Connect with us

Health

Hospital wants to pull the plug on inhumanely neglected 23-year-old woman who is not brain dead

Published

8 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Heidi Klessig, M.D.

Montefiore Hospital in Brooklyn is neglecting Amber Ebanks, but experts who have seen the student say her body is functioning and that she could improve with proper treatment.

Amber Ebanks, a 23-year-old Jamaican business student, drove herself to Montefiore Hospital in the Bronx for elective surgery on July 30. But her procedure went awry, leading to an intraoperative stroke and brain swelling that worsened over time. Now, her family is fighting for Amber’s life while the hospital wants to pull the plug.

In February, Amber was found to have a ruptured arteriovenous malformation (AVM), a tangle of abnormal arteries and veins in her brain. Thankfully, after the rupture she was able to return to life as normal. Her doctors recommended that she undergo an embolization procedure to clot off the abnormal blood vessels in her brain in hopes of preventing further rupturing and brain damage. Unfortunately, during the embolization procedure, one of the major arteries supplying blood to Amber’s brain was unintentionally occluded, and her procedure was also complicated by a type of bleeding around the brain called a subarachnoid hemorrhage. Thus, she was taken to the ICU, placed in a medically induced coma, and treated for brain swelling.

Just 10 days later, on August 9, her doctors declared her to be “brain dead.” But there were problems with this diagnosis. The Determination of Death statute in New York and the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) both state:

“An individual who has sustained either:

  1. irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions; or
  2. irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead.”

Amber Ebanks meets neither the first nor the second of these criteria. Her circulatory and respiratory functions continue: her heart is still beating, and her lungs are absorbing oxygen and releasing carbon dioxide. And she does not have the irreversible cessation of all functions of her brain, since she is maintaining her own body temperature, which is a brain function.

Moreover, the new 2023 American Academy of Neurology brain death guideline indicates that metabolic derangements such as high serum sodium levels may confound a brain death evaluation. According to Dr. Paul Byrne, Amber’s sodium levels were very high prior to her brain death determination, with readings over 160meq/L (normal sodium levels range from 135-145 meq/L). Not only can high sodium levels cause abnormal brain functioning, but they can also cause blood vessels in the brain to rupture, causing more brain bleeding – the very problems that Amber’s doctors should be interested in preventing. Also, even though high levels of carbon dioxide are known to exacerbate brain swelling, her doctors have not been checking these levels or adjusting her ventilator settings to prevent such derangements.

In addition to her ongoing heart, lung, and brain functions, Amber has continuing liver and kidney function. And presumably she still has digestive function, even though the hospital has been refusing to feed her since she came in for her surgery on July 30th. A patient cannot be expected to improve neurologically without nutrition.

Not only is Montefiore Hospital refusing to feed Amber, it’s refusing to provide her with basic wound care and hygiene. When Dr. Byrne, a board-certified pediatrician and neonatologist and brain death expert, flew to New York to see Amber this past week, Amber’s sister Kay showed him a maggot she had removed from her sister’s hair. Referring to hospital personnel, Kay Ebanks said in an ABC News article, “They are some of the cruelest people I have ever known.” Most of Amber’s family lives in Jamaica, and her father has been struggling to get a visa in order to come and see his daughter. Meanwhile, the hospital actually suggested that family members say goodbye to her over the phone.

Dr. Byrne and Dr. Thomas M. Zabiega, a board-certified psychiatrist and neurologist, have both evaluated Amber’s case. They have submitted sworn affidavits that Amber Ebanks is alive, and believe that she has decreased blood flow to her brain causing a quietness of the brain known as Global Ischemic Penumbra (GIP). During GIP, the brain shuts down its function to save energy, but the brain tissue itself remains viable. Drs. Byrne and Zabiega recommend additional time and treatment such as adjusting Amber’s sodium and carbon dioxide levels and treating hormonal deficiencies. They have testified that with proper medical treatments she is likely to continue to live and may obtain limited to full recovery of brain functions, even possibly recovering consciousness.

Nevertheless, doctors at Montefiore Hospital are adamant that Amber is “brain dead” and want to disconnect her from her ventilator over the objections of her family. Despite the testimony of qualified doctors and experts, the judge assigned to her case is requiring that a New York-licensed physician be found to evaluate Amber and give testimony about her condition. Until then, Amber remains unfed, uncared for, and neglected in an American hospital, to the point of her sister having to remove vermin from her hair.

Amber Ebanks is very much alive despite receiving little to no ongoing treatment to assist with the healing of her brain. She does not meet the medical or legal criteria for death. All she needs are proper ventilator therapy, a balancing of her fluids and electrolytes, nutrition via a feeding tube, and hormonal replacement: treatments that are commonplace in medicine today. It is shameful that her family has had to beg for these treatments and even go to court to try to force the hospital to provide them.

Heidi Klessig, MD is a retired anesthesiologist and pain management specialist who writes and speaks on the ethics of organ harvesting and transplantation. She is the author of “The Brain Death Fallacy” and her work may be found at respectforhumanlife.com.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Alberta aggressively recruiting resident physicians from across Canada

Published on

Competitive compensation for resident physicians

A new compensation agreement for resident physicians has been reached, which will help to retain and recruit more physicians throughout Alberta.

Alberta’s government, in partnership with Alberta Health Services (AHS), the University of Alberta, University of Calgary and the Professional Association of Resident Physicians of Alberta has reached a four-year agreement that provides competitive and fair-market compensation for physicians in training.

The negotiated agreement provides wage increases of three per cent in each of the first two years, and two per cent in each of the last two years. It also includes market adjustments that put Alberta on par with other western Canadian medical schools.

Ensuring resident physicians receive competitive, fair-market compensation while they train and provide services across the province will help stabilize and strengthen acute health care today while bringing medical students and ultimately more physicians to the province to support the province’s future health needs.

“Alberta’s government is grateful for all the hard work resident physicians put in as they complete their training. We are pleased to see that a new agreement has been reached and look forward to more physicians calling Alberta home.”

Adriana LaGrange, Minister of Health

“We are extremely grateful to all of our resident physicians, who play a vital role in caring for Albertans and supporting our front-line physicians and health care teams. This agreement will help us recruit medical students and encourage them to practise in this province.”

Athana Mentzelopoulos, president and CEO, AHS

Rural and Remote Family Medicine Resident Physician Bursary Pilot Program

The agreement builds on actions Alberta’s government is taking to make the province a more attractive place for medical students and resident physicians to study and practise. On Oct. 3, Alberta’s government announced measures to improve health care in rural and remote communities through the new Rural and Remote Family Medicine Resident Physician Bursary Pilot Program. The bursary program is part of the province’s Rural Health Action Plan.

The pilot program will provide up to $8 million annually for the next two years to medical students in their final year of an undergraduate medical program when they are matched with a family medicine residency program at the University of Alberta or University of Calgary, or to residents currently completing a family medicine residency at either university regardless of their year of study. In return, bursary recipients will commit to delivering comprehensive patient care in eligible communities for three years after completing their residency.

“With this agreement, Alberta strengthens its position as an attractive destination for resident physicians across Canada. By enhancing compensation, training and working conditions, we ensure Alberta recruits and retains the brightest medical talent to serve our communities and shape the future of health care.”

Dr. Pauwlina Cyca, president, Professional Association of Resident Physicians of Alberta (PARA)

“The University of Alberta is pleased collaborations with our partners have resulted in an agreement that reflects the critical impact resident physicians make in our health care system so all Albertans receive the care they need.”

Brenda Hemmelgarn, dean and vice-provost, College of Health Sciences, and dean, faculty of medicine & dentistry, University of Alberta

“Remuneration, respect, retention and recruitment of rural generalists are key to elevating rural hospitals to becoming rural centres of excellence. With this agreement and bursary pilot program, the Alberta government is recognizing rural health as being different, requiring separate and unique solutions for our communities that are mutually beneficial in enhancing the health of rural Albertans.”

Dr. Rithesh Ram, president, section of rural medicine, Alberta Medical Association

Quick facts

  • Resident physicians have graduated medical school but are completing post-graduate training in a residency program to obtain their licence to practise. With residency programs requiring an additional two to seven years of post-graduate training, most resident physicians spend more than 10 years training to become fully licensed physicians and surgeons.
  • The Professional Association of Resident Physicians of Alberta represents more than 1,660 resident physicians in Alberta.
  • The current agreement between AHS, the University of Alberta, University of Calgary and the association ended on June 30, 2024.
  • The resident physician agreement is funded by Alberta Health through a grant to AHS and the universities.

Related information

Related news

Continue Reading

Fraser Institute

Canadians want major health-care reform now

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Mackenzie Moir

Tragic stories of multiyear waits for patients are now a Canadian news staple. Is it any wonder, therefore, that a new Navigator poll found almost two-thirds of Canadians experienced (either themselves or a family member) unreasonably long for access to health care. The poll also found that 73 per cent of respondents agree the system needs major reform.

This situation shouldn’t surprise anyone. Last year Canadians could expect a 27.7-week delay for non-emergency treatment. Nearly half this time (13.1 weeks) was spent waiting for treatment after seeing a specialist—that’s more than one month longer than what physicians considered reasonable.

And it’s not as though these unreasonable waits are simple inconveniences for patients; they can have serious consequences including continued pain, psychological distress and disability. For many, there are also economic consequences for waiting due to lost productivity or wages (due to difficulty or inability to work) or for Canadians who pay for care in another country.

Canadians are also experiencing longer delays than their European and Australian universal health-care peers. In 2020, Canadians were the least likely (62 per cent) to report receiving non-emergency surgical treatment in under four weeks compared to Germans (99 per cent) and Australians (72 per cent).

What do they do differently? Put simply, they approach universal care in a different way than we do.

In particular, these countries all have a sizeable and well-integrated private sector that helps deliver universal care including surgical care. For example, in 2021, 45 per cent of hospitals in Germany (a plurality) were private for-profit. And 99 per cent of German hospital beds are accessible to those covered under the country’s mandatory insurance scheme. In Australia, governments regularly contract with private hospitals to provide surgical care, with private facilities handling 41 per cent of all hospital services in 2021/22.

These universal health-care countries also tend to fund their hospitals differently.

Governments in Canada primarily fund hospitals through “global budgets.” With a fixed budget set at the beginning of the year, this funding method is unconnected to the level of services provided. Consequently, patients are treated as costs to be minimized.

In contrast, hospitals in most European countries and Australia are funded on the basis of their activity. As a result, because they are paid for services they actually deliver, hospitals are incentivized to provide higher volumes of care.

The data are clear. Canadian patients are frustrated with their health-care system and have an appetite for change. We stand to learn from other countries who maintain their universal coverage while delivering health care faster than in Canada.

Continue Reading

Trending

X