage during an operation to remove her tonsils. Her family did not accept the decision and opted to move her to New Jersey. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, file)

SAN FRANCISCO — A girl at the center of the medical and religious debate over brain death has died after surgery in New Jersey, her mother said Thursday.

Nailah Winkfield said doctors declared her daughter Jahi McMath dead on June 22 from excessive bleeding and liver failure after an operation to treat an intestinal issue.

McMath was declared dead in December 2013 when she was 13 after suffering irreversible brain damage during routine surgery in California to remove her tonsils and a coroner signed a death certificate. Several specialists concurred after neurological tests.

Winkfield refused to accept the conclusion. She said her Christian beliefs compelled her to fight for continued care for her daughter, who she said showed signs of life through toe wriggles and finger movements.

Winkfield flew her daughter to New Jersey, where she has remained on life support and received care in the state that accommodates religions that don’t recognize brain death.

“Jahi wasn’t brain dead or any kind of dead,” Winkfield said. “She was a girl with a brain injury and she deserved to be cared for like any other child who had a brain injury.”

McMath’s case drew national attention amid the debate over brain death and religious beliefs. Conservative religious groups rallied behind Winkfield and helped raise money for McMath’s continued care.

Winkfield said she has quit her job, sold her home in Oakland and used savings to pay for McMath’s care in New Jersey. The state’s Medicaid program and donations have also contributed to the girl’s care.

“These last four-and-a-half years have not been easy,” Winkfield said. “I can go to sleep knowing I did everything possible for my kid and no one can take that away from me.”

Winkfield and her lawyers had been trying to rescind the California death certificate as part of a medical malpractice lawsuit filed against Children’s Hospital in Oakland.

In refusing to throw out the lawsuit last year, a judge ruled that it was up to a jury to determine if the girl was still alive.

Attorney Chris Dolan said the New Jersey death certificate eliminated that argument, but he and Winkfield are still debating whether to continue the fight and possibly set a precedent so other religious families don’t have to go through the same situation.

“My wish is that she will get some laws changed,” Winkfield said about her daughter. “I really hope that people learn from this and learn not to pull the plug so fast.”

Children’s Hospital lawyers had argued that the family did not subject McMath to tests accepted by the American Medical Association to determine brain death.

Dolan says new technology has made traditional tests obsolete.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.