We had a friend who died of the dreaded and rare "flesh eating disease" in Haines, Alaska. He was a local minister. He went into some sort of diabetic coma, and was rushed to the hospital. He hadn't taken his meds or something. And then, this other thing set in, and he was gone very quickly. Very sad, very horrible. But, he didn't have any arms or legs cut off, he just lost his whole body. Now, if this is actually what this woman had going on, then the amputations may have been needed. It's just that, according to the article, I do not understand why this hospital is not chomping at the bit to explain to her what this horrible disease is, and why it was necessary to do what they did. Because they are not doing this, it seems as if there is a dark cloud over the whole thing. Maybe it was just a simple mistake? Wrong patient? Aye carrumba!
It seems like this hospital is located in a 3rd world country.
If this was ME, everyone in my family would know AHEAD of time to make the decision. Seems either a lack of communication on their part, or a government conspiracy!
Bliss, this is just around the corner from my house. :blink: That's what makes it so scary. I mean, why would the hospital NOT tell this woman WHY they did this? Why didn't her family know about it BEFORE hand? Why wasn't there some sort of "permission slip" for someone to sign to authorize the procedure? It just doesn't make sense at all. It's really scary!
The *why* is because the hospital is HUGELY liable.... They desperatly want this kept quiet ....these guys are in so much trouble it isn`t even funny.
I hope to HE LL this poor lady has a great attorney ... this hospital was definatly negligent in it`s sanitary practices....SOMEBODY didn`t wash their hands...or sterilize instruments...the hospital desperatly wants to keep this information from being kept public.
The REASON the maternity ward is seperate from the rest of the hispital is to protect the healthy Moms and new borns from the rest of the hospital patients who are sick.
ONE of the doctors or staff had to have not followed procedure for this to happen.
I feel so bad for this poor lady....she is damned lucky to have survived at all......
The risk of infection from negligent staff is a huge problem in many hospitals....
THIS is is why I had most of my babies at home. I would never leave a family member unattended in the hospital either....I saw/stopped some unbelievably unsanitary practices in regard to my son on thirds when they thought I was asleep.....
Fortunatly I was able to remedie the situation because his pediatrician and orthapedic surgeon were personal friends...(ie I knew their home numbers...lol) ......else I would have never have been able to wade through the officious know it all staff to get life and death issues addressed.
Our Dr.s were LIVID when they found out what had gone on during the night.
Our hospital here is commonly referred to by the locals as *death* side rather than by it`s official name of hill side
I certainly agree that this woman's situation is more than tragic - how horrible! Please don't think I'm being cold or clinical by posting this, but I feel there's some lacking information and some mis-information in this article.
I disagree that she was not told why the operation was performed:
"She was told she had streptococcus, a flesh eating bacteria, and toxic shock syndrome, but no further explanation was given."
The article also tells us:
"Mejia said after she gave birth to Mathew last spring, she was kept in the hospital with complications."
But does not give us any details on what the complications might have been.
The article does tell us that she was transported to another hospital for the surgery - and this is where I have a problem with the article...
Whenever a patient has a proceedure done they must sign a consent form for the proceedure, anesthesia, and any testing that may be done. This is a LAW. Additionally, when a patient goes under the knife, they have a face-to-face dialogue with the surgeon before going to the operating room. The surgical site(s) are identified by the surgeon, patient, and at least two other nurses. This is all assuming that the patient is conscious, but we don't have that information from this article...
The other problem I have with the article is that they don't interview anyone from the other hospital - it seems someone from Risk Management or Quality should have addressed their reasoning for not speaking more directly about this case. I have a feeling there's another side to this story, in other words. They also do not talk with anyone in the epidemology or infectious disease department - no expertise on the diesease is given at all. There should have been some clinical information provided.
Here's some links about the type of strep infection she had:
The last link has some interesting survivors' stories - one kid developed this condition after getting a small wound from pulling out a sofa bed - a simple thing turned out to be so dangerous. The child almost lost his leg from it! Some of the cases that are presented do not have a cause of infection - no one really knows for sure. If this woman was as critical as needing this sort of extreme debridement, then she is lucky to be alive at all - again, I don't mean this to sound uncaring - she had a 1 in 5 chance of survival. My impression is that the hospital did not quickly diagnose her condition, and that is the more likely cover-up. I doubt she was not informed or gave consent.
The hippocratic oath starts with "first, do no harm..." if the hospital or medical staff of the hospital are to blame for this woman's outcome, then they certainly should take ownership for that and make proper restitution. However, as the article is written, it sounds as though she was misidentified as a quad amputee and had this horrific outcome - I don't believe that was the case. I would be interested in following this case and what the court findings are for this...
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.
I work for an insurance company and can tell you any information about other patients is strictly protected from disclosure. HIPAA regulations are quite clear about Protected Health Information (PHI) and this woman is not entitled to any information about other patients. If the hospital gave that information out without a court order they could face prosecution.
If I should learn of a friend or family member being sick through them filing a claim, and they did not personally tell me of their illness, I could not contact them about their illness. If I visited them and said something like, "Sorry you are sick" or "is there anything I can do for you," I would be breaking the law. And if my employeer found out about it could lead to disciplinary caction up to being fired.
Recommended Posts
J0nny Ling0
We had a friend who died of the dreaded and rare "flesh eating disease" in Haines, Alaska. He was a local minister. He went into some sort of diabetic coma, and was rushed to the hospital. He hadn't taken his meds or something. And then, this other thing set in, and he was gone very quickly. Very sad, very horrible. But, he didn't have any arms or legs cut off, he just lost his whole body. Now, if this is actually what this woman had going on, then the amputations may have been needed. It's just that, according to the article, I do not understand why this hospital is not chomping at the bit to explain to her what this horrible disease is, and why it was necessary to do what they did. Because they are not doing this, it seems as if there is a dark cloud over the whole thing. Maybe it was just a simple mistake? Wrong patient? Aye carrumba!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
It's part of Hillay Clintons new health care plan for those have the money but don't pay on time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
Did they speak English?
It seems like this hospital is located in a 3rd world country.
If this was ME, everyone in my family would know AHEAD of time to make the decision. Seems either a lack of communication on their part, or a government conspiracy!
too weird
I feel for that woman.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Bliss, this is just around the corner from my house. :blink: That's what makes it so scary. I mean, why would the hospital NOT tell this woman WHY they did this? Why didn't her family know about it BEFORE hand? Why wasn't there some sort of "permission slip" for someone to sign to authorize the procedure? It just doesn't make sense at all. It's really scary!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
The *why* is because the hospital is HUGELY liable.... They desperatly want this kept quiet ....these guys are in so much trouble it isn`t even funny.
I hope to HE LL this poor lady has a great attorney ... this hospital was definatly negligent in it`s sanitary practices....SOMEBODY didn`t wash their hands...or sterilize instruments...the hospital desperatly wants to keep this information from being kept public.
The REASON the maternity ward is seperate from the rest of the hispital is to protect the healthy Moms and new borns from the rest of the hospital patients who are sick.
ONE of the doctors or staff had to have not followed procedure for this to happen.
I feel so bad for this poor lady....she is damned lucky to have survived at all......
The risk of infection from negligent staff is a huge problem in many hospitals....
THIS is is why I had most of my babies at home. I would never leave a family member unattended in the hospital either....I saw/stopped some unbelievably unsanitary practices in regard to my son on thirds when they thought I was asleep.....
Fortunatly I was able to remedie the situation because his pediatrician and orthapedic surgeon were personal friends...(ie I knew their home numbers...lol) ......else I would have never have been able to wade through the officious know it all staff to get life and death issues addressed.
Our Dr.s were LIVID when they found out what had gone on during the night.
Our hospital here is commonly referred to by the locals as *death* side rather than by it`s official name of hill side
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
I certainly agree that this woman's situation is more than tragic - how horrible! Please don't think I'm being cold or clinical by posting this, but I feel there's some lacking information and some mis-information in this article.
I disagree that she was not told why the operation was performed:
"She was told she had streptococcus, a flesh eating bacteria, and toxic shock syndrome, but no further explanation was given."
The article also tells us:
"Mejia said after she gave birth to Mathew last spring, she was kept in the hospital with complications."
But does not give us any details on what the complications might have been.
The article does tell us that she was transported to another hospital for the surgery - and this is where I have a problem with the article...
Whenever a patient has a proceedure done they must sign a consent form for the proceedure, anesthesia, and any testing that may be done. This is a LAW. Additionally, when a patient goes under the knife, they have a face-to-face dialogue with the surgeon before going to the operating room. The surgical site(s) are identified by the surgeon, patient, and at least two other nurses. This is all assuming that the patient is conscious, but we don't have that information from this article...
The other problem I have with the article is that they don't interview anyone from the other hospital - it seems someone from Risk Management or Quality should have addressed their reasoning for not speaking more directly about this case. I have a feeling there's another side to this story, in other words. They also do not talk with anyone in the epidemology or infectious disease department - no expertise on the diesease is given at all. There should have been some clinical information provided.
Here's some links about the type of strep infection she had:
http://www.factbites.com/topics/Necrotizing-fasciitis
http://www.emedicine.com/EMERG/topic332.htm
http://www.nnff.org/
The last link has some interesting survivors' stories - one kid developed this condition after getting a small wound from pulling out a sofa bed - a simple thing turned out to be so dangerous. The child almost lost his leg from it! Some of the cases that are presented do not have a cause of infection - no one really knows for sure. If this woman was as critical as needing this sort of extreme debridement, then she is lucky to be alive at all - again, I don't mean this to sound uncaring - she had a 1 in 5 chance of survival. My impression is that the hospital did not quickly diagnose her condition, and that is the more likely cover-up. I doubt she was not informed or gave consent.
The hippocratic oath starts with "first, do no harm..." if the hospital or medical staff of the hospital are to blame for this woman's outcome, then they certainly should take ownership for that and make proper restitution. However, as the article is written, it sounds as though she was misidentified as a quad amputee and had this horrific outcome - I don't believe that was the case. I would be interested in following this case and what the court findings are for this...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
I too agree that there must be more to this story. Too much has been left out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
I work for an insurance company and can tell you any information about other patients is strictly protected from disclosure. HIPAA regulations are quite clear about Protected Health Information (PHI) and this woman is not entitled to any information about other patients. If the hospital gave that information out without a court order they could face prosecution.
If I should learn of a friend or family member being sick through them filing a claim, and they did not personally tell me of their illness, I could not contact them about their illness. If I visited them and said something like, "Sorry you are sick" or "is there anything I can do for you," I would be breaking the law. And if my employeer found out about it could lead to disciplinary caction up to being fired.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.