End Life Support Controversy

Choosing to sustain life artificially or to end life support is a topic that has faced, and still faces today, a lot of controversy. Many believe that life should be prolonged as there can be hope for individuals that are on life support, but other may disagree. The body is a complex system; much like a machine, there are many moving parts, signals being passed, responses being triggered, and when some of our “parts” stop functioning as they should we cease to be. The medical field can use life support systems to keep one’s essential organs running for various reasons such as assisting in the chance of survival or because it was what one’s family wanted. However, controversy arises when the patient being held alive can no longer have a say in the decisions being made and one can only speculate on what his or her wishes may be.

A young girl undergoing a tonsillectomy at Children’s Hospital in Oakland, California, experienced blood loss and went into cardiac arrest. Jahi was originally declared brain-dead, and controversy arose, between the hospital and her family, whether to keep her alive on life support or to “pull the plug,” (Bender & Alund, 2016). Now in the case of Jahi, which is still ongoing today, it is said that she has shown signs of improvement (Shoichet, 2013). When diagnosed brain-dead, there usually is no hope for recovery, and in Jahi’s case, the state of California had printed a death certificate upon their determination of her status (Death Certificate, 2014). Jahi’s family believes there is still hope for their child and that she will wake up one day, and her signs of improvement may be proof to such hope. Keeping a patient alive on life support may be what the family wants, but also these instances can open opportunities for doctors to learn from these