Woman dies on ER floor after 45 minutes of people ignoring h

Acies · Post by **Acies** » June 13, 2007, 6:26 pm

Hello all. Been a very long time since I have posted but after reading this article I wanted to shout out my disgust to someone.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19207050/?GT1=10056

LOS ANGELES - A woman who lay bleeding on the emergency room floor of a troubled inner-city hospital died after 911 dispatchers refused to contact paramedics or an ambulance to take her to another facility, newly released tapes of the emergency calls reveal.

Edith Isabel Rodriguez, 43, died of a perforated bowel on May 9 at Martin Luther King Jr.-Harbor Hospital. Her death was ruled accidental by the Los Angeles County coroner’s office.

Relatives said Rodriguez was bleeding from the mouth and writhing in pain for 45 minutes while she was at a hospital waiting area. Experts have said she could have survived had she been treated early enough

You can also find a video clip of this story from ABC news on Yahoo

What does everyone think of this? Especially you South Cali's, as this happened in your neighborhood.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 13, 2007, 7:45 pm

I hate hospitals.

The regulations governing what 911 and paramedics do are so out of whack.

It starts with that odd practice of sending fire trucks when someone calls for paramedics.

Due to zoning, if I had to be taken to a hospital by paramedics from work, it'd be some shithole ghetto hospital, but if I got in my car and drove a block and then called the paramedics, I'd go to a normal hospital. My coworker learned this first hand as he was stuck in a nightmare hospital where they wouldn't release him for two days, threatening him that if he didn't go through all the tests, the insurance wouldn't pay for it...so, if he got up and left, he'd be charged around 20K...$4K for the paramedic call and trip to the hospital and $16K for the tests. Total cost for him to find out that he had bad gas: $20K and 2 days in the hospital.

I'm not surprised at all that they let someone die on the floor in a hospital in this country. Our medical policies are totally screwed up. Getting medical attention is a challenge and when they do find out you are insured, they rape you for all they can.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » June 13, 2007, 8:11 pm

Winnow wrote:Due to zoning, if I had to be taken to a hospital by paramedics from work, it'd be some shithole ghetto hospital, but if I got in my car and drove a block and then called the paramedics, I'd go to a normal hospital.

If you're capable of making the decision here they'll take you wherever you ask to go. That's a very big deal too, considering the specialization of the Tampa area hospitals. For a heart attack, you need one place, after a stroke you're far better off at another. You've got to pick the right one depending on what you think is wrong with you, if it's anything past just getting stitched up. Without some prior research you can't do that.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » June 14, 2007, 4:00 am

MIchael Moore is probably happy as hell this happened just before the release of his latest movie.

miir · Post by **miir** » June 14, 2007, 1:10 pm

I'm glad I don't live in the US.

cid · Post by **cid** » June 14, 2007, 1:22 pm

miir wrote:I'm glad I don't live in the US.

I am glad you do not.

nneenaK · Post by **nneenaK** » June 14, 2007, 1:40 pm

miir wrote:I'm glad I don't live in the US.

Me too.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 14, 2007, 2:39 pm

At least we don't have to wait 10 months for a socialist doctor to become available if we need a surgery! (don't deny it!)

miir · Post by **miir** » June 14, 2007, 2:53 pm

Winnow wrote:At least we don't have to wait 10 months for a socialist doctor to become available if we need a surgery! (don't deny it!)

If a patient NEEDS surgery, there are no wait times.
If a patient WANTS surgery, there might be wait times.

moron.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » June 14, 2007, 2:55 pm

I don't know about that. My grandmother had to wait 2 hours before she needed surgery

miir · Post by **miir** » June 14, 2007, 2:56 pm

Lynks wrote:I don't know about that. My grandmother had to wait 2 hours before she needed surgery

Hehe....

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » June 14, 2007, 3:56 pm

SoCal. They were probably so full with other non insured "aliens" that they were over worked and had no idea she was in need. Under staffing and over working ftw. One of these days we will have regulated health care...

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » June 14, 2007, 4:02 pm

Winnow wrote:At least we don't have to wait 10 months for a socialist doctor to become available if we need a surgery! (don't deny it!)

America has over 30 other countries ranked above us in the healthcare rankings. Pretty much every single one of them is from a socialized health care system. Every industrialized nation in the world takes care of it's citizens except the US. I'm amazed at how many people just don't care about that statistic. The United States of Apathy. The Clinton's tried to change the healthcare system around '93-94ish and it was a horrible failure. Our health care industry is a money machine and the people in power will fight tooth and nail to keep it that way.

Don't get me wrong. We have a fantastic health care system here... if you can afford it.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » June 14, 2007, 5:12 pm

There are 2 problems killing our health care system: the AMA and the insurance lobbyists. A lesser third evil is the lobby of the prescription drug companies. I think it's rather insane that we allow corporate bodies to lobby out government.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 14, 2007, 5:33 pm

Morgrym wrote:SoCal. They were probably so full with other non insured "aliens" that they were over worked and had no idea she was in need. Under staffing and over working ftw. One of these days we will have regulated health care...

Excellent point.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 14, 2007, 6:38 pm

miir wrote:
Winnow wrote:At least we don't have to wait 10 months for a socialist doctor to become available if we need a surgery! (don't deny it!)
If a patient NEEDS surgery, there are no wait times.
If a patient WANTS surgery, there might be wait times.

moron.

Would someone with a gaping hole in the side of his head exposing the brain count as "needed" surgery? See below!

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/fina ... 06&k=68065

'Mediocrity' threatens way of life: report card
Paul Vieira, National Post
Published: Wednesday, June 13, 2007

OTTAWA - Compared with other industrialized countries, Canada is sinking in a pool of mediocrity that threatens to pull down our standard of living, says a new report from the Conference Board of Canada.

The non-partisan, not-for-profit think-tank will issue its scathing assessment today as part of an inaugural report card on Canada, in which it measures Canada's performance in a number of sectors against developed peers.

Ok, you got a B in health!

Many people in the province want to know why, including an injured Hamilton man and a local MPP

By Tanya Talaga and Robert Cribb
Toronto Star
(May 22, 2007)

David Malleau awoke in hospital with a gaping hole in his skull.

The 44-year-old Hamilton truck driver had suffered a devastating car accident in 2004 that forced doctors to remove a fist-sized piece of bone from his skull to relieve pressure on his brain. Once the swelling subsided and he was ready for surgery in March 2005, Malleau was sent home from Hamilton General Hospital and put on a waiting list.

Three months passed, then six. He waited at home, a prisoner unable to leave the house for fear something would hit the exposed side of his brain -- for him a potentially fatal incident. In the end, it took nearly a year before he could get skull replacement surgery.

If Malleau lived anywhere but Ontario, the provincial ombudsman's office could have investigated why he had to wait so long for neurosurgery.

When patients or their families feel their complaints about the hospital system are falling on deaf ears, there is no independent body in Ontario with the power to conduct an independent investigation. All other Canadian provinces give their ombudsmen power to scrutinize hospitals. In Ontario, successive ombudsmen have sought that oversight power for more than three decades without success.

"The position of hospitals continues to be, 'Let's keep our dirty laundry to ourselves,'" says Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin. "There's tens of billions of dollars signed away in the form of a blank cheque to run health care. (Independent oversight) is a complete no-brainer .... It's frankly embarrassing."

Entire article:

http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp ... 2101662670

miir · Post by **miir** » June 14, 2007, 7:39 pm

This thread is about the joke that is healthcare in the US.

Not the acceptable healthcare system in Canada.

miir · Post by **miir** » June 14, 2007, 7:41 pm

About that moron in the article.

If he felt that getting that surgery was so crucial, he should have looked at other doctors and hospitals.
He's really got no one to blame but himself.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » June 15, 2007, 12:20 pm

This thread is about the joke that is healthcare in the US.

Not the acceptable healthcare system in Canada.

About that moron in the article.

If he felt that getting that surgery was so crucial, he should have looked at other doctors and hospitals.
He's really got no one to blame but himself.

Those are the two weakest replies I've seen since Cart was banned. While slightly more articulate than some of the shit he use to post, they contributed nothing more than he ever did.

And in response to your first observation, YOU are the one that introduced the international debate aspect of the conversation with your...

I'm glad I don't live in the US.

... so just admit that you can find horror stories in every healthcare system and that Winnow got you on this one.

miir · Post by **miir** » June 15, 2007, 12:50 pm

Those are the two weakest replies I've seen since Cart was banned. While slightly more articulate than some of the shit he use to post, they contributed nothing more than he ever did.

I love irony.

miir · Post by **miir** » June 15, 2007, 1:00 pm

so just admit that you can find horror stories in every healthcare system and that Winnow got you on this one.

Nowhere did I imply that our healthcare system is perfect... so winnow got me on nothing.
Even in the safest country in the world, you could dig up an account of someone being murdered.
You could find a disgruntled employee at the 'best company to work for'.
The best team in the NBA is not going to win every game.

Like every other Canadian, I'm well aware that our helthcare system isn't perfect... but it's a fuckton better than in the US.

The article winnow quoted just happens to be a really really bad example.
The guy's life was not at risk by not having the surgery (despite his claims). If it was, he would not have been put on a waiting list.
He didn't seek out other doctors or hospitals.
He didn't make a fuss until years after.
The whole situation reeks of lawyers and partisan politics.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » June 15, 2007, 1:49 pm

miir wrote:Like every other Canadian, I'm well aware that our helthcare system isn't perfect... but it's a fuckton better than in the US.

With all due respect, that's a completely subjective opinion.

If we want to start making comparisons based on actual data, I bet we'd find the US meets or exceeds that of Canada. Things such as # of Dr's/nurses per X people, % of GDP spent for public health, per capita health care spending, etc. And of course I'm aware that in some stats Canada will do better, but US will do better in others. For every US story like the one posted above, another could be found in the {country of your choice} that is just as egregious and horrible.

I know here in Arizona the free, low-income based health care system is as good or better than the private insurance I carry for myself and my family. Also, due to the high illegal immigrant population, there are also seveal laws here that require hospitals to provide emergency medical services to any individual regarldess of their ability to pay. That's at any hospital, any time.

miir · Post by **miir** » June 15, 2007, 1:54 pm

It's not opinion at all.
It's fact.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » June 15, 2007, 4:15 pm

Mak wrote:If we want to start making comparisons based on actual data, I bet we'd find the US meets or exceeds that of Canada. Things such as # of Dr's/nurses per X people

One could say that there are more doctors/nurses per X people because in the US, the doctors can rape people (or their insurance agencies) for way more money than anywhere else. Of course they're going to flock towards the money..

miir · Post by **miir** » June 15, 2007, 4:21 pm

That's a very good point.
It's been slowly improving here, but the 'brain drain' of doctors moving to the US to set up practice was terrible like 5-10 years ago.

Doctors here make pretty good money up here but it can't compare to the fortune to be made setting up a private practice in the states. In the US, doctors have much more freedom to charge ridiculous fees for their services.

I'm of the belief that the quality of healthcare should not be based on a person's income.
Proper healthcare should be a right, not a privilege.

Braxter · Post by **Braxter** » June 16, 2007, 6:38 pm

who knows whether it's reliable info, but here's a wiki article that compares the health care systems of the u.s. and canada.

good read...

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » June 16, 2007, 8:45 pm

Siji wrote:One could say that there are more doctors/nurses per X people because in the US, the doctors can rape people (or their insurance agencies) for way more money than anywhere else. Of course they're going to flock towards the money..

Insurance companies screw the doctors and the institutions they work for as well, and the lawsuit happy idiots who sue over nothing add to the problem.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » June 17, 2007, 4:29 pm

Aabidano wrote:
Siji wrote:One could say that there are more doctors/nurses per X people because in the US, the doctors can rape people (or their insurance agencies) for way more money than anywhere else. Of course they're going to flock towards the money..
Insurance companies screw the doctors and the institutions they work for as well, and the lawsuit happy idiots who sue over nothing add to the problem.

Yup. It's actually becoming more profitable, depending upon the area, to be a Dr's assistant and let the full blown Dr. pick up the insurance costs.

In Marshall, MI, our Dr's make good money, but they're not "rich". The younger Docs live very much like I do because they're in debt up to their eyeballs. The older ones that own Family Practices and such definately make more money, but they also work their asses off. You could never pay me enough to work like they do.

The real money is in surgery and specialty practices like Chemo, Cardiology, Ortho, and Urology. Those types of docs definately break into the "rich" category.

Nali · Post by **Nali** » June 17, 2007, 10:50 pm

The responsibility for the health care costs in the United States doesn't completely lie with the health care providers. Do you guys have any idea how expensive it is to run a medical facility in the U.S? My mom practiced family medicine for nearly 20 years in a clinic she owned. The price of malpractice insurance is completely ridiculous. I'm not trying to excuse what happened to the woman...but it isn't entirely the fault of health care providers (as far as the costs go).

masteen · Post by **masteen** » June 18, 2007, 2:42 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:The real money is in surgery and specialty practices like Chemo, Cardiology, Ortho, and Urology. Those types of docs definately break into the "rich" category.

Wrong. The real money is in dermatology, plastic surgery, ect. Either very low risk, or at least low exposure to malpractice since all the shit they do is voluntary.

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » June 19, 2007, 3:07 pm

Wouldn't that fall under specialty practices? The way he said it made surgery and specialty practices exclusive of one another.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » June 19, 2007, 3:47 pm

Kaldaur wrote:Wouldn't that fall under specialty practices? The way he said it made surgery and specialty practices exclusive of one another.

Yeah, I am pretty sure they were both saying the same thing

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » June 20, 2007, 1:48 pm

I'd really like to see how that group graded the US.

Markulas · Post by **Markulas** » June 23, 2007, 3:04 pm

Update,

Hospital may lose license after death in E.R. lobby

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19375461/wi ... ?GT1=10056

Wiever · Post by **Wiever** » June 24, 2007, 4:03 am

Winnow wrote:
It starts with that odd practice of sending fire trucks when someone calls for paramedics.

Not much I can add to this debate with the exception that most fire departments have ALS (advanced life support) engines equipped and accompanied with firefighter/paramedics and various other levels of EMT's (Basic, Intermediate, Paramedic). How is sending additional resources to an emergency an odd practice? The main goal of any non facility emergency is stabilization next would be transport. Its great that our emergency system is proactive enough to realize that a 2 man ambulance crew isn't satisfactory enough to provide the care that many medical/trauma emergencies present. Sorry for the derail, but I am always amused at peoples' response to the fire department arriving at medical emergencies.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 24, 2007, 4:57 am

I dunno,

it seems like sending this:

would be more practical than sending this:

for someone having a heart attack.

I can see them doing it to keep the firefighter's active but if a call comes in for a medical emergency that clearly doesn't involve anything other than the individual, they should have a smaller, more paramedic-ish sized, vehicle to respond in.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » June 24, 2007, 9:05 am

Our EMTs are county employees and ride with the fire crews, if you call 911 you're getting a fire truck usually because that's all they have. The ambulances are run by private firms and are OMFG expensive if you require transport. A 15 mile trip costs ~$700.

Coming in by ambulance puts you at the front of the ER queue, so not a bad deal from that respect.

Wiever · Post by **Wiever** » June 24, 2007, 3:15 pm

They will send both. A transport agency is always dispatched along with manpower(fire department). Working a code (someone that is dying) takes much more than 2 people to give the best service. Also response times are something to think about. If you dispatch an engine 2 blocks away and a medic unit that is 3 miles away stuck in traffic you now have people there at the scene giving the patient care. Regardless of the vehicle that arrives first, they will leave in the medic unit, its more of a matter of getting manpower to the scene and providing care that is needed. There are many calls where the medics will beat us to the scene and we will be dropped from the call because the extra manpower isn't needed, however very often the patient requires additional muscle to move the patient in a safe manner.

Heart attack patient:
1 Person aquiring patient history from patient
1 Person getting information from family member/checking medications (dealing with hysterical family members can be a one person job in itself)
1 Person getting vitals
1 Person getting stretcher

Thats 4 people on a situation that hasn't even reached a critical point yet. If this person goes unconscious, you need people available to push drugs, obtain an airway, hook up AED, etc., etc. When dispatched its best to assume the worst possible and have too much care than not enough.

Of course I know you were probably just trying to be funny.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 30, 2007, 9:27 pm

A 108-year-old woman has been told she must wait at least 18 months before she receives a new hearing aid.

Olive Beal, who has failing eyesight and uses a wheelchair, finds it difficult to hear with her five-year-old analogue aid and needs a digital version that cuts out background noise and makes conversation easier.

Mrs Beal, a former piano teacher who was involved in the suffragette movement, would be 110 by the time she gets her new hearing aid. "I could be dead by then," she said yesterday.

Think this was in the UK.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » July 31, 2007, 8:39 am

Winnow wrote:
A 108-year-old woman has been told she must wait at least 18 months before she receives a new hearing aid.

Olive Beal, who has failing eyesight and uses a wheelchair, finds it difficult to hear with her five-year-old analogue aid and needs a digital version that cuts out background noise and makes conversation easier.

Mrs Beal, a former piano teacher who was involved in the suffragette movement, would be 110 by the time she gets her new hearing aid. "I could be dead by then," she said yesterday.
Think this was in the UK.

Under the US system she'd get the hearing aid no problem and pretty fast, the vendor would even do the paperwork and bilk Medicare\insurance for the outrageous costs.

Unfortunately she wouldn't be allowed money for batteries afterwards. She'd have a choice that would involve losing something else she probably needed that week as well.

Going through this crap with my previously well off mother in law now and have seen it with a few friends and co-workers with elderly parents as well. Our system is designed to bleed every dollar you have, then let you die. That's no exaggeration, joke or anything else. If you don't hide all your assets in a trust or something along those lines you are almost guaranteed to die destitute. Of course you have to live in a state that allows you that option as well.

*Edit - Know who's paying for a lot of the those power scooters you see around these days? Medicare. In quite a number of cases for people who are unable to use them.

miir · Post by **miir** » July 31, 2007, 10:39 am

Under the US system she'd get the hearing aid no problem and pretty fast,

I dunno man, a digital hearing aid?
That sounds pretty experimental.
The insurance company would probably send an investigator to follow her around, sneak up behind her and make a loud noise... just to verify that she actually needs the hearing aid updated.
But then again, her insurance would have probably been cut off years ago. Someone that age would probably be too high risk for any insurance company to take on. But if she did still have insurance, her deductible would probably be around a thousand bucks (the value of the hearing aid).

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » July 31, 2007, 12:34 pm

I dunno man, a digital hearing aid?
That sounds pretty experimental.
The insurance company would probably send an investigator to follow her around, sneak up behind her and make a loud noise... just to verify that she actually needs the hearing aid updated.

My Dad has a digital hearing aid, it's pretty cool. They've been around for a number of years.

The AARP lobby isn't something to mess with at all, pure political suicide. There was a good Simpson's episode with AARP stormtroopers that wasn't far off the mark

miir · Post by **miir** » July 31, 2007, 1:31 pm

My previous post was intended to be tongue-in-cheek sarcasm.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » July 31, 2007, 4:56 pm

miir wrote:My previous post was intended to be tongue-in-cheek sarcasm.

Reality is funnier in a sad way, you can get expensive, high margin things you don't need pretty easily due to our friends the lobbyists (aka vultures), minor items you truly need can become inaccessible since there isn't enough money there.

After dealing it and the poor bastards who have to run the system the whole situation really pisses me off. But it could be far worse I guess.

Toshira · Post by **Toshira** » August 1, 2007, 8:50 am

Not sure if this is still true, Winnowlad, but I remember an illustration in college that showed that an equal amount of people died in the U.S. from un-needed surgeries as died in Canada waiting for surgery every year.

Re Thread title, kind of misleading. I'm not sure "ignoring" is really what happened.