NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.wftv.com/news/6253589/detail.html

How can a person become a quadruple amputee after going in to GIVE BIRTH then not be allowed to know even why! For the love of god someone is incompetent at that faculty

http://www.wftv.com/news/6253589/detail.html

How can a person become a quadruple amputee after going in to GIVE BERTH then not be allowed to know even why! For the love of god someone is incompetent at that faculty

This one doesn't even make sense.

Give BERTH?

Okay, now I'm imagine rather odd things involving boats, docks and pregnancy... and amputations.

That shouldn't be possible, why the hell would they knock her out for her to give birth? If she was out cold why didn't they get consent from the husband? How was none of this explained before the surgery?

Give BERTH?

Okay, now I'm imagine rather odd things involving boats, docks and pregnancy... and amputations.

Sorry fixed

Cover up.

The hospital is playing a very dangerous game.

http://www.wftv.com/news/6253589/detail.html

How can a person become a quadruple amputee after going in to GIVE BIRTH then not be allowed to know even why! For the love of god someone is incompetent at that faculty

She has a family and husband. They did not ask why she was being moved to a different hospital and why she was going into surgery? This sounds so bizarre.

Jan 2006?

Jan 2006?

I have not found any updates on the story ...

I have not found any updates on the story ...

http://www.wesh.com/news/9148849/detail.html

Slightly more updated with some more detail.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274116,00.html It's Faux, but the only thing I can find.

Even newer update, May 2007

http://flagranny2.wordpress.com/2007/05/21/florida-woman-who-lost-arms-legs-during-birth-works-for-answers/

Gives the details by court order.

wtf? Remind me to never get sick enough to have to go to a hospital in the US.

http://www.wesh.com/news/9148849/detail.html

Here's the update. The story is different -- it doesn't say she came out of delivering birth as a quadruple amputee -- she said that 12 days later she was given a choice: this or die.

I have not found any updates on the story ...
People on snopes found an update, but it's passworded, but I couldn't be bothered to go get a password from bugmenot
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=2498

Some guy on an old snopes board also thinks the hospital is covering for malpractice.
http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=25;t=001164;p=1

See? Our health care system doesn't need to be revamped! Look at how good it is doing now!

She is indeed right that she has a right to know whatever she has and whatever operations that might be performed on her. However, in case of emergency, you can't always get the patient or the family member to consent first lest the patient die while waiting for that goddamn consent. However, as I do not know the details, I cannot say whether it is a true emergency. The article only says:

She was told she had streptococcus, a flesh eating bacteria, and toxic shock syndrome, but no further explanation was given.

I believe that patients, within reason, do have the right to know everything about their condition. Now if she have streptococcus and TSS, that might be indeed an emergency. TSS is life-threatening and the amputation may either be due to the death of the limb because of the septic/anaphylactic shock of TSS and/or the bacteria already ate the limb, necessitating amputation. (Or, gross error... as in, "Wait, you amputated that patient? The one we are supposed to amputate is the one in the next bed!") Nevertheless, everything must have been explained to her before (if possible) or after the procedure.

ORMC said Mejia is requesting information on if there were other patients or someone on her floor with the streptococcus. They said, if they release that to her, that would be a violation of other patients' rights.

She was in two hospitals, meaning that the strep could have come from any of those two. Perhaps the hospital could be faulted for sloppiness or not adhering to standard medical procedures to prevent dissemination of pathogens from patient to patient. She is just asking if there is another patient with her who had streptococcus. She deserves an answer for that, but what she can't have is the identity of that person. That is the violation of patient confidentiality. The hospital might be hesitant to reveal it because it might give her a lead on how did she get the strep, but even if she knew another patient had strep, it has to be proven that she indeed got it from him/her and that the hospital is liable.