Hospital Kidnaps Child

[Aim64C]

The story, here:

You must be registered for see links

It is possible that this has been posted, already. On the other hand - it has not garnered much of the media attention that it really should.

To give you all the short version:

Justina was diagnosed by a doctor at Tufts Medical Facility as having Mitochondrial Disease, just as her older sister was. The parents followed the treatment outlined by the doctor.

One day, Justina comes down with the flu and becomes dehydrated and is admitted into Boston Children's Hospital, also known as The Twilight Zone. Two doctors at Boston Children's insist that there is no such thing as Mitochondrial Disease and diagnose Justina as having a Somatoform Disorder - a psychiatric condition brought on by stress.

Then, the parents are issued an .... interesting .... schedule for Justina:

You must be registered for see images

Note the portion that expressly forbids second opinions (only the biggest red flag in the health care industry).

Knowing a bad deal when they see one, the parents decide they are withdrawing Justina from the hospital and taking her home.

So the hospital contacts the Massachusetts equivalent of Child Services and gets parental custody of Justina revoked.

That was a year ago.

Since then, Justina has become paralyzed from the waist down (she could walk and actually enjoyed figure skating before being admitted).

When speaking publicly about the issue to news outlets recently (yesterday, at this point), the father has had charges of contempt of court filed against him:

You must be registered for see links

Child protection coming to a hospital near you:

You must be registered for see links

 

[Genrou]

Talk about Illegal Detention.

If the above mentioned patient's diagnosis of Somatoform Disorder is indeed inside the guidelines of diagnosis of Somatoform Disorder in the DSM V, I understand the need to decrease the patient's anxiety by limiting her exposure to any forms of negative stressors, but damn, doesn't being cooped up in a Psych Ward with limited parental visits constitute as a stressor?

And also, I am confused by the "no second opinons" of your own accord, when it is clearly stated in the Patient's Bill of Rights that she has the right to refuse whatever treatment she and her family deem unnecessary, and has the right to consult any other physician her family wants. Her being a minor, her parents have the right to request for her to be transferred to another hospital they want to.

3. The patient has the right to make decisions about the plan of care prior to and during the course of treatment and to refuse a recommended treatment or plan of care to the extent permitted by law and hospital policy and to be informed of the medical consequences of this action. In case of such refusal, the patient is entitled to other appropriate care and services that the hospital provides or transfer to another hospital. The hospital should notify patients of any policy that might affect patient choice within the institution.

8. The patient has the right to expect that, within its capacity and policies, a hospital will make reasonable response to the request of a patient for appropriate and medically indicated care and services. The hospital must provide evaluation, service, and/or referral as indicated by the urgency of the case. When medically appropriate and legally permissible, or when a patient has so requested, a patient may be transferred to another facility. The institution to which the patient is to be transferred must first have accepted the patient for transfer. The patient must also have the benefit of complete information and explanation concerning the need for, risks, benefits, and alternatives to such a transfer.

I fear that this case will ultimately be dependent on legal technicalities , instead of prioritizing what matters the most: the patient's life.

 

[~Sky~]

I fear that this case will ultimately be dependent on legal technicalities , instead of prioritizing what matters the most: the patient's life.

Pretty much.

Disgusting situation.

 

[Genrou]

Pretty much.

Disgusting situation.

Yep. The doctor's Hippocratic Oath just became hypocritical. smh

 

[Champ]

She didn't say her doctor bill, so the baby was ransom

 

[Aim64C]

Talk about Illegal Detention.

If the above mentioned patient's diagnosis of Somatoform Disorder is indeed inside the guidelines of diagnosis of Somatoform Disorder in the DSM V, I understand the need to decrease the patient's anxiety by limiting her exposure to any forms of negative stressors, but damn, doesn't being cooped up in a Psych Ward with limited parental visits constitute as a stressor?

Accounts of her 'therapy' consist of being forced to sit on a toilet for hours with someone shouting at her to "go."

Even if it is somatoform disorder (which I doubt), I would seriously question the hospital's treatment methods.

And also, I am confused by the "no second opinons" of your own accord, when it is clearly stated in the Patient's Bill of Rights that she has the right to refuse whatever treatment she and her family deem unnecessary, and has the right to consult any other physician her family wants. Her being a minor, her parents have the right to request for her to be transferred to another hospital they want to.

Not really.

See, our children belong to the State. A Judge can, at any time, rule to remove a child from the custody of parents.

The doctor who originally diagnosed Justina with Mitochondrial Disease stopped by Boston Children's to see how she was doing, and was forcibly removed from her room by a social worker. This was the same doctor who diagnosed Justina's older sister, who has been able to live a functional and productive life with the parents following this doctor's instructions.

I fear that this case will ultimately be dependent on legal technicalities , instead of prioritizing what matters the most: the patient's life.

There are a few possible reasons for this.

First - it's low-lying fruit in terms of money. The Boston Children's Hospital commands a huge amount of authority - legal action is cheap for them. Meanwhile, they can continue to bill the insurance company.

I find this somewhat unlikely as it's just too overt. However, it's been mentioned and it is a possibility.

It is also possible that it is a case of almost lethal ego coming from Boston Children's - which is the #1 rated children's hospital in the nation. Yet, her condition has steadily declined since she was admitted to the hospital. Doctors not wanting to go back on a diagnosis or admit that 'the other doctor' was correct (or at least able to produce functional results) may be a driving factor.

I think the most likely scenario is that they ****ed something up. What, exactly, they ****ed up is anyone's guess at this point (because they don't want -anyone- to look at her - red flag). From a damage control standpoint, they made the assumption that this was the average family. Boston Children's can easily leverage legal power. It's a parent's word against a medical professional's - it works on hundreds of families (if not thousands) every year. Parents who decide against a doctor's orders can be easily labeled as dangers to the children and have the custody revoked. The average family doesn't have the money to argue in court.

Neither does this family. But the hospital over-bargained its position. They likely didn't know about Justina's older sister - diagnosed with the same disorder (which is recognized as hereditary) by the same doctor and living a productive life under the same care instructions as Justina. They probably failed to properly consider the merits of the original diagnosis - assuming it to be a case of some quack the parents were fond of.

And they sure as hell didn't anticipate popular talk radio picking up the subject and running with it.

But this isn't just about this case.

It's about the reality of what this case exposes. The State owns our children and has been granted the right to, without trial, remove a child from parental custody indefinitely.

 

[Genrou]

Accounts of her 'therapy' consist of being forced to sit on a toilet for hours with someone shouting at her to "go."

Lol 'therapy'. Isn't that potty training, done during the toddler stage? Again, putting pressure on a patient to "go" is a stressor. Something you're avoiding to put on people with Somatoform disorder.

Even if it is somatoform disorder (which I doubt), I would seriously question the hospital's treatment methods.

I agree on this. But then again they are bound to remain their procedures confidential since they are bound legally and professionally to do that. Unless a subpoena of all her medical records from both hospitals is issued, then no light will be shed on what exactly is happening to her treatment.

Not really.

See, our children belong to the State. A Judge can, at any time, rule to remove a child from the custody of parents.

No, I meant the first few days after she was diagnosed with Somatoform disorder, they could have requested this before the state intervened.

I guess a review of the hospital's rules and policies is needed. There must be something in that waiver / form that's questionable.

The doctor who originally diagnosed Justina with Mitochondrial Disease stopped by Boston Children's to see how she was doing, and was forcibly removed from her room by a social worker. This was the same doctor who diagnosed Justina's older sister, who has been able to live a functional and productive life with the parents following this doctor's instructions.

I'm not defending the hospital, I'll just be putting this out there, but I think this might have something to do with Physician accreditation to a certain hospital. But if he came as Justina's friend, and not as her physician, this is indeed baffling.

There are a few possible reasons for this.

First - it's low-lying fruit in terms of money. The Boston Children's Hospital commands a huge amount of authority - legal action is cheap for them. Meanwhile, they can continue to bill the insurance company.

I find this somewhat unlikely as it's just too overt. However, it's been mentioned and it is a possibility.

It is also possible that it is a case of almost lethal ego coming from Boston Children's - which is the #1 rated children's hospital in the nation. Yet, her condition has steadily declined since she was admitted to the hospital. Doctors not wanting to go back on a diagnosis or admit that 'the other doctor' was correct (or at least able to produce functional results) may be a driving factor.

I think the most likely scenario is that they ****ed something up. What, exactly, they ****ed up is anyone's guess at this point (because they don't want -anyone- to look at her - red flag). From a damage control standpoint, they made the assumption that this was the average family. Boston Children's can easily leverage legal power. It's a parent's word against a medical professional's - it works on hundreds of families (if not thousands) every year. Parents who decide against a doctor's orders can be easily labeled as dangers to the children and have the custody revoked. The average family doesn't have the money to argue in court.

I agree. Must be really hard to admit you messed up with a diagnosis, them egos be burnt. So throw in the Psychiatric Diagnosis, and don't allow second opinions. Tsk.

Neither does this family. But the hospital over-bargained its position. They likely didn't know about Justina's older sister - diagnosed with the same disorder (which is recognized as hereditary) by the same doctor and living a productive life under the same care instructions as Justina. They probably failed to properly consider the merits of the original diagnosis - assuming it to be a case of some quack the parents were fond of.

Then their history taking and medical assessment during admission in the ER was not thorough enough. Surely her parents / siblings who were there when she was admitted could've answered questions regarding the family history if someone bothered to asked.

I have yet to see an assessment form that does not include Heredofamilial / Genetic disorders. Someone must've skipped that part, which ultimately resulted to this demise.

And they sure as hell didn't anticipate popular talk radio picking up the subject and running with it.

But this isn't just about this case.

It's about the reality of what this case exposes. The State owns our children and has been granted the right to, without trial, remove a child from parental custody indefinitely.

It's all about power and money and saving faces. I agree.