a case briefing for KingDrew Medical Center ..read only if youre into it....

June 18, 2007

no, she should not be.

the hospital was complacent because she was a chronic patient and cried wolf

too many times.

and because the people that go in there do the same thing. for a medical

professional to IGNORE someone in medical need, there

has GOT to be a reason...

the news of course will not report that..

the hospital will be found negligent, possibly criminally negligent....the

deputies answering 911 will not or only partially.

because- and this is law school kicking in - it is not unreasonable for the

deputies to believe the callers could get help in the hospital. it was

*unreasonable* for them to think that anyone would be ignored in such a

situation....in other words..anyone in their situation would have been just

as unbelieving under the same circumstances...but they are Professionals,

and they are held to a higher standard of care under duty.

it was *unreasonable* for hospital staff to ignore a sick patient. so the

fault will lie with them for the most part.

definition of negligence - prima facie case (on its face):

they had the duty to treat. *professionals are held to higher standard of

care under duty*, medical staff are EXPECTED TO TREAT THE SICK.

they breached that duty by not treating.

they were the actual and proximate (closest) cause of the result.

and there was damage, ie a death.

----------this case meets all of the above....anna would find the hospital

culpable.

was 911 negligent?

they have a duty to send help when help is feasable. they are professional

help providers. they have a higher standard of care to the public.

did they breach that duty? - they didnt send help, because they would have

sent the patient to a hospital, they were already in a hospital. it was not

reasonable that they doubt that help would be given.

were they the actual and proximate cause of the result - no, the hospital

staff had the medical knowledge and equipment to provide the lifesaving

help, they didnt use it. they were right there. 911 was far away and would

have to send paramedics from somewhere else.

was there damage? yes, there was a death.

could 911 have saved her *despite* the negligence at the hospital?

the hospital defense could claim 911 is more negligent because they were an

intervening cause and 911 denying help was *unforseeable*..something else

that might have done the job that dropped the ball...but 911 will argue all

of the above...still, if 911 could have done something reasonable to help,

and didnt, they can be found *partially* negligent..if it was *forseeable*

that 911 would deny help in a situation *caused by the hospital* the

hospital will be left flapping in the breeze all alone in fault.

still, if the deputies WENT OUTSIDE LOGIC and distrusted the hospital, they

could have sent medics to a hospital and rescued the woman. but are they

expected to go outside logic?

its all about whats more reasonable. anna (i love talking in the 3rd person

when im the judge in a case) ...anna would hold that 911 was *not* being

unreasonable by denying help to a patient *because they were already in a

hospital*....but they *could have* thought outside the box....

.....our agency - which gets calls from old folks in convalescent hospitals

complaining about staff all the time - **does NOT ignore these calls**....we

call inside the hospital on another number to verify the story, or we *send*

cops to verify in person, because we all know old folks are often abused in

conv hosps, and that would be a felony in progress - cops love those....

..... if its a patient at a regular hospital,,we call inside to security to

check on the patient and verify the story...the deputies *could have* done

that.

so..............bottom line...............negligence in my personal opinion

is 90% hospital, 10% sheriffs dept. or even 75/25...but most is on the

hospital because they had a duty long before 911 was even called.

you can see how the public EXPECTS 911 TO BE PSYCHIC....??? we HAVE TO THINK

OF EVERYTHING.

the only entity that i know that can do that is G-D......you folks expect

that of us...and most of the time we do it.

itll be a great case to follow...

peace

anna

On 6/18/07, Terry Bakhtiari <pablobully wrote:

>

> I have heard some of it. I realize the press put their own spin on

> everything but so far from what I heard that hospital was very

> negligent(sp?) . And two people called 911 to get help for her since the

> hospital ( who apparently has a reputation already) and sounds like those

> two 911 operators didn't help. Unfortunately, like you said millions of

> called are handled and successful each year but this is the one you will

> hear about over and over. I think if what has been said took place happened,

> there is so reason that woman should be dead.

>

June 19, 2007

you made some very good points, of course you have more insight! I agree the

hospital is more than mostly responsible. Especially from what was reportesd the

woman was lying there bleeding from her mouth so obviously there was a problem.

I know they said she had been in two other times (I believe) that week they gave

her a prescription but it wasn't helping. But I will say for the 911 operators

if two people call and say this woman is lying here bleeding and no one is

helping her thinking outside the box would of possibly saved her life. But I am

sure it sounded unreasonable to believe you are in a hospital and no one is

helping.

Anna Bishop <mowthpeece wrote: no, she should not be.