Ideology in My Controversy

I've done quite a bit of current research on Jahi McMath, in addition to reading about her while the controversy was still very recent. I'm now able to answer some basic questions about this controversy.

"Hospital Bed" Public Domain

Who is involved?
McMath's mother, Latasha Winkfield, is very involved in the controversy. In addition, Dr. Paul Byrne is a huge advocate for McMath. Children's Hospital Oakland, the hospital where McMath received her fatal surgery, is obviously integral to the controversy, as is the Honorable Judge Evilio Grillo and the entire Alameda County Superior Court.

Who are some of the major speakers/writers within the groups?
Dr. Byrne, who has lots of experience speaking on behalf of pro-life groups, has always been outspoken personally and with the press. In addition, Byrne has a presence on the "Keep Jahi Mcmather on life support" Facebook page. McMath's attorney, Christopher Dolan, has also released statements about McMath. Dr. Frederick Rosen, the surgeon who operated on McMath, has not released many public statements on behalf of the hospital; rather, Oakland Children's PR department handles statements.

What kind of social/cultural/economic/political power does each group hold?
McMath's family has had a large measure of support from their social community within Oakland. In addition, there has been a surge of African-American support for McMath and her family. The hospital holds some political power due to the fact that the law did side with removing Jahi from the hospital's care.

What resources are available to different positions?
McMath's family has received awards from the Terry Schavio Hope and Life Network, an organization devoted to supporting people with traumatic head and brain injuries. The hospital has both public and private resources available.

What does each group value?
McMath's family values her continued existence, even if she is unable to breathe or circulate on her own. The hospital values the ability to help other patients who may need ventilators to continue to survive with brain health.

What counts as evidence for the different groups?
For McMath's family, evidence lies in the fact that McMath is still breathing and is capable of a few, reflexive bodily functions on her own. For the hospital, McMath has absolutely no brainwaves, and is incapable of breathing without the help of a ventilator. In addition, she has been declared legally dead.

Is there a power differential between the groups?
Legally, the two sides are at somewhat of a standoff. The hospital has the right (and is legally required) to declare McMath brain dead, and because she cannot breathe, dead. However, McMath's guardians also must sign a death certificate, and agree to her death. Without parental consent, McMath isn't technically dead.

Is there any acknowledged common ground between the two groups?
Both sides acknowledge that the McMath family has gone through a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering.

Is there any unacknowledged common ground?
There really isn't a lot. Both the hospital and the McMath family have suffered a great deal. I would argue that it is possible that there are people within the hospital that have grown to care for McMath a lot, so maybe both sides have affection for her and wish her peace.

Do the various groups listen to each other? Do they respond directly?
Usually the groups need a lawyer or a judge to mediate. They do listen, but neither side truly understands the other's opinions or motives.

The two sides are at odds legally, but since McMath has been moved to a private facility, there has been much less conflict. However, this controversy has blown into a large-scale legal and medical investigation about consent, choice, and the very definition of death.