DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Canadian boy moved to US over end-of-life dispute

By JIM SALTER, Associated Press Jim Salter, Associated Press – Mon Mar 14, 6:25 pm ET
ST. LOUIS – A Canadian couple transferred their terminally ill toddler son to a Catholic hospital in St. Louis after an Ontario court ruled that doctors could remove the breathing tube keeping the boy alive.

Thirteen-month-old Joseph Maraachli arrived at Cardinal Glennon Children's Hospital on Sunday after the hospital agreed to treat the boy.

Joseph's doctors at London Health Sciences Centre in Ontario, where he had been treated since October, determined that he was in a permanent vegetative state and that his condition was deteriorating, and they planned to take him off of assisted breathing.

Joseph's parents, who lost an 18-month-old child to the same disease eight years ago, challenged the hospital's finding in court but lost. Moe Maraachli and Sana Nader contended that removing their son's breathing tube would cause him to suffocate and cause him undue suffering, and they sought to compel doctors to give Joseph a tracheotomy that would allow him to breathe through a tube inserted into his throat. They said the tracheotomy could extend his life up to six months — as they say it did for their other child who died — and would allow him to die at home.

After losing in the courts, Joseph's parents enlisted support for their cause using social media sites, but the hospital refused to reverse course. So they began reaching out to U.S. hospitals, and Cardinal Glennon agreed to care for their son.

Late Sunday, a plane carrying Joseph, his father, and the Rev. Frank Pavone of the New York City-based group Priests for Life flew to Cardinal Glennon. Priests for Life, which lobbies against abortion rights and euthanasia, paid for the chartered plane.

Moe Maraachli did not immediately return phone messages seeking comment Monday. But Pavone said the parents are simply trying to extend the life of their child and make sure he doesn't suffer.

"The parents are saying, `Look, even if the diagnosis is fatal, let's give him the best care he can get,'" Pavone said. "They're saying, `This is our child. We believe his life is worth extending.'"

Pavone said the exact disease from which Joseph suffers has not been determined. The Ontario hospital, in a news release, called it a "progressively deteriorating neurological condition" and said the move to St. Louis was against the advice of its medical staff. Joseph breathes with help from a machine and receives nourishment through a feeding tube, the hospital said.

Cardinal Glennon spokeswoman Ashley Wiehle said doctors "are in the process of evaluating Joseph and forming a treatment plan. Like we do for all the children here at Cardinal Glennon, we want to provide the best care possible for him and do what's best for him."

Wiehle said it wasn't known how long Joseph would stay at Cardinal Glennon.

London Health Sciences Centre said the hospital's judgment was supported by various pediatric specialists in both countries along with Ontario's Consent and Capacity Board.

"LHSC continues to be proud to stand behind their judgments and the care given to Baby Joseph," hospital chief executive officer Bonnie Adamson said in the release. "The judgments were sound, both medically and ethically, and the care Baby Joseph received from our staff was second to none anywhere in the world."

Rebecca Dresser, a professor of law and medical ethics at Washington University in St. Louis, said U.S. courts generally side with families in such cases that want to continue treatment for loved ones even in seemingly hopeless medical cases.

Dresser said similar end-of-life cases will likely become more common.

"Because of the growing concerns about costs, we're going to see more of this," she said.

web page

So, if I have this correct - the canadian health care system basically said "this is fatal, may as well end it now so we don't have to pay more"? Is that right?

Hmmm.........

Sounds to my that the child is going to pass away from this disease and yes the goverment did not want to keep him on the breathing tube any longer . But it also sounds like the parents are just in denial of whats going on and there keeping hope alive that there son will come back around . Im just glad that all my kids are healthy and have nothing wrong with them Thank god

Yeah. I don't blame the family too much for caring about their child to the point of standing firmly on a bottom line of, "Keep him alive as long as possible" because I know with parents there's a sense of love and attachment that'll never go away through thick and thin. However..

The reality of the situation, though, is that the baby is in a vegetable state. Doesn't this procedure- as the LHSC stands by- not effect a cure at all from the imminent death/present vegetable state? Yes, this child is clinically brain-dead and non-self-functioning. That being the case, this practically and permanently unconscious child's operation is more for the sake of the parents delaying the inevitable and not letting go. I understand where they come from and don't expect rationality to be at the forefront on their minds here; but this is irrational nonetheless.

So the mass media's stirring up of this situation is centering (again like always) around an air of sensationalism. The hospital on up to the Ontario Supreme Court isn't as callous as this is being blown up to be. And of course Cardinal Glennon's Children's Hospital is taking this on. It was a PR gift dumped straight into their laps.

I think the parents are clear that their child is going to die. But they have the right to spend as much time with their child as they can. If a procedure will extend his life 6 months then they should do it. I'm assuming that since they are Canadian citizens they pay taxes and thus into the Canadian Healthcare system.

I would love to see the what comments this thread would get if this was American citizens and it was a Health Insurance company saying they won't pay for the procedure because the child isn't going to get better.

Look.....maybe I am biased. My Aunts sister passed away in November. She was mentaly challenged. It was an extreame case where she could not function at all on her own. For as long as I can remember she had health problems. Her arteries were failing her to the point they had to remove/bypass sections several times. Many times over the years doctors would consult the family that they were delaying the envitable but the choice was always theirs. They chose life. A person doctors said would be lucky to see her 7th birthday lived till she was 45. And I know her parents wouldn't of done anything different and were happy to have spent the time they did with their daughter.

Quote:

---

I would love to see the what comments this thread would get if this was American citizens and it was a Health Insurance company saying they won't pay for the procedure because the child isn't going to get better.

---

The left would be in a tizzy, clamoring for socialized medicine.

Here's the story from the Canadian press...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nati...article1940715/

The health care system operated the way it was supposed to and refused to perform a surgery that was not medically necessary. This doesn't stop the parents from accessing paid health care elsewhere which they did.

Its a horrible case for certain but the system balanced proper care and responsibility to the taxpayer.

The only thing I would have liked to see is the option to have the surgery done for pay in Canada but private health care services are limited to only a few surgeries at the moment. This is something that will require changes to the health care act.


Activist priest helps severely ill Canadian baby get treatment in U.S.
RENATA D'ALIESIO
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Mar. 14, 2011 6:26AM EDT
Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 15, 2011 8:19AM EDT

An activist American priest has waded into a medical and ethical battle over a severely ill Canadian baby, helping whisk the boy away from a Southern Ontario hospital “under the cover of darkness” for medical treatment in the United States.

In the view of Rev. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life, Joseph Maraachli's case was a rescue mission from a Canadian medical bureaucracy that wanted to end the infant's life. He also believes it's symbolic of a broader debate: Should doctors or family members decide when and how a terminally ill patient dies?

“We saw this as a pivotal case. It really embodies for us some of the challenges of what we call ‘the culture of death,'” Father Pavone said Monday after accompanying Joseph and his father in a private air ambulance flight to SSM Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center, a Catholic hospital in St. Louis.

“Medical professionals should give us medical information … but they should not make a value judgment about how much a life is worth,” he said. “We believe that both in the United States and throughout the world, this is becoming more and more of a problem.”

Joseph's parents asked for the help of Father Pavone and his group, which bills itself as the largest Catholic pro-life organization in the U.S., advocating against abortion and euthanasia. He gained prominence last decade as he spent years publicly battling against the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube in a contentious Florida medical and legal case that ignited an international right-to-life debate.

Priests for Life has raised $150,000 (U.S.) to cover the battery of medical tests that began Monday on Baby Joseph. The 13-month-old had been surviving on breathing and feeding tubes at London Health Sciences Centre for the past five months.

Officials with the Southern Ontario hospital refused to comment Monday. In a statement released Sunday, the medical centre said Baby Joseph's parents had a legal right to request their son's discharge, but added the infant's transfer to the American faith-based hospital was contrary to advice from medical experts in Canada, the U.S. and Europe.

Doctors at the London hospital, one of Canada's most prestigious medical institutions, felt Joseph's prognosis was clear. Admitted for treatment in October, the baby boy was diagnosed with a fatal neurodegenerative disease. His physicians determined he had no hope of recovery and recommended removing his breathing and feeding tubes.

But Joseph's parents, Moe Maraachli and Sana Nader of Windsor, Ont., launched a legal battle to stop the tubes' removal. Fearing he would suffer a painful death if his breathing tube was removed, they wanted physicians to perform a tracheotomy, which would involve cutting a hole in their son's throat to create an airway.

The London hospital refused to do the surgery, saying it was an invasive procedure designed for patients with a prospect of surviving.

Doctors at SSM Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center, where Catholic values have a role in medical decisions, have decided otherwise. Robert Wilmott, chief of pediatrics there, said in a statement released Monday evening that Joseph will likely have a tracheotomy performed by the end of the week to facilitate his move to a nursing facility.

The plight of Baby Joseph has garnered public attention for months, playing out in the courts, media and social-networking Internet sites.

London hospital officials contend its physicians and staff have been targeted with threats through social media and e-mail, many of them originating from “members of U.S.-based groups.” These threats have been forwarded to the hospital's lawyers, who plan to talk with the police.

Several other U.S. hospitals had declined to treat the Ontario boy.

Wilfrid Laurier University medical ethics professor Melany Banks doesn't believe the St. Louis children's hospital should have agreed to accept Joseph. She worries religious politics and the emotions of grieving parents have overtaken the boy's best interests.

“Of course grieving parents are going to jump at any hope,” Dr. Banks said. “But with a terminal diagnosis, the main concern is alleviating pain and not performing any unnecessary surgeries.”

The family's lawyer Claudio Martini noted Sunday's transfer was not as dramatic as portrayed by Father Pavone and his Priests for Life group, who used the phrase “under the cover of darkness.” The London hospital responded promptly to the family's discharge request, Mr. Martini said.

Joseph's parents weren't available for comment. They lost another child to the same neurodegenerative disease eight years ago.

Quote:

---

An activist American priest has waded into a medical and ethical battle over a severely ill Canadian baby, helping whisk the boy away from a Southern Ontario hospital “under the cover of darkness” for medical treatment in the United States.

---

There's a slant for ya.

Sounds like a corpse being kept alive because the parents want to prolong the suffering.

Sad when somebody dies. It's sadder still when somebody lives in denial.

A Church that loves politicizing things decides to jump in and politicize the pain of a family. I have to say, who is exploiting who? Are the parents exploiting their child, or is the church exploiting the parents?

I take it that, in Charlie's world, it is the state that would make that decision for the parents. Do I have that right? If so, that might be the saddest statement of all.