# child dies after workers refuse to fix his medicaid record



## blu (Aug 11, 2011)

Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post

but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!

If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!


----------



## whitehall (Aug 11, 2011)

So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 11, 2011)

The mother should have been indicted for child abuse since stupidity isn't a crime.


----------



## Full-Auto (Aug 11, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



If it would have been my child, I would have been arrested for chocking out the pharmacist. The ensuing media coverage would have gotten the problem resolved.

Sometimes you just need to kick the table over to gather peoples attention.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Aug 11, 2011)

> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



If only _his parents_ had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position.


----------



## frazzledgear (Aug 11, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



Oh give me a break.  The mother couldn't figure out how to get her son his medications for MONTHS?  Couldn't have been trying very hard -because I wouldn't have left the place until I had it in my hand.  That is what a REAL parent does -so WTF was she doing for all those MONTHS?  Its only a wonder he didn't die sooner.  But NOW, NOW she has the energy to actually do something about it, right -by suing someone hoping SHE makes out like a bandit for HER failure to properly care for her own child!  I wouldn't give her ONE DIME.   She couldn't be bothered FOR MONTHS to actually get off her ass and if it took going from doctor to pharmacist to Medicaid office -WHATEVER IT TOOK to make sure her kid had his medication, then sorry no one should have the time to hear her lawsuit.    First and foremost responsibility for making sure this child had his medication was HERS -and she abandoned it.  Too bad her kid can't sue HER for dereliction of her parental duties.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Aug 11, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



One nine year old kid in Denver dying does not in any way, shape, or form mean the U.S. does not have the best health care system in the world.  Best does not mean perfect and people in Europe with socialist health care die all the time, but you already knew that.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 11, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



What are you yaking about?

The kid wasn't aborted so it's all good with the right.

Once it leaves the womb..it ain't anyone's responsibility.

You guys want to cut everything that would keep kids alive.

This is just a proof of concept.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Aug 11, 2011)

Sallow said:


> What are you yaking about?
> 
> The kid wasn't aborted so it's all good with the right.
> 
> Once it leaves the womb..it ain't anyone's responsibility.



Silly me.  Here I thought he was his mother's responsibility.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 11, 2011)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > What are you yaking about?
> ...



Opps.

There is that.

But if she dies..then it's suppose to be left out in the woods.

This-is-SPARTA!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkWS9PiXekE]This is Sparta. Full scene. - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## syrenn (Aug 11, 2011)

What i see is a mother trying to make a payout on the back of her dead son.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Aug 11, 2011)

Sallow said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...



She didn't, so what it the relevancy of your statement?  In fact, you have yet to make a relevant point in this thread.


----------



## lilbug (Aug 11, 2011)

Something doesn't jive here.  Don't Medicaid recipients carry 'insurance cards' or some kind of something to prove eligbility?  Couldn't the pediatrican confirm the child was on Medicaid...or provide sample meds, physicians often do. Asthma didn't develop overnight, there has to be a prescription record somewhere that could prove eligibility.

Aside from that, as a mom you do what you have to come up with the money for the medication for your child and clear up the 'glitch' after you know your child is on the mend.


----------



## freedombecki (Aug 31, 2011)

What doesn't jive is some did not go to the link and read what actually little boy.

What happened to him was death by computer glitch at Walgreen's.

My heart goes out to that mother who, from all appearances, followed up over and over with the same result from Walgreen's each and every time--computer sez this and computer sez that.

She lost her beautiful young son, and there was no excuse for a pharmacy treating her so arrogantly as to not care about her and her little boy's life-threatening asthma.


----------



## California Girl (Aug 31, 2011)

Seems the utopia of 'universal health care' ain't all that, either. 



> A teenage girl has been left paralysed for life after an appalling blunder by doctors during a routine operation.
> Sophie Tyler, 14, was given an overdose of the painkilling  epidural drug after surgery to remove gallstones.




Read more: Teenager left paralysed for life after routine hospital operation to remove gallstones went horribly wrong | Mail Online


----------



## geauxtohell (Aug 31, 2011)

whitehall said:


> So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.



Oh please.  Have you ever tried to fight the medicaid bureaucratic nightmare?

This kid died because a pharmacy wouldn't fill his frigging albuterol inhaler.  

That's just absurd. 

But blame the mother.  Why not?  I am sure it's all her fault.  If only she could have been able to afford private insurance, she wouldn't have had these problems!


----------



## California Girl (Aug 31, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.
> ...



Shit like this happens in every system across the world. People die because other people screw up. 

Most of us don't pretend it's because the whole system is fucked - but most of us are slightly more rational than the idiot OP.


----------



## auditor0007 (Sep 1, 2011)

California Girl said:


> Seems the utopia of 'universal health care' ain't all that, either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh come on Callie Girl; how many fuck ups could we find in our system of private care?  Do I really need to give you a list of all the lawsuits over doctor fuck ups?  It doesn't matter what system we have, nothing is ever going to be perfect, and yes, some people are going to die or have the wrong leg amputated.  Hell, with things like MRSA, it's a crapshoot just being admitted to a hospital anymore.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 1, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!





"that in government, no one answers the phone?" said John Holland, one of Lucero-Mills' attorneys. "Who is responsible for nothing happening? Is it nobody? Is it God? Is it a computer? Or is it the people who didn't act?"

Just think how nice it will be when the government gets its hands on YOUR health care. The mom could have had the meds no problem. Her laziness killed her Son.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 1, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.
> ...



needymeds.com . They would have sent the drugs to her door. he was lazy, and it killed her Son.


----------



## California Girl (Sep 1, 2011)

auditor0007 said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> > Seems the utopia of 'universal health care' ain't all that, either.
> ...



Which is exactly my point. The idiot OP claims it is our system, and that's why we need 'universal health care'.... so kids won't die. That is quite simply bullshit. Every system, anywhere in the world, has problems. 

blu is a fucking dishonest fool.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 1, 2011)

I also dont understand how the Woman could not have gone to any of thees slideing scale clinics-

Places for free medical clinics near Denver, CO
Bruner Family Medicine
 - Place page
Exempla Healthcare || Denver Colorado - 1960 North ogden street,#460, Denver - (303) 318-2000
Stout Street Clinic
 - Place page
Colorado Coalition for the Homeless - National Coalition for the Homeless - 2100 Broadway, Denver - (303) 293-2220
9 Health Fair
 - 1 Google review
9Health Fair - 1139 Delaware Street, Denver - (303) 698-4455
Riverside Pregnancy Center
 - Place page
Riverside Baptist Church - 2637 West 23rd Avenue, Denver - (720) 855-0505
Rose Medical Center
 -  14 Google reviews
Leading Denver Hospital for Bariatric Surgery, Cancer Treatments, Orthopedic and Spine Surgery - Rose Medical Center - 4567 E 9th Ave, Denver, Colorado - (303) 320-2121
The Releaf Center
 -  64 Google reviews
The Releaf Center - Medical Marijuana Dispensary - 2000 West 32nd Avenue, Denver - (303) 458-5323
AfterOurs Urgent Care - Downtown Denver (LODO)
 -  22 Google reviews
AfterOurs Urgent Care | AfterOurs Urgent Care Health Care Nights, Weekends & Holidays - 1515 Wazee Street, Suite D, Denver - (303) 861-7878

and explained her issue and gotten the drugs wich most doctors have tons of as samples to hand out to people in her situation ? The system did not kill her child so much as generational welfare did. This woman was trained to depend on the system.


----------



## frazzledgear (Sep 1, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.
> ...




Are you people FOR REAL!  We are talking about a parent who ALLOWED their child to die because it took too much effort to clear up the snafu here.   For MONTHS she did NOTHING.  

WHO THE FUCK DOES THAT except someone who believes she has less responsibility for that child than some faceless bureaucracy?  What kind of ASSHOLE, IRRESPONSIBLE citizens are we deliberately breeding by making excuses for this kind of behavior?  A show of hands here about who here would just shrug if they experienced a screw up over their own child's insurance coverage and just allow their own child to go without his asthma medication for MONTHS like this?  

Did she return to the emergency room or the clinic and tell a doctor about the problem and ask for their help to at least get her kid's medication in the interim -because there isn't a doctor in the country who would have said they couldn't help with making sure a child was not deprived of a medication that could cost that child his life by going without it!  How hard was it even do THAT much?  Every pharmaceutical company in this country has a program to help people get vital medications who cannot afford it to get that vital medication either for free or at significantly reduced prices-especially that for children.  And asthma medication is a critical medication. 

*Whose job did she think it was to bring this error to the attention of someone who could help or entirely fix it? *   Clearly some people here think she had no responsibility to make sure this error was fixed in order to save her own child's life!!  If you wouldn't have allowed your kid to go without his life-saving medication then where do you get off excusing this woman for being so irresponsible?  

1.  She could have gone to or called the Medicaid office and insisted on getting the error fixed, making sure they knew a child's life was at risk until it was fixed.  She didn't even bother with this minimal step.

2.  She could have returned to the prescribing physician and explain the problem and ask for help and she absolutely would have gotten at least temporary help had she done this much as well as information about what else she could do if she couldn't get Medicaid to fix the error -including long term assistance to make sure her kid was never without his inhaler.

3.  She could have paid cash for that inhaler while trying to get it fixed -some inhalers cost as little as $20 even without insurance -for anywhere from 100 to 250 doses.   But I bet she had plenty of cash to spend on her own personal vices though.  But for MONTHS she coughed up NOT ONE DIME for her own child's medication -although the vast majority of parents would have foregone spending money on something else to make sure their kid had his life-saving medication.  

Instead she  CHOSE not to do ANY of these things and she chose NOT to make any extra effort to fix this screw up  -*which makes HER negligent.*  If you know your child needs that medication and you CHOOSE not to make the effort to make sure a bureaucratic screw up isn't fixed so he can get that life-saving medication, then as a parent, you have FAILED your parental responsibility and are negligent!   FAR more negligent than a bureaucratic screw-up committed by a faceless government bureaucracy which does not have greater responsibility for her kid than she does!  A mistake that would have and could have been corrected had it just been brought to someone's attention!

I'm a parent too and I cannot imagine just sitting on my ass doing nothing about this for MONTHS.  But then I take my job as a parent FUCKING SERIOUS, was never indoctrinated to believe others carried greater responsibility for the health and welfare of my kid than I do - and would have done whatever was necessary to make sure MY kid had his asthma medication so he wouldn't suffocate to death the next time he had an asthma attack!  IT IS MY DUTY AS A PARENT!

And not so oddly enough in this "gimme-gimme" society and "sticking my hand out for that hand out amounts to a real job" mentality we are creating, she has no problem going through far more trouble to sue someone for HER negligence as a parent -hoping to make big bucks off the death SHE could have prevented in the first place.  But clearly felt no real sense of responsibility to do so.

I sympathize with that child that he had such an UNCARING, negligent parent who couldn't be bothered to do the right thing by her own kid.  But NONE for her.  Those defending this woman for her own negligence must really believe the issue of insurance and insurance screw ups relieves a parent of their primary responsibility to their own kid and shifts the burden to some faceless bureaucracy instead.  Even though SHE is the one who actually knew there was a bureaucratic mistake occurring but couldn't be bothered to insure it got fixed in order to save her own kid's life.  

*SHE still had options available to get around that screw up and chose not to use ANY OF THEM.*  If I were a juror on this lawsuit she wouldn't get a dime from me.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Sep 1, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



This is a traject lesson of why we should never ever allow the government to start running out healthcare.

Everytime something starts getting government money, it becomes unaffordable for the average person to afford, let alone struggling poor people.



Oh, and too the lefty fuck that's slamming the system;  it was the government system that killed that child.


----------



## Conservative (Sep 1, 2011)

Sallow said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



you really are pathetically stupid.

The child was the mothers responsibility. She FAILED in her responsibility to provide proper care for her child. The original pharmacy was not her only recourse. She was too fucking stupid or lazy to take proper care of her child, and the child died because of it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Sep 1, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



You are a fucking waste using the death of a child to pander your fucking agenda.


----------



## westwall (Sep 1, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!







You do realize she's suing the COUNTY right?  It was a GOVERNMENT WORKER who screwed the poor kids records up and caused his tragic death.  These are the same people you Obamacare people want us to have to deal with.  If Obamacare is fully iplemented this will be a drop in the bucket as the flood of untimely deaths begin.

"The suit against Denver seeks monetary damages and relief for her emotional loss and grief. The city fixed Zumante's eligibility status to pay for his funeral, according to court documents.

Three then-employees of Denver County Human Services are named in the lawsuit, in addition to the county. Holly Lumpkin was Zumante's caseworker, and Lumpkin's supervisors, Teresa Long and Annette Williams, also were named."



Read more: Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post 
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: Terms of Use - The Denver Post


----------



## Sarah G (Sep 1, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



These huge corporations can all die a slow and painful death as far as I'm concerned.  Let's bring small businesses back in communities (like small pharmacies) who have time to care about their customers.

It's ridiculous.  I hope she gets paid bigtime.


----------



## Sarah G (Sep 1, 2011)

westwall said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



Those pharmacists could have helped them get the records straight.  They just kept saying he wasn't eligable for medicaid.  That isn't helpful for a kid that can't breathe.  The doc could have helped as well.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 1, 2011)

Sarah G said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



She should not, and is not entitled to compensation. If anything, she should be charged with neglect and endangerment. A pharmacy is powerless ware medicare is concerned. The woman could have been at a free clinic at anytime before her child died, she could have requested samples from the prescribing doctors office, she had a prescription, she could have requested assistance directly from the drug company. There are a million things she could have done, yet she waited ? She neglected her child to death and should be prosecuted for it.


----------



## westwall (Sep 1, 2011)

Sarah G said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...







It's not the corporations fault in any way Sarah.  No corporation should be required to do the work of the parent.  The mother is most at fault IMO followed by the County.  As has been pointed out there is plenty of free medical support in Denver.  All paid for by the taxpayers and some of it by corporate donation.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 1, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!


 
We have the medical CARE..but as has been said over and over, socialized medicine sucks, and that's what you and your buds want, so .... this is what you get.

BTW, it's PROVIDERS who are to blame for this. They don't understand the system (because it's complicated and generated by the schizophrenic insurance companies) and so they get all sorts of garbled information, and that translates into crappy service for clients.

If this mom was a decent and intelligent and self-sufficient person, she would have called her worker, and her worker would have called the pharmacy, or would have provided a client hotline number to the mother, and somebody would have advocated for them with the provider. 

The problem is, when you teach people to be dependent, they're screwed when someone they're dependent on makes a mistake.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 1, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



If she were a decent Mom, ass's would have been burnt until she had the meds. I have been broke and sick, and I have been treated. Not for free, (even universal health care is not free), but it was done. This death is the result of a system that trained this woman to rely on it.


----------



## frazzledgear (Sep 2, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.
> ...



Are you for real?  That cheesy ass excuse works for you as justification for allowing her child to go without his life-saving medication?  Let me weigh that up for myself:  an innocent child's life versus it being a pain in the ass to make the effort to get what is actually a pretty common bureaucratic mix-up fixed before that child was harmed by it.  And look where YOU came down on that one.  OMG!  I hope you never have children.  Seriously.  Because everyone now knows where YOUR priorities are as well.  If its a pain in the ass, then you believe you are absolved of all responsibility!!    

Your comment makes me want to vomit at the ease with which you dismiss this child's life in comparison to the pain-in-the-ass it would have been to get this COMMON mistake fixed.  So what if its a pain in the ass to deal with?  SO WHAT?  Who promised anyone that life would be easy and a parent didn't have to bother with their kids as soon as it became a pain-in-the-ass to do the right thing by them!  

*Understand this:  Once she became aware of the error, it was HER responsibility to protect her own child from being harmed by it.  PERIOD.*  Whether it meant parking her ass at the Medicaid office, returning to the prescribing physician or an emergency room or a free clinic and explaining what happened -or even if it meant GASP -paying for it out of her own pocket!  She couldn't be bothered with any of it for MONTHS.  But her FIRST duty is NOT to her personal comfort -but to her CHILD who is HELPLESS and VULNERABLE unless she does live up to her parental obligations!  She chose HER comfort and she chose death for her kid when she did.  

How can someone else be more responsible for it when SHE is the one who knew about the existence of this screw up - but didn't bother to bring it to the attention of someone who could actually fix it or at the very least to the attention of someone who could offer even temporary help while waiting for it to be fixed?  I can't stand people like you and using this dumb ass excuse that its a pain in the ass to deal with as if it justifies this woman's behavior and her decision to just let her kid go without his medication entirely is beyond revolting.  It is clearly the response of someone who places very little value on the life of another person, someone who is also so narcissistic and self-centered they can more readily identify with the narcissism of another over the very life of an innocent person who died because it was just too much of a pain in the ass to do the right thing by her helpless child!  *Your own comment speaks volumes about the quality of YOUR character too.  And its not good.*

If Blue Cross/Blue Shield screwed up and refused to cover your kid's asthma medication, are YOU going to just shrug and walk away waiting for your kid to die just because its a pain in the ass to straighten it out?  SERIOUSLY?  The fact the insurer is not BC/BS but a government entitlement program does NOT shift responsibility for this child to government!  If you become aware of an error that has the potential to harm your kid -then it is INCUMBENT upon you to do whatever it takes to get it fixed BEFORE it harms your kid.   And tough shit if its a pain the ass to get that done.   That's called LIFE -deal with it.  Or for God's sake don't have children and allow them to pay the price for having a narcissistic, self-centered parent who just can't be bothered to do the right thing by their child.  She had MONTHS to do it before it finally caught up with him.   She sure doesn't find it a pain in the ass to go through the long term hassle required to try and enrich herself from his death NOW though, right?  Look what she is willing to go through NOW when she thinks SHE might benefit from the hassle instead of her kid!  Its her MOTIVE that determines whether she can be bothered -and for her, a motive of financial gain is far more important than saving her own kid's life.  How terrible for that child to have been stuck with such a narcissistic, selfish, cold and self-centered bitch for a mother.  There are women who would sacrifice their own life for her child's -but this isn't one of them.  She wasn't willing to sacrifice her TIME to save his life, much less cough up $20 for his emergency inhaler.   An alley cat is a better mother.

If that child couldn't count on his own mother to protect him from a COMMON bureaucratic mix-up by doing whatever it took to get it fixed and by making sure he at least had his emergency inhaler that would save his life during an acute attack - then where did that child fail in his own responsibility?  Because surely you also mean that child should have known he could not count on his mother to speak for him, right?  You just dismissed her responsibilities for this child's welfare out of hand on the grounds its just too much of a pain in the ass to spend the time needed to get it fixed which relieves her of all responsibility.  Which means you must have expected that child to know this and have a back-up plan for himself, right?  Should have known he would have to find someone else to speak on his behalf and save his life once his mother refused to do so, right?  Shouldn't we be teaching kids starting in preschool they better not expect their own parents to provide for them and protect them and it is their responsibility to figure out how to do it for themselves and have a back-up plan?   Maybe carry around a phone number of some government bureaucratic office that will go to computerized menu and voice mail so they can feel all "cared for" and all?  Teach them early on that children having sex is "normal" and is of no more importance than a sneeze and likewise having children carries no more responsibility than a sneeze either.  Teach them that being handed insurance coverage they don't have to pay for automatically shifts full responsibility for that child from those who brought him into the world -to those who didn't?  Because clearly people like YOU believe that to be true!  

*Medicaid, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, State Farm, Medicare, Prudential -whatever -insurance companies do NOT become parental substitutes just because you buy or get handed insurance coverage!  They exist to help with the cost -not to take over responsibility for your own child!* *If the parent becomes aware of a bureaucratic error like this  -whether it happens with Blue Cross/Blue Shield or with Medicaid - it is AUTOMATICALLY their responsibility to make sure it gets fixed before it harms their kid.* 

Only a fucking immoral, narcissistic, irresponsible juvenile would even attempt to make an excuse for what this woman failed to do.  Her child DIED because of it -what could possibly outweigh that?  Well if you are one of those lying ass liberals who go on and on pretending how much they "care" -realize what they really mean by it.   I'm going through these posts on this topic and it is not surprising in the least to me that the people who are excusing, defending or justifying this woman's behavior -are for the most part -LIBERALS!  It is actually quite consistent with modern liberalism to believe far more in doing the EASY thing and making excuses for not doing the RIGHT thing.  So naturally their sympathy is with this woman entirely because HEY, getting the mistake fixed might have taken more than ten minutes and been a real pain in the ass.  While sitting on her ass for months waiting for her kid to die was certainly MUCH easier and therefore acceptable!  Modern liberals have been pushing for years the idea that doing the easy thing rather than doing the right thing is an American "value" -because it is for them.  Just one more reason I'd rather lose a limb than be a liberal which would cost me my soul.

MONTHS later her kid dies.   Didn't go to the Medicaid office and stay until someone fixed it.  She didn't return to the prescribing physician, didn't go to a free clinic, she refused to pay a dime out of pocket for even his emergency inhaler to make sure he wouldn't die during the next attack -and on and on through the many options she actually had.    And she never brought this mistake to the attention of those who had the authority to fix and demand it be fixed -she waited until he was dead to bring the error to their attention instead.  She CHOSE death for her son because doing the right thing by him was such a big pain in the ass!  Which is all the justification a liberal needs -but doesn't work for normal people -people who are also aware of the sick irony that she doesn't find it such a pain in the ass to spend far more time and effort to try and enrich herself from it now.


----------



## del (Sep 2, 2011)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> > If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!
> 
> 
> 
> If only _his parents_ had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position.



if only there was more than one pharmacy in denver...


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 2, 2011)

del said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > > If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!
> ...



Pharmacy hell, There is not one single Dr.'s office in this country that doesn't have samples of medication on hand to hand out. And with the frequency of Asthma in this country there is NO excuse for why that woman did not have the meds she needed. If she wins this case, she and her lawyers will have successfully committed legal extortion


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 2, 2011)

Any er would have treated him.

Mom is a lackwit. Possibly a true lackwit, in that she's incapable of making intelligent decisions or judgement calls, in which case it's very sad. But again, not the fault of the government worker or the pharmacy.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 2, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > blu said:
> ...



If she were a decent Mom, she would have paid full price for the inhaler, whether she went out of pocket or asked her family, friends or church for a loan, then fought to get a refund. Anything to keep her child alive.

Even if it took collecting pop cans for the aluminum, her child's life should have come first.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 2, 2011)

the whole myth that the child died because he was denied treatment is false. She could have taken him anywhere and gotten treatment. She didn't because she's either brain dead, or drugged, and attorneys latched onto it.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 2, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



Darn tooting.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 2, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> the whole myth that the child died because he was denied treatment is false. She could have taken him anywhere and gotten treatment. She didn't because she's either brain dead, or drugged, and attorneys latched onto it.



She was trained through a system of generational welfare to depend on the system to address her needs. This gos back to the beginnings of welfare programs. As the economy gets tougher, and food stamps get harder to get, you will see similar cases involving starvation. In a way, the child and to a lesser degree the woman are victims of the system. This is the system our current President wants for all of us. Think about that when you pull the lever at voting time.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 2, 2011)

thank you, I already remarked on that.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 2, 2011)

No sweat.


----------



## frazzledgear (Sep 3, 2011)

Full-Auto said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



Why clock the pharmacist?  They file by computer and are immediately told if it is covered or not and what if any co-pay exists.  Pharmacists don't decide if its covered or not -they are TOLD whether it is.  They aren't slaves obligated to eat the cost if someone refuses to pay for it or insurance refuses to pay for it.  Most are just another employee working for some company and would be fired for theft for handing out merchandise or drugs to people for free.  I do not agree that a pharmacist should be willing to get fired or deserves to be punched out if he or she refuses to hand over drugs for free to anyone with a good sob story.  But I do agree with your real point here -any normal parent would make sure there was hell to pay until that mistake was fixed!    But where the mistake was actually made -not someone else caught in the trap of that mistake too.

Some people here going on and on about the failure of companies, government, insurance, the pharmacist etc  are totally off the mark on this one.  This is an issue that addresses basic parental responsibilities and a lot of people really don't understand why they should be loudly condemning this woman instead of wasting their time sympathizing with her.  She is NOT a sympathetic person but someone who should have been charged with a crime.

Everyone pretend this identical error happened to you personally.  Not your kid but to you alone.  You go to get your prescription filled for a critical medication, one you know for a fact is covered and one that if you stop taking it will sharply increase the risk you will die very soon.  You are told by the pharmacist your insurance or your Medicaid refuses to cover it.  What would you do in that event?  Would you shrug and walk off deciding the bureaucratic "nightmare" just isn't worth the time it will take to get it straightened out?  Go home and just wait to kick the bucket even though you know for a fact your medication really is covered?  Or are you going to find where the screw up occurred and get it fixed so you can get your medication so you won't die?  No one in their right mind is just going to walk off and forget about it and wait to die even though they know for a fact that medication is actually covered.  Just not going to happen, is it?  No matter how much a pain in the ass it will be, each of us would talk to whoever we had to, go wherever we had to go in order to get the mistake fixed so we could get that vital medication again.  We all know it without a doubt.  

But what liberals in particular don't get is this:

Every single parent owes their child at a minimum that IDENTICAL level of care.  Whatever they would do for themselves, they OWE their child -because the child cannot do this for himself.  The child is helpless if a parent refuses to do it which is why this is a fundamental moral parental duty, responsibility and obligation -one that has been recognized for THOUSANDS OF YEARS.  *Every parent OWES their child to do AT LEAST as much as they would have done for themselves in the identical situation as the very minimum level of care.  PERIOD.   Because the child can't.*  The parent speaks for himself  -but also MUST speak for their child because the child cannot.  We all know she would never have just walked off and not bothered to get her OWN life-saving medication knowing it really was covered and someone screwed up somewhere.  She would have raised holy hell to get HER critical medication and get the problem straightened out.  We all know that because it is what each of us would have also done and it is what any reasonable and normal person would have done.  She doesn't claim to be mentally incompetent.  

But in spite of the fact most of us would have been even MORE demanding and aggressive about fixing the mistake that denied our child his critical medication than if it had been our own - this woman refused to give her child the same level of care we all know she would have done for herself.  That means she was negligent in the care of her son and her negligence led to his death.  Her kid died because she couldn't be bothered to provide the required minimal care she owed him -care she absolutely would have made sure SHE got if that same error happened to her.  SHE belongs in jail for that.  Not in front of a jury demanding she be enriched at taxpayer expense for denying her own child the minimal level of care she owed him.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 3, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



No, if the mother wasn't such a twatwaffle her child would still be alive.  I would work street corners if I needed meds for my child if that is what it took.



geauxtohell said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.
> ...



Actually an albuterol inhaler is about $10 at Costco.



NGSamson said:


> and explained her issue and gotten the drugs wich most doctors have tons of as samples to hand out to people in her situation ? The system did not kill her child so much as generational welfare did. This woman was trained to depend on the system.



And that is the real key.  She is trained to depend on welfare.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



Medicaid is a government program, so really, if you support single-payer, you're telling us that the REST of America needs health care like this kid!


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> What doesn't jive is some did not go to the link and read what actually little boy.
> 
> What happened to him was death by computer glitch at Walgreen's.
> 
> ...



You have obviously mistaken Walgreen's for a charitable organization.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

frazzledgear said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



There are a few things I don't understand here.

First of all, if this woman and/or her children were on Medicaid, where was her Medicaid card?  They issue ID cards just like a regular health insurance company does.  Had she presented one to the pharmacist, there's a good chance this whole issue would have been resolved by him over the phone the first time she went in.

Second of all, who exactly was she "repeatedly calling"?  Again, if her kids were on Medicaid, she should have had a caseworker, who certainly would have returned her "repeated" calls, if only to get her to shut up and leave him alone.

Third, WAS her kid actually ON Medicaid?  The story keeps talking about him "being eligible" for Medicai, which isn't the same thing.

Fourth, why did she think "repeated phone calls" were enough to discharge her responsibilities, if they weren't getting returned?  In her place, the day after the pharmacy first said they had no record of me and my calls weren't returned, my butt would have been physically down IN the office, demanding that someone clear up the computer glitch YESTERDAY.  Of course they don't answer the phone.  Has anyone called a government office in the last twenty years and gotten to directly speak to a human being right off the bat?  Be serious.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.
> ...




People die because private health insurance denies claims all the time.  I have an illness for which the medicine costs $20,000 a month.  I got to the specialty clinic just days before I would have died.  You know why it took so long?  Because my referring doctor assumed my insurance would not pay for it, as most insurances do not.  So, they just give you blood pressure medicine and wait for you to die.  But MY insurance does pay, and I know how lucky I am these days.  


My point is that people with private insurance die every day because claims are denied.  And apparently they are denied so frequently that with my illness referrals to specialty clinics are considered to be useless.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

Sarah G said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



Which "huge corporation" are you railing against, twat?  She's suing THE GOVERNMENT, because it was THE GOVERNMENT who owned the computer glitch.  Walgreens didn't do anything wrong, and they didn't do anything a small pharmacy wouldn't have done exactly the same.  What the fuck is running through your muddled mind that Walgreens was supposed to do?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

Sarah G said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > blu said:
> ...



No, you stupid bitch.  There's really very little the pharmacy could have done about a glitch at the Medicaid end.  Please share with us PRECISELY what you think these people could have done, that you're so sure a "small pharmacy" could have done better.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > blu said:
> ...



I don't know that Advair comes in free samples.  I think it's an inhaler, isn't it?


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> I also dont understand how the Woman could not have gone to any of thees slideing scale clinics-
> 
> Places for free medical clinics near Denver, CO
> Bruner Family Medicine
> ...



Yes, MDs do have plenty of samples on hand usually.

But more, drug companies like Glaxosmithkline which makes Advair have patient assistance programs as well:  RxAssist - GLAXOSMITHKLINE Patient Assistance Program

Sadly even some doctor's offices do not know about these.   Working with indigent clients, I have used these programs extensively with my patient population.  One company drop shipped a year of medicine to one of my patients.

I, too, have to wonder why the mother wasn't more assertive. Still, many people don't realize that asthma will kill you.  I have, however, worked most of my career with people on public assistance and medicaid as well as with indigents.  To be fair, many of them suffer from learned helplessness and simply do not have the ability work through a problem like this.

Learned helplessness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## strollingbones (Sep 5, 2011)

she is disadvantaged ....most likely a lower iq and poor social skills.....i am always amazed at how critical the haves are of the have nots.....having is not limited to material things


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

frazzledgear said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



Advair is very expensive.  I used it several years and for a while my copay was almost $100.00.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



Drug reps keep the MD offices supplied with samples of it.  In fact, drug reps leave many samples.  One company left my clinic over $50,000 worth of samples one month for indigent patients.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 5, 2011)

> If I were a juror on this lawsuit she wouldn't get a dime from me.



Which means youd not likely be on the jury in the first place.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

strollingbones said:


> she is disadvantaged ....most likely a lower iq and poor social skills.....i am always amazed at how critical the haves are of the have nots.....having is not limited to material things


 
I agree she undoubtedly has issues.

But that doesn't mean it's somebody ELSE'S fault when her stupidity gets her kid killed.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


 
but they are not obliged to hand them out...I think there's probably more to this story. I doubt if the kid was with her having an asthma attack in the pharmacy.

The long and short...if she couldn't get his meds, she should have taken him to the ER. Hopefully it wouldn't be an ER that was set up by Michelle Obama...


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 5, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



It is and it does.  It's a dry inhaler, a powder form of a steriod.  Advair is not a rescue medication, it takes weeks to work.  Albuterol would likely have saved the day.  $10 at Costco.  It is a rescue inhaler and something that should have been used immediately.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

And I've no doubt that if the child was in the pharmacy, dying, that the pharmacist would have handed the stuff over. Or if the mother had given an indication that the child was in urgent need at that moment.

Even pharmacists can't read minds. And the clerks certainly can't, and aren't medically trained anyway. Their job is to facilitate the payment of the meds.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...



Yes, this is correct.  It is not a rescue inhaler.  



koshergrl said:


> An*d I've no doubt that if the child was in the pharmacy, dying, that the pharmacist would have handed the stuff over*. Or if the mother had given an indication that the child was in urgent need at that moment.
> 
> Even pharmacists can't read minds. And the clerks certainly can't, and aren't medically trained anyway. Their job is to facilitate the payment of the meds.



As above.  If he _handed the stuff over_, it wouldn't have worked on a dying patient.  But I don't think he would have.  Anyone with half a brain would have called an ambulance for a dying person.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



That is correct.  There is no _obligation._

However, I know several self employed very high income individuals who have HSA's or insurance plans with very high deductibles, and the MDs give them samples every time they darken the door.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

Sure, but that doesn't mean they are responsible when a child dies because his mom is too stupid to relay to anybody any sense of urgency.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> Sure, but that doesn't mean they are responsible when a child dies because his mom is too stupid to relay to anybody any sense of urgency.



_They?_  Who is _they?_


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

The pharmacy workers, her case worker.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> The pharmacy workers, her case worker.



She is not suing the pharmacy.  

However, the caseworker may be liable.  According to the article in post # 1:



> Zuton Lucero-Mills said she called Denver County Human Services several times a week in the spring and summer of 2009 after she tried to get 9-year-old son Zumante's asthma medications at Walgreens and was told he wasn't eligible for Medicaid.
> 
> No one resolved the computer glitch. *Most of Lucero-Mills' calls weren't returned.*
> 
> ...


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 5, 2011)

> Sure, but that doesn't mean they are responsible when a child dies because his mom is too stupid to relay to anybody any sense of urgency.



Good luck with that in court. 

The state was clearly negligent in its process, and it was incumbent upon the state to find a solution to the problem as the eligibility determining authority, or have an alternative plan in place. 

When I had Medicaid clients in Florida they would be able to secure a hard-copy document from the state establishing eligibility when there was a problem with the eligibility database. The document would override what the pharmacy was seeing in the computer, allowing the prescription to be filled. That Colorado doesnt have a similar provision is strange, as computer systems are notoriously unreliable. Were obviously not getting the entire story.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

strollingbones said:


> she is disadvantaged ....most likely a lower iq and poor social skills.....i am always amazed at how critical the haves are of the have nots.....having is not limited to material things



The kid had asthma for a while, had a prescription, and had had the medicine before, all of which means he was being treated by a doctor for it.  Exactly how smart and social does one have to be to understand when the doctor says, "This is life-threatening", which he certainly would have done, since it is?  Should anyone too stupid to understand that sentence be allowed to run around loose and unsupervised?

I've seen stupid, low-class people get more aggressive in the supermarket when they ran out of the brand of eggs on their WIC checks than this woman got over her son's life.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> > Sure, but that doesn't mean they are responsible when a child dies because his mom is too stupid to relay to anybody any sense of urgency.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



From the article in post # 1:



> The county automatically generated paperwork after her continual calls and sent it to the family's home. It verified Zumante qualified for Medicaid &#8212; yet pharmacists said he wasn't in the system.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have noticed over the years that when there is a death, particularly of a child, unreturned calls by social services is what sinks them.  And calls are easy to prove.


----------



## Greenbeard (Sep 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> You do realize she's suing the COUNTY right?  It was a GOVERNMENT WORKER who screwed the poor kids records up and caused his tragic death.  These are the same people you Obamacare people want us to have to deal with.  If Obamacare is fully iplemented this will be a drop in the bucket as the flood of untimely deaths begin.



"ObamaCare" is giving states the money and technical guidance they need to upgrade their existing shitty eligibility systems, some of which are decades old. Colorado is among the states currently preparing to bring their eligibility systems into the 21st century.

The story in the OP is tragic but seems to lack the ideological component that some are trying to find in it.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...



Interesting.  I knew doctors' offices had a lot of samples in liquid and pill form, but I didn't realize they had samples of inhalers, as well.  Of course, no one in my family has ever had asthma, so . . .


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 5, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Yes, they do also have Advair.  A lot of their samples are the newer name brand drugs that have no generic yet.

When I was put on Advair the MD gave me a sample so I wouldn't have to throw  away an expensive purchased one if the dose was too low.  The dose of the first one was actually too low, but I hadn't paid a hundred bucks for it.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> strollingbones said:
> 
> 
> > she is disadvantaged ....most likely a lower iq and poor social skills.....i am always amazed at how critical the haves are of the have nots.....having is not limited to material things
> ...



Anyone who thinks "stupid and poor" equals "timid and non-aggressive" has clearly not visited the ghetto lately.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 5, 2011)

Pretty sure there's whole shitloads we're not being told about this story.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 5, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Sarah G said:
> ...



If its the round one colored purple that you have to cock before you inhale then yes they do, just not as many shots. When my folks bugged out for IKE the pharmacy was closed so her Dr. filled her bag and sent her on her way.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> > blu said:
> ...


 
Now let's give her a little credit...maybe the huge corporation she has issues with is ACORN!


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 5, 2011)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> > Sure, but that doesn't mean they are responsible when a child dies because his mom is too stupid to relay to anybody any sense of urgency.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The Mother is guilty of abuse and neglect.

Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the childs parents, legal guardian,
or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,
or supervision that a prudent parent would take. The requirements of this subparagraph (III) shall
be subject to the provisions of section 19-3-103.

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ps/cctf/canmanual/app1.pdf

The child died due to the Mothers inaction. She needs to be investigated for not seeking a remedy to the situation.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 5, 2011)

Exactly.

And while there may be extenuating circumstances, while she may not have known, or it just happened so fast there was no preventing it (well aside from making sure your child has the medication he needs...and even with medication, asthmatics often die suddenly) that DOESN'T make it the fault of the people who sell the drugs, or the people who determine eligibility for medicaid!


----------



## bill5 (Sep 6, 2011)

whitehall said:


> The mother should have been indicted for child abuse since stupidity isn't a crime.


Which you should be grateful for   

I guess you missed the part where she was calling human services several times a week.  What was she supposed to do, hold them at gun point?  Yes I would have gotten much more in people's face about this too, but hindsight is 20/20 and many people are very intimidated by authority/authority figures and feel powerless.  She also may not have realized that his life was in danger.  Again I agree she should have known, and could have done more, but it's easy to get self-righteous about this and rubbing salt in her wound is asinine in a wide variety of ways.

That aside, I hope with great passion that the SPECIFIC PEOPLE who blew her off end up in jail, and that point should be emphasized.  But it won't.  Incompetent employees hide behind their company and get off scott free while the best one can usually hope for is the company or state or whatever just throws some money at this and goes "oops our bad."  That itself should be a crime.  PEOPLE should be held accountable for shit like this.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

bill5 said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > The mother should have been indicted for child abuse since stupidity isn't a crime.
> ...




She could have called her Dr.'s office and said " Hey, my stuff is all messed up.I cant get my kids meds". The receptionist would have passed the message on to the Dr. and the Dr. would have given the woman samples to hold the kid over until the issue was settled.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 6, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> She could have called her Dr.'s office and said " Hey, my stuff is all messed up.I cant get my kids meds". The receptionist would have passed the message on to the Dr. and the Dr. would have given the woman samples to hold the kid over until the issue was settled.


Maybe.  We have no idea if that's what the Dr would have done (I have seen more than my share of incompetence, apathy, and even willful neglect from Dr's than I care to think about).  Second and again, it's easy to sit around and mull about how she could have done this or that after the fact.  The point is she didn't just sit around.  In fact, near as I can tell, she did what felt she could and should do.  Calling her neglectful is ridiculous.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 6, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> Exactly.
> 
> And while there may be extenuating circumstances, while she may not have known, or it just happened so fast there was no preventing it (well aside from making sure your child has the medication he needs...and even with medication, asthmatics often die suddenly) that DOESN'T make it the fault of the people who sell the drugs, or the people who determine eligibility for medicaid!


Perhaps.  But at the very least it IS the fault of her case worker and/or anyone in her chain of command, as well as whoever failed to ensure she WAS in the system - or why she was taken out.  etc etc.  Again pointing a finger at her is absurd.  She obtained and provided DOCUMENTED, VERIFIED PROOF of his eligibility - but because they're so stupid/stubborn/blind they refuse it anyway - and they aren't accountable?  I think not.

She addressed this.  She was blown off.  I'm going out on a limb and suggesting this isn't her fault.  I hope those who ARE responsible are fired if not jailed (yeah right) and the pharm company and HR "services" are held liable for a truckload of money.  It won't bring her child back, but it if it's enough, it might leave a big enough sting to light a fire and have Colorado/Denver/the pharms FINALLY get their shit together.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

bill5 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > She could have called her Dr.'s office and said " Hey, my stuff is all messed up.I cant get my kids meds". The receptionist would have passed the message on to the Dr. and the Dr. would have given the woman samples to hold the kid over until the issue was settled.
> ...



It fits the legal definition of abuse and neglect. I posted that earlier in the thread. If that Dr was a twerp she could have gone to another.

Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the child&#8217;s parents, legal guardian,
or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,
or supervision that a prudent parent would take. The requirements of this subparagraph (III) shall
be subject to the provisions of section 19-3-103.

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ps/cctf/canmanual/app1.pdf


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 6, 2011)

bill5 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly.
> ...


 
No, it is NOT. You can't fail to be a mother to your child just because you have insurance. Insurance does not insure that you can be as crappy a guardian as you choose, and never be held responsible for the well being of your child.

you don't just stop trying to get treatment for your child because somebody at the front desk says there's a problem with your coverage. It is reasonable to expect that a parent will not stand by and watch her child die because she is standing in line, because she's lost her wallet, because the doctor isn't in, because she has a flat tire, because she didn't pay her phone bill..what the hell EVER. The child wasn't treated because she didn't get the child treatment. It isn't because some poor government worker screwed up her coding or got behind on their caseload and processing times. 

If my child was having an asthma attack, and I didn't take him to the hospital because I owe them money...that's not the hospital's fault...

And if this woman had sought any sort of information or advocacy, any at all, this could have been taken care of promptly. She probably tried to call ONE person, on that person's lunch hour, and they weren't available so threw up her hands, took another bong hit, let her kid die, then stomped into the waiting room screaming and waving her hands around.

This is beauracracy and socialism in motion. YOu end up with a populace that has become so unused to doing ANYTHING for themselves that they are essentially crippled. They're afraid to take initiative, and they don't know how, and they depend upon a system that doesn't care if they live or die, and is rife with injustice and error.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 6, 2011)

Why didn't the mother take the time to get a lawyer and sue the city for the cost of the medicine while the child was alive? She certainly found time to find one after her kid died.

I'll bet the city would have fixed the paperwork in a hurry had they been served court papers. And they probably would have hand delivered the meds he needed.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 6, 2011)

People make mistakes. I know a couple who moved to a different state whose son started wheezing upon arrival. In a few hours, the son's wheezing grew into strange gasping sounds. From their hotel room, the mother said they needed to get their son immediately to the hospital. The father said it wasn't necessary, the son was just trying to get attention. She grabbed the keys and the kid and headed out the door. He followed along behind, not wishing to stay in a strange hotel by himself. When they got to the er, the doctor told the couple how lucky they were, their son would have been on the verge of dying in less than an hour. As it were, their son's life was saved.

People who don't know better about allergies are neither stupid nor mean. They just can't tell a real crisis from an emotional issue. 

Bad stuff happens to good people every day. We do not have enough evidence to slam this bereaved mother with neglect. Ignorance maybe, but neglect, nope.

I do not know what a judge will decide, but I don't think the mother had a clue how serious her son's asthma was until it was far too late. She wasn't lucky enough to have someone by her side gauging her to do the right thing and do it now.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 6, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> People make mistakes. I know a couple who moved to a different state whose son started wheezing upon arrival. In a few hours, the son's wheezing grew into strange gasping sounds. From their hotel room, the mother said they needed to get their son immediately to the hospital. The father said it wasn't necessary, the son was just trying to get attention. She grabbed the keys and the kid and headed out the door. He followed along behind, not wishing to stay in a strange hotel by himself. When they got to the er, the doctor told the couple how lucky they were, their son would have been on the verge of dying in less than an hour. As it were, their son's life was saved.
> 
> People who don't know better about allergies are neither stupid nor mean. They just can't tell a real crisis from an emotional issue.
> 
> ...


Finally someone who gets it.  Thank you.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> People make mistakes. I know a couple who moved to a different state whose son started wheezing upon arrival. In a few hours, the son's wheezing grew into strange gasping sounds. From their hotel room, the mother said they needed to get their son immediately to the hospital. The father said it wasn't necessary, the son was just trying to get attention. She grabbed the keys and the kid and headed out the door. He followed along behind, not wishing to stay in a strange hotel by himself. When they got to the er, the doctor told the couple how lucky they were, their son would have been on the verge of dying in less than an hour. As it were, their son's life was saved.
> 
> People who don't know better about allergies are neither stupid nor mean. They just can't tell a real crisis from an emotional issue.
> 
> ...



Its the law suet that's not right. Doesn't matter, the dept will settle out of court to avoid a huge media mess.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 6, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > People make mistakes. I know a couple who moved to a different state whose son started wheezing upon arrival. In a few hours, the son's wheezing grew into strange gasping sounds. From their hotel room, the mother said they needed to get their son immediately to the hospital. The father said it wasn't necessary, the son was just trying to get attention. She grabbed the keys and the kid and headed out the door. He followed along behind, not wishing to stay in a strange hotel by himself. When they got to the er, the doctor told the couple how lucky they were, their son would have been on the verge of dying in less than an hour. As it were, their son's life was saved.
> ...


If a pharmaceutical company can't employ educated decision-makers on the issue of how critical asthma can be nor know the medical laws that guaranteed this mother's child to medicine as needed, a lot more people will die. We should not have to wait until the mayor's kid dies before we make sure the one-parent child doesn't die. If government workers' incompetence is causing people to have to sue in order to make sure this kind of travesty never happens again, and the fed is content to let needless deaths ride, the courts will merely have to kick the government's ass until it corrects itself.

This lawsuit couldn't be righter for that reason.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



The drug company had nothing to do with it.and the government workers should not have the lives of mama's and babies in there hands, and the one child's parent should actually have been a parent and gone after the meds her child needed. There are over 100 clinics in the Denver area she could have gone to. It is not the city, state or feral governments job to make sure a parent gets meds for her child. The woman had her options, SHE decided to do nothing. SHE is guilty of neglect as it was pointed out ware I posted and linked to what constitutes child abuse/neglect. She by rights should be prosecuted, instead she will get paid.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 6, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Why didn't the mother take the time to get a lawyer and sue the city for the cost of the medicine while the child was alive? She certainly found time to find one after her kid died.
> 
> I'll bet the city would have fixed the paperwork in a hurry had they been served court papers. And they probably would have hand delivered the meds he needed.



The elements of negligence are duty, breach, causation, and damages.  Before he was dead, all four of those elements had not been met.  There were no damages until he died.  Now there is a wrongful death.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

In Colorado Neglect is abuse, and abuse is neglect. Thats why they charge people with abuse/neglect. This is the states definition not mine-

Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the child&#8217;s parents, legal guardian,
or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,
or supervision that a prudent parent would take. The requirements of this subparagraph (III) shall
be subject to the provisions of section 19-3-103.


Thees two from the link say she committed a crime.

Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the child&#8217;s parents, legal guardian,
or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ps/cctf/canmanual/app1.pdf


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 6, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> In Colorado Neglect is abuse, and abuse is neglect. Thats why they charge people with abuse/neglect. This is the states definition not mine-
> 
> Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the childs parents, legal guardian,
> or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,
> ...



With her complaints against the State, I doubt the State will charge her with a crime.  That is not to say the mother couldn't have been more aggressive in caring for the boy.  But, in fairness, when I was her age, I wouldn't have known that doctors had samples or medicines.  I didn't know that until I started working as an NP.  No once before that had I nor any of my family been handed a sample drug.  

He didn't die at home.  She did take him to a hospital where he was on a vent for a few days before he died.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > In Colorado Neglect is abuse, and abuse is neglect. Thats why they charge people with abuse/neglect. This is the states definition not mine-
> ...



I think thees days they have more on hand. I have SVT and high blood pressure. I take this crap called nebivolol, now I have superb insurance, and my Dr. still tries to send me out with it. Maybe there are legal issues ib thr state that prevents it, I dont know, Im just a bindelstiff on a message board with an opinion, and you know what they sat about those ! Regardless, it is sad.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 6, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> People make mistakes. I know a couple who moved to a different state whose son started wheezing upon arrival. In a few hours, the son's wheezing grew into strange gasping sounds. From their hotel room, the mother said they needed to get their son immediately to the hospital. The father said it wasn't necessary, the son was just trying to get attention. She grabbed the keys and the kid and headed out the door. He followed along behind, not wishing to stay in a strange hotel by himself. When they got to the er, the doctor told the couple how lucky they were, their son would have been on the verge of dying in less than an hour. As it were, their son's life was saved.
> 
> People who don't know better about allergies are neither stupid nor mean. They just can't tell a real crisis from an emotional issue.
> 
> ...


 
I agree..whether it was negligence or just bad luck on her part, who knows. But regardless, the caseworker and pharmacists are not responsible for that child's death.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 6, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


 Even if she demanded free samples and they denied her..unless the kid was right there in front of them dying, they still are not obligated in any way to give her meds if she's unable to pay.

If the child was in distress and she knew it, then she should have gotten her ass to the ER.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 6, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


The drug company was in the big middle of it. This isn't about what should be, it's about what is in place, and how error killed this child in spite of his mother's concerted efforts to get him medicine that was prescribed and by law, he was entitled to receive. This is a matter for a court of law, not the kangaroo court of public opinion.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 6, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > People make mistakes. I know a couple who moved to a different state whose son started wheezing upon arrival. In a few hours, the son's wheezing grew into strange gasping sounds. From their hotel room, the mother said they needed to get their son immediately to the hospital. The father said it wasn't necessary, the son was just trying to get attention. She grabbed the keys and the kid and headed out the door. He followed along behind, not wishing to stay in a strange hotel by himself. When they got to the er, the doctor told the couple how lucky they were, their son would have been on the verge of dying in less than an hour. As it were, their son's life was saved.
> ...


It is just not that cut-and-dried, imho. If the law entitles an underprivileged, ill child to health benefits, heaven and earth cannot protect the slattern who behind closed doors made the drug unavailable to a helpless, 9-year-old victim of severe asthma, and the pharmacists certainly did turn a deaf ear to the mother's pleas by being the mouthpiece for the screwball number someone did to withhold medication from him through the poorest imaginable record-keeping.


----------



## initforme (Sep 6, 2011)

Our healthcare system is in total shambles.   It needs a major overhaul.   This is an easy one.


----------



## Rozman (Sep 6, 2011)

whitehall said:


> So it seems the single parent just sat back until little Zumati died because Wallgreens refused to fill her prescription?  The mother needed a prescription for motivation for Gods sake. Figure it out while the child is alive.



Heard a good one tonight...
Reverend Al Sharpton has a show on MSNBC
Had a heartbreaking story...
He said he never thought he would ever hear a story like this in America.
A man died from a toothache.
It seems he died because he could not afford the $27.00 for an antibiotic.
All was pissed.

Are you fucking kidding me.
This is my fault he could not afford $27
How many packs of cigarettes does this guy buy a week
How many six packs of beer.
How much spent on the Lottery.

This is my problem now.The guy has become so dependent on Government as the answer for everything...what a shame.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 6, 2011)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoznjbKVnmw&feature=player_detailpage]JOE SOUTH- " WALK A MILE IN MY SHOES " - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## bill5 (Sep 6, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


Congrats, that is easily one of the most idiotic posts I've read in quite some time.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



Ok, but state law, the one I quoted, also says she can be prosecuted for abuse/neglect. And drug companies make drugs, they have nothing to do with county, state, or federal welfare programs. And other then filling out paper work, nothing is said about what the mother did or was doing between the time the boy ran out of meds, and when he died.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 6, 2011)

bill5 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...




Ok, for you simple folk so you under stand.

Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post

Her son's asthma worsened after several months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, which kept the disease manageable.

Now the Law in Colorado concerning abuse/neglect.

Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the child&#8217;s parents, legal guardian,
or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ps/cctf/canmanual/app1.pdf

So, for several months what was she doing ? Lets see if we can find out.

This also happened in 2009. Why did it take two years to file it in court ?

Lucero et al v. City and County of Denver et al
Share |
Plaintiffs: 	Zuton Lucero  and Estate of Zumante Lucero 
Defendants: 	City and County of Denver, Holly Lumpkin, Teresa Long and Annette Williams

Case Number: 	1:2011cv01857
Filed: 	July 18, 2011

Court: 	Colorado District Court
Office: 	Denver         Office
County: 	Denver
Presiding Judge: 	Richard P. Matsch

Nature of Suit: 	Civil Rights - Other Civil Rights
Cause: 	42:1983
Jurisdiction: 	Federal Question        
Jury Demanded By: 	Plaintiff        

Looks like its still on the docket. bill5, keep the emotion out of your post. It makes you look stupid.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 7, 2011)

If the child was legally eligible for the medicine and either medicaid glitches or the pharmacy glitch caused her a denial that resulted in his death..yeah they are legally responsible.  Nurses and doctors can be sued individually as well as hospitals so why not pharmacies when they are neglectful? All it would have taken is them calling medicaid to verify eligibility.  The mother tried several times to get the child´s medication so she was not the one that was neglectful.


----------



## Dude111 (Sep 7, 2011)

Full-Auto said:
			
		

> Sometimes you just need to kick the table over to gather peoples attention.


Sadly the case in many instances!!


Poor boy


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> If the child was legally eligible for the medicine and either medicaid glitches or the pharmacy glitch caused her a denial that resulted in his death..yeah they are legally responsible. Nurses and doctors can be sued individually as well as hospitals so why not pharmacies when they are neglectful? All it would have taken is them calling medicaid to verify eligibility. The mother tried several times to get the child´s medication so she was not the one that was neglectful.


 
How can a denial of benefits CAUSE DEATH???? If the mother had walked into any ER, heck, any doctor's office with the child the child would have been treated.

Death was not caused because she didn't have benefits. Death was caused because the kid had asthma, and she didn't get her into the ER timely. Which sometimes happens with asthma. I know a DA who dropped dead while jogging...he wasn't even 40 years old, he had medical, he just had an attack at an unfortunate time.

Point is, it's not the fault of someone who works administering programs in an office somewhere when a parent is too fucking stupid to take her kid to the ER.


----------



## frazzledgear (Sep 7, 2011)

bill5 said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > The mother should have been indicted for child abuse since stupidity isn't a crime.
> ...



Did someone promise you an error free world or else everyone who makes a mistake will be tossed in prison?  Or just those who work in fields that deal with others, if THEY make mistakes they should go to prison but if you and your buddy janitors make mistakes, that's different?  Only some people are supposed to be perfect at all times?  You ASSUME without any proof whatsoever that three different people in different agencies actually KNOWINGLY chose to make sure this kid didn't have his life-saving medication?  One person DID knowingly decide to let this kid go without his life-saving medicine -but it wasn't any bureaucrat.  It was his MOTHER.  She KNOWINGLY CHOSE to let him go without it.  And SHE belongs in prison for it.  Not rewarded with a big chunk of taxpayer money!

You think those who supposedly blew her off belong in jail -but not HER?  Really?  You are sure quick to give HER the benefit of the doubt in spite of the fact there is NO evidence she contacted ANYONE.  She just SAYS she made phone calls.  You agreed she didn't do the right thing by her own kid and CALLOUSLY dismiss the fact she caused her son's death by failing to provide the MINIMAL care she owed him.  There are 720 hours in a month and even being generous, she spent less than 0.02% of her TIME trying to save his life.  With a few phone calls where she apparently always hit the same dead end over and over.  For MONTHS she did nothing more than this.  Including refusing to just BUY a $20 emergency inhaler out of her own pocket.  Just ONCE.  Refused to go back to the prescribing doctor.  Refused to find a free clinic.  Refused to leave her house and park her ass at the Medicaid office and just refuse to leave until someone fixed the damn mistake.  Refused to get advice or outside help ANYWHERE even though even people on this thread were rapidly able to track down an entire list of different agencies both public and private that could help.  Even people on this thread are more concerned than she was to make the effort to find other sources of help.  She only CLAIMS to have called and left it at that.  Nothing but some phone calls to the same place to reach the same dead end apparently -as if that was enough.   And for people like you -shockingly it really is enough.  This is what you clearly just can't get.  *It isn't enough for NORMAL PEOPLE.*   You are more than willing to excuse this woman for NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING -because as far as YOU are concerned, just doing the EASY thing was enough.  Something the typical liberal really does believe.  But for normal people doing the easy thing when it comes to your kid instead of doing the right thing -doesn't cut it.   While you have already decided to give her every benefit of the doubt about even making those phone calls, I am not so willing to do so and certainly not so quickly with so little support for it -given the fact it is unreasonable to believe three different people in different agencies with three different jobs would have blown her off!  That just did not happen.  

Instead you insist others should not rub salt in the wound?  ARE YOU KIDDING?  Your sympathy is with HER?  Sorry, but mine is with that poor, helpless child dependent on someone who couldn't be bothered to save his life and CHOSE to let him go without his life-saving medications for MONTHS until he died as a result!  And it is NAUSEATING there are people like you who think making a few phone calls was enough -even though you would NEVER have stopped with that just if it were for YOURSELF.  And this woman would never have stopped with that if it were life-saving medication for HERSELF either!  But hey, if its just for a kid, that's WAY more than enough  -for you.

This is a very common error in both private and public insurance.  And it is one both are used to dealing with ALL THE TIME.  Routinely.  And it is one that doesn't take MONTHS to fix -except they first have to know about it to be able to fix it.  If she made those calls and actually talked to someone with the authority to fix this problem -there will be a record of that along with a record of her complaint, a record of why it wasn't fixed -what was missing that would not allow it to be fixed.  These people have to fill out paperwork for everything and every claim and every complaint and every contention that coverage was wrongfully denied.  There is ALWAYS a record of it -IF contact was actually made.  While you might get me to believe ONE of those three people failed in their basic job to properly document it -no way I'm buying three people in different agencies and three different jobs failed to do it.  But I noticed her lawyer isn't claiming to have ANY of that supporting documentation.  Just her unsubstantiated CLAIM she made the calls.  Ok, then her phone records should be able to at least back up that she dialed the right numbers.   Without hearing anything but HER claims you are ready to JAIL other people -but not her. While I haven't seen anything that even hints at anyone's guilt except her own blatant negligence.  Her WORD will mean nothing in court.  She will have to PROVE she even made those phone calls, PROVE that she actually spoke to these people, PROVE that she followed all instructions she may have been given, PROVE these people did NOT do their jobs properly and PROVE they just "blew her off" as you seem to think happened.  *And the biggest hurdle of all -she must PROVE that their failures outweighed her NEGLIGENCE and HER refusal to do all she could have done to save her own kid's life!*  Including just buying the inhaler out of pocket -which she REFUSED TO DO!  Who does that?  Seriously -who does that?   

When you made the comment about hindsight may be 20/20 - you just proved why the TAXPAYER should NOT be on the hook for HER failures.  That is an admission SHE SCREWED UP!   I don't OWE people money when THEY FUCK UP!   And SHE fucked up!   Her kid died because SHE did -that doesn't make her entitled to MY money as a payoff for it!  The bureaucratic screw up didn't kill her kid, bureaucrats didn't kill him, Medicaid didn't kill him, the pharmacist didn't kill him.  (And please GET REAL -she is suing her own caseworker who would NOT have "blown" her off and left her kid without his asthma medication.  NOT going to happen.  These people look for ways to make sure someone is getting every entitlement possible but is going to let her kid go without his asthma med?   And then THREE totally different people did it?  GET REAL.)  His mother had MONTHS to make sure that very common screw up didn't harm him -including just buying that inhaler herself just ONE TIME!  And she didn't do it.  THAT fact outweighs what anyone else supposedly did or did not do and NO ONE else is as responsible for his death as SHE IS.  

Would YOU have paid $20 for YOUR kid's inhaler just ONCE in all those MONTHS?  An inhaler that has between 100 and 250 doses -versus refusing to cough up $20 for ZERO doses.  What is her reason for refusing to pay out of pocket for even ONE inhaler in all those MONTHS?  I'd like to hear that.  Because during all those MONTHS I'm betting she had a $20 bill she chose to spend on something else instead.   Does she drink?  Smoke?  Do drugs?  Did she choose cell phone over land line at a fraction of the cost?  Did she buy any clothes or new shoes during all those MONTHS?  Go to the movies? Get her hair done, colored, permed or straightened, cut?   Buy fast food?  Out to dinner? Go out with friends?  Buy any costume jewelry in all those months?  Bought desserts, candy or snacks at the grocery store in all those months?  I feel pretty safe saying she put her kid's medication WAY down her list of priorities and chose to spend money on something else that she could have foregone just ONCE in all those MONTHS.   Who refuses to pay $20 out of pocket for an emergency inhaler while trying to fix an insurance/Medicaid screw up?  WHO DOES THAT?  Someone who placed more value on ANYTHING-except the medication that could have saved her kid's life.  

Get real on the "authority fear" bullshit -what a joke.  Do you fear your insurance agent too?  Tremble with fear when talking to him or her?  Medicaid is taxpayer paid insurance to cover the medical costs and is manned by people whose sole purpose is to wait on them.  It is NOT like when you were being questioned by cops while holding your friend's stash!  And no one deals with those bureaucrats better than someone used to dealing with them for years.  Pain in the neck -yes.  Something to cause a fear of "authority"?  ROFL -oh sure.  Just like I shake in my boots when renewing my driver's license too.  Oh sure, a mother watching her kid go without his life-saving medication for MONTHS is going to wilt because.....what?  And if she was so fearful of authority, how DID she manage to keep up with those phone calls I wonder?  You know, the ones that tied her up for all of what?  A couple of hours a week?  Maybe?

She CLAIMS to have called several times a week.   So just how many phone calls that were always a dead end would YOU make to get YOUR life-saving medication before deciding it was time to try something else and seek help elsewhere?  How long do you think she would have continued down a dead end path before trying something else if it were HER life-saving medication?  Do you REALLY think she would have been satisfied with making the same phone calls a couple of times a week that got her nowhere -and just done that until she died MONTHS later?  Because I don't.  I also FIRMLY believe if it were HER life-saving medication she would suddenly decide it was worth coughing up the $20 at least ONCE during all those MONTHS while trying to get the screw up fixed.   

*She owed her child NO LESS than what she would have done for herself and she didn't do it.*  Because it wasn't HER life on the line here.  Just her helpless child's life -and THAT clearly did NOT give her the same sense of urgency as if it had been her life on the line.  While with normal, caring parents it would actually have caused an even GREATER sense of urgency than if it had been their own.  A few phone calls is NOT a sense of urgency -if you think that is sufficient and find her actions reasonable -then please do not reproduce and just spare any child from that kind of "caring".   But sure -if you aren't willing to change up your budget for even ONE emergency inhaler in all those MONTHS for your own kid-then sure, doing nothing else but a few dead end phone calls would seem like a big effort to you too no doubt.

Stop defending her and STOP insisting others must sympathize with this woman and her money-making scheme to enrich herself from her own negligence when seriously -an alley cat is a provably better mother.  The notion that poor people have an excuse for failing to do the right thing by their own kids is BULLSHIT.   Poverty does NOT turn someone into a LOUSY PARENT!    If it were Blue Cross/Blue Shield that screwed up and a rich woman she did nothing more than this she would belong in prison!  The fact she uses Medicaid does NOT excuse her negligence.  YOU wouldn't have stopped there if it were YOUR life-saving medication, I wouldn't, my neighbor wouldn't, no one on this thread would have stopped there -and she wouldn't have either.  But she stopped there when it came to her kid.  Because HIS life did not matter to her as much as her own did!   And THAT makes her NEGLIGENT -and that NEGLIGENCE killed that child.   *And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!  Or THEY would be negligent!  But she isn't suing the doctor for malpractice for failing to tell her that, is she?  Doctor's keep extremely detailed records for just that reason! So she ABSOLUTELY KNEW asthma could kill her kid if left untreated!* *And she decided her $20 was better spent on something else -hell, she figured it was better spent on ANYTHING else.* Except to save her child's life.  And NOW she wants taxpayers to reward her for it -when she really does belong in prison?  She can only hope to get a jury filled with lame-asses like you who think we should all be paying this woman far more than we already have been for HER failure to be a decent parent and do what any reasonable person would have done.  Excuse me while I puke.

Anyone with a normal conscience would be eaten with guilt for failing to do the right thing by their kid.  Not viewing it as a money-making opportunity hoping a jury will buy into believing taking a government entitlement somehow transferred her parental responsibilities to someone other than herself.  She belongs in prison LONG before anyone else does.  She KNEW it would kill him and chose to do nothing more energetic to prevent than dial the phone a few times.  BIG FUCKING DEAL.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> If the child was legally eligible for the medicine and either medicaid glitches or the pharmacy glitch caused her a denial that resulted in his death..yeah they are legally responsible.  Nurses and doctors can be sued individually as well as hospitals so why not pharmacies when they are neglectful? All it would have taken is them calling medicaid to verify eligibility.  The mother tried several times to get the child´s medication so she was not the one that was neglectful.



Well if you look at the law suet filing the pharmacy is not named. The pharmacy only sails drugs. You are wrong about that to Read the article. For several months she tried. It has also taken over two years for a law suet to be filed against the welfare workers and the department. Aside from all that, this is the system that will handle our medical needs in the future. This is a sign of things to come. Also notice that it is a civil rights law suet and not wrongful death ? $$$$$ wonder tf she called the lawyer hr if they called her $$$$$


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

bill5 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...




Yeah, facts tend to hurt some times.


----------



## Douger (Sep 7, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!


Fuck'im. 

Please sign the petition to send another 10 billion dollars to IsNtReal.
Shalom.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


You don't think after she went to the pharmacy numerous times to fill a prescription for which her son needed to be healthy, the son died from his human error lack of medicine, this poor creature lost her son, so some cheapskate comes up with the brilliant idea to jail the woman who tried to get help for her son to punish her further?

Double jeopardy, fella.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

Douger said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...


You humiliate your girlfriend by exposing her private area to prove what a jock you are, now you wish to brutalize a poor woman who lost her precious son too?
I'm not buying it.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

frazzledgear said:


> Did someone promise you an error free world or else everyone who makes a mistake will be tossed in prison?  Or just those who work in fields that deal with others, if THEY make mistakes they should go to prison but if you and your buddy janitors make mistakes, that's different?  Only some people are supposed to be perfect at all times?  You ASSUME without any proof whatsoever that three different people in different agencies actually KNOWINGLY chose to make sure this kid didn't have his life-saving medication?  One person DID knowingly decide to let this kid go without his life-saving medicine -but it wasn't any bureaucrat.  It was his MOTHER.  She KNOWINGLY CHOSE to let him go without it.  And SHE belongs in prison for it.  Not rewarded with a big chunk of taxpayer money!
> 
> You think those who supposedly blew her off belong in jail -but not HER?  Really?  You are sure quick to give HER the benefit of the doubt in spite of the fact there is NO evidence she contacted ANYONE.  She just SAYS she made phone calls.  You agreed she didn't do the right thing by her own kid and CALLOUSLY dismiss the fact she caused her son's death by failing to provide the MINIMAL care she owed him.  There are 720 hours in a month and even being generous, she spent less than 0.02% of her TIME trying to save his life.  With a few phone calls where she apparently always hit the same dead end over and over.  For MONTHS she did nothing more than this.  Including refusing to just BUY a $20 emergency inhaler out of her own pocket.  Just ONCE.  Refused to go back to the prescribing doctor.  Refused to find a free clinic.  Refused to leave her house and park her ass at the Medicaid office and just refuse to leave until someone fixed the damn mistake.  Refused to get advice or outside help ANYWHERE even though even people on this thread were rapidly able to track down an entire list of different agencies both public and private that could help.  Even people on this thread are more concerned than she was to make the effort to find other sources of help.  She only CLAIMS to have called and left it at that.  Nothing but some phone calls to the same place to reach the same dead end apparently -as if that was enough.   And for people like you -shockingly it really is enough.  This is what you clearly just can't get.   *It isn't enough for NORMAL PEOPLE.*   You are more than willing to excuse this woman for NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING -because as far as YOU are concerned, just doing the EASY thing was enough.  Something the typical liberal really does believe.  But for normal people doing the easy thing when it comes to your kid instead of doing the right thing -doesn't cut it.   While you have already decided to give her every benefit of the doubt about even making those phone calls, I am not so willing to do so and certainly not so quickly with so little support for it -given the fact it is unreasonable to believe three different people in different agencies with three different jobs would have blown her off!  That just did not happen.
> 
> ...


 
 Goodness, gracious, great balls o' fire, dear. You have furnished a passel of misinformation to emphasize the diminution of a conscience in the United States. :eyeroll:


----------



## bill5 (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Ok, for you simple folk so you under stand.


...said the pot.   



> Now the Law in Colorado concerning abuse/neglect.
> 
> Any case in which a child is a child in need of services because of the childs parents, legal guardian, or custodian fails to take the same actions to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care,


 Yes we heard you the first time.  It's still irrelevant because SHE TOOK ACTION.  Numerous times.  



> So, for several months what was she doing ?


Did you even read the article?




> This also happened in 2009. Why did it take two years to file it in court ?


I don't know.  Do you?  Of course not.  And that's relevant because-?



> bill5, keep the emotion out of your post. It makes you look stupid.


Try to keep stupid statements out of yours.  It makes you look far more stupid.  There was/is precious little emotion in my stating so; rather a statement of IMO rather obvious fact.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



No not really. A pharmacy is ware you buy drugs. They only sell drugs. They have nothing to do with it. Thats why there not named in the law suet.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

bill5 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, for you simple folk so you under stand.
> ...


 
Try bringing some facts with yours.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 7, 2011)

frazzledgear said:


> Did someone promise you an error free world or else everyone who makes a mistake will be tossed in prison?


No, I simply have this crazy idea that people should be held accountable in this world - doubly so when it costs an innocent person their life.  I know that's a terribly radical and unpopular viewpoint these days, but that doesn't make it any less logical IMO.

Sorry I didn't read the rest of your extremely lengthy post; don't have time or frankly inclination offhand as I suspect it's a very long way of basically going "she's at fault, not the people who screwed up and refused her son the medication!"  Agree to disagree.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

bill5 said:


> frazzledgear said:
> 
> 
> > Did someone promise you an error free world or else everyone who makes a mistake will be tossed in prison?
> ...



You tend not to read much. You still have not brought any facts to the thread. Only emotion.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



How was the drug company in the middle of it? Nothing in the story said they were ever contacted. They probably didn't know anything about it until the story hit the media.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...



They are not even included in the court action. This is a case ware a lawyer encouraged the woman to sue. I posted the filing all parties are named.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



I agree. It's an ambulance chaser and a do nothing mother looking for a payday. I'm just curious as to how freedombecki thinks the drug company was involved in the boy not getting the meds.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



Don't know. Same with the Pharmacy. Imagine if they just gave over the drugs and the boy died any way.


----------



## kwc57 (Sep 7, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



If only his mother hadn't relied on the government to meet her medical needs.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

kwc57 said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...



Says in the article "several months" without the meds.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


Thank you, Rat in the Hat. The thread parent opened this one with this link that I gathered a certain impression from and have based my responses on:



> *A Denver mother whose son died after she  was unable to fill his multiple prescriptions because pharmacists kept  telling her he was not eligible for Medicaid  even though records  proved he was  has filed a lawsuit against the city and county of  Denver.*
> Zuton Lucero-Mills said she called Denver County Human Services  several times a week in the spring and summer of 2009 after* she tried to  get 9-year-old son Zumante's asthma medications at Walgreens and was  told he wasn't eligible for Medicaid.*
> *No one resolved the computer glitch. Most of Lucero-Mills' calls weren't returned.*



That's how I concluded the pharmacy was in the big middle of it and refused to provide the correct medications for the victim, her son. According to what this says, it was Walgreen's who told her that her son was ineligible for Medicaid. That makes Walgreen's a spokesperson in behalf of a government that screwed up big time.

The above link continues with the following assessment:


> *Her son's asthma worsened after several  months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, which kept the  disease manageable.*
> The boy died in July 2009. He fainted at his home after telling his  mother he couldn't breathe and then died a few days later at Children's  Hospital when he was taken off a ventilator.
> State investigators later found *the boy died of complications from  his condition, which was covered by a state health plan that should have  paid for the prescription medication he needed.*
> "I want this not to be the story of anyone else's family," Lucero-Mills said. "Something has to change."



That's why I'm on this poor woman's side. If you have ever seen a child suffering with mild wheezes and it becomes an issue of him not being able to do more than gasp for air, in spite of his young age, he can become the victim of a heart attack. My friend's son was on the verge of death, she was surprised to find out, when she took him to the hospital er with just such a complaint. Both she and her husband have above-average intelligence, and they had no idea how close to death he was, just a gut instinct.

This never should have come to an issue of why a child in America could not get care. He was eligible all along, and in spite of the mother's plea, the pharmacy told her at each time she visited he was ineligible.

That's why I think pharmacies if they are speaking in behalf of a government agency might consider going proactive in the behalf of a person could die if the government agency persisted in denying the child care.

And I think a whole lot more, but I have no proof. 

People do not know what the hell they're dealing with the first time they see their child gasping for air. In actuality, a sane, highly intelligent person might think a good-natured child is pretending, but just as real, that kid is gasping for his very life.

Asthma can fool even a rocket scientist. That's what my friend's husband was.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> You humiliate your girlfriend by exposing her private area to prove what a jock you are, now you wish to brutalize a poor woman who lost her precious son too?
> I'm not buying it.


Please do not feed the trolls.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



Oh yes, the Walgreens pharmacy could have done more in this situation. But they are not the drug company who made the drug, only the middleman in selling it.

And I also wonder why mom's suit didn't include the pharmacy.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> bill5 said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...


I was going to respond with "try actually addressing my points," but realized what a foolish request that would be, since you've clearly demonstrated you cannot and not are capable of a rational discussion/debate, at least not on this topic.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> bill5 said:
> 
> 
> > frazzledgear said:
> ...


Your responses only get more idiotic and childish as you go, which speaks for itself.  I'm not replying to you further until you actually say something worth replying to.  I'll hold my breath waiting.


----------



## boedicca (Sep 7, 2011)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> > Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> ...





If the moron who started this thread had actually read the article, he would have seen that it was three government employees who denied the child health care coverage.

Now, multiply that by the entire population being subjected to the ObamaCare panels, and think of the implications.


----------



## bill5 (Sep 7, 2011)

Oh yay, I was wondering when we'd get around to digressing this into a wingnut cat fight.  Took longer than usual.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


Lawyers worth their salt generally go with information upon which they can base a case. A poor person calling from several pay phones when she has an issue may have zero records, and pair that with a language barrier issue, that gets compounded. People in one country have a tendency to disbelieve foreigners, which may be another consideration the lawyer has to deal with. If he wins his case on factual information, he doesn't have to get into the lugubrious details of she-said he-said, and vice versa. That's just my guess. 

Funny how one bit of info can go unnoticed by one, but clobbers another directly in the face. I wouldn't have said anything here, except for my dear friend whose son was so sick years ago, and she couldn't appreciate it until the doctor told her exactly what his chances were and how getting him to the hospital timely prevented him from whatever it is they call it when the brain doesn't get enough air and dies. Anoxia? (just guessing off the top of my head)


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



Had the pharmacy handed out the drugs, and the boy died any way, they would then have been named in the law suet, and liable. It is a shitty messed up deal, the boy should NOT have died in this country, in this day and age from asthma. We agree on that. I also think we can agree on the fact that some goof ball at a desk messed up causing the boys death. All the rest is arm chair quarter backing about who should have done what. This article was posted (I assume) to support universal health care, instead, it foretells the things to come when bureaucrats get thrown into the mix between a doctor, and patient.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

bill5 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > bill5 said:
> ...



You have brought no facts to support what you say. Every post you have made has onle been made to wind folks up. Bring facts, or blow it out your ass.

Definition for internet troll:
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, , or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

bill5 said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > bill5 said:
> ...



Whats your point ?


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


I don't know the position of the person who posted this information, NGSampson. I did my best to post within the parameters of the story and hearing my friend whose son had a similar issue tell of it. and but for the grace of God, did not end up going to a funeral, got a refillable prescription along with a stern warning from a physician in the er her first week in a new state. My thinking is she was probably insured, considering her husband's work and employer, not to mention her resources.

I don't have to have an experience if my best friend went through a family ordeal to get her dying son to care on time. I've lost touch with her, and don't know if her son actually suffered long-term issues, he was so young back when they arrived at the same town I lived in and we were friends from the start at the church we both attended. He seemed ok for the next 3 years we lived there.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



The fact that your friend had insurance most likely helped allot. The attack there child suffered may have been common in that area.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 7, 2011)

And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler! 

Are you positive about that? My son had RSV and I have asthma..my doctor never once told me asthma could kill me...in fact, he told me it very rarely does cause life threatening illness. So they don't always do what you say and asthma medicine is EXPENSIVE extremely so, it is also an approved medication through medicaid.  If she was denied her medication because of an error at the medicaid office that is why they were named and not the pharmacy.  If the pharmacy was too lazy to pick up the phone and find out then they are also neglectful and I am not their attorney so I don't know the details of why they are not being sued, perhaps they are witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff? Also, why should a woman be charged with neglect when she went to the pharmacy and she was denied that medication? She had the insurance..and while it was medicaid.being poor is not a crime and it is covered under medcaid so yeah I would say they were neglectful moreso than she was.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 7, 2011)

Clerical errors are not the same as murder.

next.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> 
> Are you positive about that? My son had RSV and I have asthma..my doctor never once told me asthma could kill me...in fact, he told me it very rarely does cause life threatening illness. So they don't always do what you say and asthma medicine is EXPENSIVE extremely so, it is also an approved medication through medicaid.  If she was denied her medication because of an error at the medicaid office that is why they were named and not the pharmacy.  If the pharmacy was too lazy to pick up the phone and find out then they are also neglectful and I am not their attorney so I don't know the details of why they are not being sued, perhaps they are witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff? Also, why should a woman be charged with neglect when she went to the pharmacy and she was denied that medication? She had the insurance..and while it was medicaid.being poor is not a crime and it is covered under medcaid so yeah I would say they were neglectful moreso than she was.



There are the "several months" in between. The pharmacy had to have been on the phone to make the determination that her meds weren't covered. The pharmacy would only have trouble if human services told them she was approved for the meds and they did not give them to her. And the law sute is a civel right case, not a wrongful death law suet.

    civil rightsplural of civ·il rights
    Noun: The rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality.  More »
    Dictionary.com - Answers.com - Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary

How were they violated ? we dont know. The article leaves allot out.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> Clerical errors are not the same as murder.
> 
> next.



True 100%. And this is the result of adding people to the process of receiving medical treatment. If anything, it points out that universal health care will fail, and increase thees type of law suet.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> 
> Are you positive about that? My son had RSV and I have asthma..my doctor never once told me asthma could kill me...in fact, he told me it very rarely does cause life threatening illness. So they don't always do what you say and asthma medicine is EXPENSIVE extremely so, it is also an approved medication through medicaid.  If she was denied her medication because of an error at the medicaid office that is why they were named and not the pharmacy.  If the pharmacy was too lazy to pick up the phone and find out then they are also neglectful and I am not their attorney so I don't know the details of why they are not being sued, perhaps they are witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff? Also, why should a woman be charged with neglect when she went to the pharmacy and she was denied that medication? She had the insurance..and while it was medicaid.being poor is not a crime and it is covered under medcaid so yeah I would say they were neglectful moreso than she was.


I checked up on this, Xchel. By far, most people who get asthma have the type that is non life-threatening, because for some reason, their body's response is enough to thwart the disease down to nothing. Maybe one in a hundred people who have asthma get into a life-threatening situation, I didn't find stats on it. That's why treatment is so essential. If a person was mildly exposed for over 10 days, and his body developed an allergy to it at any time in the past, his first obvious reaction may be a situation in which he is near death.

There are just too many factors for us laypersons to know about with re to asthma. The best we can do is to tell sufferers or their parents to get help and try to deal with the shortness-of-breath issue first. 

Respiratory diseases are a kind of health crap shoot. A touch of bronchitis can quickly mutate into full-blown pneumonia that can kill a healthy man in just a couple of days. Just look at what happened to Jim Henson, creator of the Muppets and Sesame Street collaborator. He thought he had a cold. By the time he realized it was serious, even the hospital couldn't save him from the sudden death he experienced.

Life is shortened by a lot of things people don't understand. But when someone kills people by computer glitch or negligence, we should hesitate with all brakes on 4 wheels to point a finger at the parent who did all she could do to help her child. 

This mother not only has to deal with the grievous loss of a child, resting on her shoulders in a lawsuit none of us wants to hear about, is the whether-or-not other people have to go through the same issue in the US of A.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 7, 2011)

I think that mother is probably a member of this family:

Family members left elderly relative to die, then hid her body, prosecutors say


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> 
> Are you positive about that? My son had RSV and I have asthma..my doctor never once told me asthma could kill me...in fact, he told me it very rarely does cause life threatening illness. So they don't always do what you say and asthma medicine is EXPENSIVE extremely so, it is also an approved medication through medicaid.  If she was denied her medication because of an error at the medicaid office that is why they were named and not the pharmacy.  If the pharmacy was too lazy to pick up the phone and find out then they are also neglectful and I am not their attorney so I don't know the details of why they are not being sued, perhaps they are witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff? Also, why should a woman be charged with neglect when she went to the pharmacy and she was denied that medication? She had the insurance..and while it was medicaid.being poor is not a crime and it is covered under medcaid so yeah I would say they were neglectful moreso than she was.



Status asthmaticus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RSV =/= Asthma.  

So, let's go down the basics of ACLS with the ABCDE, Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Displacement, Exposure stepwise approach.

We can stop at the first, and most important step A:  Airway.  Asthma causes bronchoconstriction of the airway which is why people get all wheezy.  When people have to fight to breath, eventually their diaphraghms fatigue out, they go into respiratory failure and die.  

If you come into the ER and are struggling for air and can't speak in full sentences, you just earned yourself an intubation and possible time on the ventaltor.  

So, yes, asthma kills people.  It's part of that whole breathing and airway thing.  

That's why albuterol is called a "rescue inhaler" and asthma is graded from mild, to moderate, to severe (and therapy is changed) based on how many times a person has to use their inhaler.  

Note, this is not directed at you, but rather some of the dumbfucks on this thread who think that denying an albuterol inhaler or salumeterol or adviar or whatever to a child with severe asthma is something you can mess around with.  I guess you can make the argument that this mother could have prostituted herself out to get her son's meds.

But pragmatically, someone fucked up.  Our civil litigation service exists to punish non-criminal fuck ups.

Some woman's child is dead due to a clerical error.  I hope someone pays appropriately for it.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> I checked up on this, Xchel. By far, most people who get asthma have the type that is non life-threatening, because for some reason, their body's response is enough to thwart the disease down to nothing. Maybe one in a hundred people who have asthma get into a life-threatening situation, I didn't find stats on it. That's why treatment is so essential. If a person was mildly exposed for over 10 days, and his body developed an allergy to it at any time in the past, his first obvious reaction may be a situation in which he is near death.
> 
> There are just too many factors for us laypersons to know about with re to asthma. The best we can do is to tell sufferers or their parents to get help and try to deal with the shortness-of-breath issue first.
> 
> ...



Not all asthma is created equal.  







and the treatment is not the same.  For mild intermittant, you can use a short acting B2 agonist (albuterol), for mild persistent you add a low dose inhaled steroid, for moderate you add a long term b-agonist like salmeterol, for severe asthma you add daily PO steroids.

So, the disease of "asthma" can range from a simple disease where the child or adult has to carry an inhaler or a severe disease where they have to carry an inhaler and then use 3-4 additional treatments.  

Furthermore, the newest evidence shows that (like it's obstructive lung pathologic cousin, COPD, asthma causes progressively worsening lung function and loss of lung function that can't be regained.  

It's nothing to full around with.  For the knuckleheads on here, if asthma were this totally benign condition in children, obviously it wouldn't be covered under medicaid, now would it? 

There was no reason this child shouldn't have had his medications other than an error.  This woman is right to want legal remedy.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...



Are you able to vagal yourself down or have you ever gotten the adenosine bolus?  

That looks particularly miserable.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> ...


Thanks, Geaux, for cutting to the chase and delivering an accurate diagnosis of where the fault lies. It's so important that people who do clerical work in human clinical health issues have some semblance of knowledge on the seriousness of the illness represented on paper and a little pharmacology knowledge as well. Competency in the healthcare field is paramount, no matter which rung of the ladder one may find him- or herself. Private of public health care? I can't say, but if it can't deliver competence from top to bottom, it may not be the best system, and that is for another thread.

This thread is about the one boy who died, his mother's loss, and who caused the loss. I think Geaux and a couple of others came to the correct conclusion.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> How can a denial of benefits CAUSE DEATH???? If the mother had walked into any ER, heck, any doctor's office with the child the child would have been treated.
> 
> Death was not caused because she didn't have benefits. Death was caused because the kid had asthma, and she didn't get her into the ER timely. Which sometimes happens with asthma. I know a DA who dropped dead while jogging...he wasn't even 40 years old, he had medical, he just had an attack at an unfortunate time.
> 
> Point is, it's not the fault of someone who works administering programs in an office somewhere when a parent is too fucking stupid to take her kid to the ER.



That's some bizarre logic right there.  The kid was denied his meds, and because of that went into respiratory failure, but he would have been saved if he had made it to the ED in time?  Well, no shit.  He wouldn't have had to go to the ED if he had his meds.

It's like saying, the guy got shot seven times and died of shock, but if they would have gotten him to the ED in time, they probably could have saved him!

I think you would be hard pressed to find a physician who would advocate medical resuscitation in the ED versus prevention of the underlying pathology.  

I am going to go out on a limb and guess you haven't spent much time in EDs have you?


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > I checked up on this, Xchel. By far, most people who get asthma have the type that is non life-threatening, because for some reason, their body's response is enough to thwart the disease down to nothing. Maybe one in a hundred people who have asthma get into a life-threatening situation, I didn't find stats on it. That's why treatment is so essential. If a person was mildly exposed for over 10 days, and his body developed an allergy to it at any time in the past, his first obvious reaction may be a situation in which he is near death.
> ...


Thanks for your eagle eye in picking out what happened, Geaux, and making all of us here a little smarter than we were before you showed up. Most of us laypersons, if we hadn't known someone with a serious lung issue caused by this heinous issue, could nail it so well. Kudos.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

Quote- Note, this is not directed at you, but rather some of the dumbfucks on this thread who think that denying an albuterol inhaler or salumeterol or adviar or whatever to a child with severe asthma is something you can mess around with. I guess you can make the argument that this mother could have prostituted herself out to get her son's meds. QUOTE

Fron the article-

"Her son's asthma worsened after several months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, which kept the disease manageable".

No mention of the other drugs. here is a quote from another article about the same thing.

After two weeks, his benefits were reinstated.

"I did get it worked out, finally," Tafoya said. "But it's because I called every day and I know what I'm doing."

Paperwork maze endangering Colorado Medicaid patients - The Denver Post

the difference between the two is one got the meds in two weeks after the problem was solved. The reoccurring theme here is the government system failed. This is an example of how it will go under Obama care.

And more on Zumante from the article above-.

"The boy still had an inhaler and nebulizer, but being without Advair was creating a life-threatening situation that his mother didn't recognize until it was too late."


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> ...


 
The child isn't dead because of a clerical error. The child is dead because the mother didn't have the sense to pursue treatment if it wasn't handed to her with a "thank you for taking this free medicine" comment from the pharmacy.

So the child is dead because he #1, had asthma, and #2, had a stupid or lazy mother.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > How can a denial of benefits CAUSE DEATH???? If the mother had walked into any ER, heck, any doctor's office with the child the child would have been treated.
> ...


 
The kid was denied meds over a period of months.

A reasonable person would have found an alternative route to get his meds to him. Even if it meant getting a job and paying for them (I know, shocking).

In the end, if anybody bears the blame, it's mom.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



The entire situation is sad.  I can't see how pharmaceutical companies are responsible, but I think the paper pushers are.  I am sure the mother could have been more proactive but I don't think she is 100% at fault.  Her son was on advair which is a inhaled steroid and salmeterol so he most likely had moderate persistent asthma.  

With asthma patients, a crucial question to ask is always "Have you ever been intubated?  How many times?" as this is an indication of prognosis and acuity.  However, this kid might have never had respiratory failure.  It just takes once.  Perhaps the mother didn't realize that with something like asthma an exacerbation could come at any time and she needed to beg, borrow, or steal to get the meds.  It's not reasonable to expect her to possess the fund of knowledge of a medical professional.

Considering some of the dumb-fuck statements on this thread, it's obvious she's on par with several posters who have commented on it.  

The situation is sad.  The kid should have gotten his advair, he didn't due to pure clerical error.

Someone is legally negligent (not criminally negligent).  It doesn't sound like the Dr.  and it's probably not the pharmacy, though you'd think the assholes at the pharmacy would have done more to get to the bottom of a situation like this.  I watch my mentors pull all sorts of wazoo schemes to get people the meds they need.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Sunshine said:
> ...



Dont know what any of that is, the drugs keep it under control pretty good. When it happens my Dr told me  to bear down as if taking a dump, try drinking a very cold glass of water, or massaging the artery in the neck. If all of that fails, then I get a shot. If the meds dont, or stop helping then they will burn the nerve that controls the electrical impulse that tells my heart to beat, as the nerve in my heart is deformed. After that, at some point it means a pace maker will be needed.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> I think that mother is probably a member of this family:
> 
> Family members left elderly relative to die, then hid her body, prosecutors say



I think that the family of Mary Coleman of Madison, Wisconsin, is most likely completely unrelated to the family of Zuton Lucero-Mills. Don't tempt me to tell you to go stand in the corner and shut up.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Quote- Note, this is not directed at you, but rather some of the dumbfucks on this thread who think that denying an albuterol inhaler or salumeterol or adviar or whatever to a child with severe asthma is something you can mess around with. I guess you can make the argument that this mother could have prostituted herself out to get her son's meds. QUOTE
> 
> Fron the article-
> 
> ...



Again, it's kind of tough to compare two different patient situations.  One person was more aggressive because she "Knew what she was doing".  The other obviously wasn't as adept at navigating the nightmare of Medicaid.

Comparing this to Obama care is like apples and footballs.  This happened under medicaid.  

As for the last:  Of course.  The kid most likely had moderate asthma.  Albuterol isn't going to cut it for that.  You can look at the chart and then read the stepwise treatment plan.  You can't treat moderate asthma with albuterol and a nebulizer.  You need the inhaled corticosteroids and long acting B2 agonist, which are combined in advair.  

Obviously this mother didn't realize her son was reaching a crisis.  She could have been more proactive, but it's not reasonable to expect her to have the knowledge of a health care provider or how to work the medicaid system.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> [
> The child isn't dead because of a clerical error. The child is dead because the mother didn't have the sense to pursue treatment if it wasn't handed to her with a "thank you for taking this free medicine" comment from the pharmacy.
> 
> So the child is dead because he #1, had asthma, and #2, had a stupid or lazy mother.



Really, you think that is what they put on the autopsy report?

Cause of Death:  Respiratory failure due to acute asthmatic exacerbation.  Mode of death:  Stupid/lazy mother.

You are a real gem.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > koshergrl said:
> ...



Wait, I thought she was at fault for not getting him to the ED in time?  You should make up your mind.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Quote- Note, this is not directed at you, but rather some of the dumbfucks on this thread who think that denying an albuterol inhaler or salumeterol or adviar or whatever to a child with severe asthma is something you can mess around with. I guess you can make the argument that this mother could have prostituted herself out to get her son's meds. QUOTE
> ...



The point is people screw up. Its not a matter of which program it is, medi this or CHP that some one will fuck it up every time, and the odds in a mistake happening increases with every person you put between a patient and a doctor.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



The case was just filed. Its a civel rights against the government. Nothing will come out until its settled.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...



Yeah, those are vagal manuevers.  SVT is one of the few arrhythmia that you can convert without medications or electric cardioversion.  If that fails, you have to get to a hospital and get an adenosine bolus, which basically stops your heart for a split second and apparently feels like shit.  

Glad to hear the meds work.  I would have guessed you had Wolff-Parkison-White Syndrome, but it sounds like you have some sort of vagal nerve pathology.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...


You think? Last time I was at my doctor's office they had a sign hanging on the wall, "We are no longer calling prescriptions in to Walgreens. If they're your pharmacy we will write out a prescription for you to carry."

So apparently this case is not the first in which a patient encountered a non-professional person at the pharmaceutical counter. Even the lawyer isn't touching the pharmacy, but imho, they need a reminder from someone someday who does have written proof they better either get *in* the public health service business or get out of it, one or the other.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



Now you see, I was hoping to remain in ignorant bliss about all that.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



Some physicians are starting to get pissed off at pharmacies in certain communities.  For example, recently, some pharmacies decided to stop carrying a certain type of OCP because it can be used as an "abortificant" and the pharmacist was morally opposed.  That's his right.  It's also the right of the Drs. to saw "screw you" to those pharmacies and send their patient's elsewhere.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 7, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > NGSamson said:
> ...



LOL.  I was on the sideline of a high school football game during my rural medicine month with the team doc and a player veered off onto the sideline and was white.  We were all like "what the hell".  He sat down and did vagal movements and converted himself back into a normal rhythm.  Turns out he had SVT too and had gone to a cardiologist on the side to get cleared.  The team doc was like:  "Well, I would have told him to do the same thing, but it would have been nice to know".  

Anyways, he got back in the game.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 7, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> ...



RSV does not equal asthma...RSV is a virus that attacks young children's lungs. It is called Respiratory Syncytial Virus.  THERE IS NO CURE for RSV. 60% of children in the US become infected with RSV so clearly we know that RSV does not equal asthma.  However, sometimes in rare instances where it progresses to bronchiolitis like my son's did and then pneumonia*his did not continue to pneumonia* it can lead to death but not often....

I take Advair, you know what Advair costs? Mine costs about $250 for one disc.  Advair is a maintenence med not a prevention med..it won't stop an asthma attack.  Albuteral or Salbutemol or Combivent are what you use for that.  Costs for that run between $30 and $60 or more. So we are talking in excess of $300 for 2 medications for this child PER MONTH.


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...


Xchel, we have a thread on a new antiviral drug I remember that was around here a week or so ago. Here is the link. You may want your son on the list or not, except it may still be in the testing stage. It sounds promising. Oh, wouldn't it be good if there were a cure for your dear son?


----------



## Xchel (Sep 7, 2011)

freedom, thanks but it wouldn't matter about that since we aren't in the US. I am an ex pat living in  Honduras right now..our goal is returning to the US before the drug war gets anymore hot here, but that may not work out in the very near future..


----------



## freedombecki (Sep 7, 2011)

Xchel said:


> freedom, thanks but it wouldn't matter about that since we aren't in the US. I am an ex pat living in  Honduras right now..our goal is returning to the US before the drug war gets anymore hot here, but that may not work out in the very near future..


My prayers for your safety and health. There's some plant out there in the jungle that may be a cure. We just don't have enough scientists on it. I do know there are a number of new innovations on the front lines in bio cures for truly bad things.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 7, 2011)

well I am not exactly in the jungle but I am close to the rain forests.  I live in San Pedro Sula so there is a huge city around me..about 2 million people probably.


----------



## CaféAuLait (Sep 8, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> What doesn't jive is some did not go to the link and read what actually little boy.
> 
> What happened to him was death by computer glitch at Walgreen's.
> 
> ...



A Computer glitch at Walgreens? There are a ton of Pharmacys in Denver. Why not use another?  There are other avenues. Why not take him to the ER to assure he had his medication? A doctor office could not provide samples?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> bill5 said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



She also could, and should, have taken her sorry ass down to the Medicaid office, demanded to speak to her caseworker in person, and then refused to leave until the problem was straightened out and she was certain that her kid's medicine was waiting at the pharmacy to be picked up.

One does NOT spend months making phone call after phone call and shrugging about "They never call me back" when life-threatening illnesses are at stake.  Hell, I wouldn't do it at all, just as a matter of principle.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> freedombecki said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



Why would they be?  They didn't do anything wrong.  All they can do is act on the information being conveyed to their computers.  The glitch was apparently in the government's computer, not the Walgreen's computer.

What, precisely, did you expect Walgreen's to do?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2011)

Xchel said:


> And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> 
> Are you positive about that? My son had RSV and I have asthma..my doctor never once told me asthma could kill me...in fact, he told me it very rarely does cause life threatening illness. So they don't always do what you say and asthma medicine is EXPENSIVE extremely so, it is also an approved medication through medicaid.  If she was denied her medication because of an error at the medicaid office that is why they were named and not the pharmacy.  If the pharmacy was too lazy to pick up the phone and find out then they are also neglectful and I am not their attorney so I don't know the details of why they are not being sued, perhaps they are witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff? Also, why should a woman be charged with neglect when she went to the pharmacy and she was denied that medication? She had the insurance..and while it was medicaid.being poor is not a crime and it is covered under medcaid so yeah I would say they were neglectful moreso than she was.



I'm sorry to hear that your doctor is incompetent, but doctors are actually required by law to inform you of all the possible side effects, permutations, what-have-you of an illness and its treatment, however unlikely they are.  I've had my doctor warn me about stuff, followed by the statement, "Not that there's ever been a single documented case of it happening, but it's still a theoretical possibility, so we have to tell you."

I don't think it takes a lot of brains to figure out that being unable to breathe = not good, though.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 8, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > And she absolutely knew an asthma attack could KILL HIM -because every doctor ALWAYS makes sure parents know that asthma can kill their child if not treated or if the child is without an emergency inhaler!
> ...



I dunno if the pharmacy tried to call the Medicaid office or not.  If, as seems to be the case, reaching an actual useful human being at the Medicaid office was just shy of impossible, I can't see that it would have helped much if they did.  They certainly don't have the time and resources to devote hours or even days to trying to reach someone for that one patient out of thousands, even leaving aside the fact that doing so is properly HER job, not theirs.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 8, 2011)

Doctors do not have any obligation to inform you of all of the symptoms of your illness..that is your job..their job is to dx you with your illness and treat you..not tell you what might happen to you.  It does not make a dr incompetent to say oh asthma is going to kill you...especially if it isn't going to...as another poster pointed out...not all asthma is created equal...and btw, I spent 4 years pre med so I know what I am talking about.  One of your first classes that you are given is MALPRACTICE LAW.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 8, 2011)

Xchel said:


> RSV does not equal asthma...RSV is a virus that attacks young children's lungs. It is called Respiratory Syncytial Virus.  THERE IS NO CURE for RSV. 60% of children in the US become infected with RSV so clearly we know that RSV does not equal asthma.  However, sometimes in rare instances where it progresses to bronchiolitis like my son's did and then pneumonia*his did not continue to pneumonia* it can lead to death but not often....
> 
> I take Advair, you know what Advair costs? Mine costs about $250 for one disc.  Advair is a maintenence med not a prevention med..it won't stop an asthma attack.  Albuteral or Salbutemol or Combivent are what you use for that.  Costs for that run between $30 and $60 or more. So we are talking in excess of $300 for 2 medications for this child PER MONTH.



Thank you.  I know all of this.  To include how expensive advair and combivent are.  I think this is tragic and some paper pusher fucked up and now this kid is gone.  It's awful.  No one can, at this point, afford those drugs on their own.  Hopefully they will be generic soon and reasonable.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 8, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Doctors do not have any obligation to inform you of all of the symptoms of your illness..that is your job..their job is to dx you with your illness and treat you..not tell you what might happen to you.  It does not make a dr incompetent to say oh asthma is going to kill you...especially if it isn't going to...as another poster pointed out...not all asthma is created equal...and btw, I spent 4 years pre med so I know what I am talking about.  One of your first classes that you are given is MALPRACTICE LAW.



Really?  That's strange.  I am a fourth year medical student and have yet to have a single malpractice class.  Doesn't look like I will get any instruction on that before I graduate too.  Pre-med classes don't even really touch what you learn in medical school.  I mean, as entertaining as basic chemistry, organic chemistry, biochemistry, physics, and biology are, they aren't terribly applicable to medical school.  Those are just considered to be the basic pre-med science foundation to do medical science.  If you did physiology and anatomy that is more relevant, but pathology is where medicine starts to become medicine and you really learn medicine in your clinical years.  (And then spend the rest of your life learning it).  

No offense, but your statement is a little silly.  My wife is an attorney and did med-mal for a while so I am at least familiar enough with it to know that you can't grasp the nuance of the law in one class, even med mal.  It would most likely resort to a semester of scare tactics IMO.   

The notion of negligence means there is no "hard and fast rule" about what a doctor has to tell a patient.  I agree that a physician should have informed this woman that her son could possibly go into respiratory distress without his medications.  In fact, he might have.  If he didn't, though, that doesn't necessarily equate to negligence or malpractice.  A person could make that claim in court, but I don't think it would go anywhere.  A "reasonable person" should know that being without asthma medication is a very, very bad thing.  

Just my thoughts on the matter.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 8, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> ]
> I'm sorry to hear that your doctor is incompetent, but doctors are actually required by law to inform you of all the possible side effects, permutations, what-have-you of an illness and its treatment, however unlikely they are.  I've had my doctor warn me about stuff, followed by the statement, "Not that there's ever been a single documented case of it happening, but it's still a theoretical possibility, so we have to tell you."
> 
> I don't think it takes a lot of brains to figure out that being unable to breathe = not good, though.



What law is that?

If that were the case, a doctors visit would take six hours.  There is some common sense for certain things.  I think a person should be told about angioedema before being put on an ACEI, but I would bet that most physicians don't tell them about it.  I would lay odds that a significant number of people on this board are on lisinopril (or some other drug that ends in -pril) and don't know about angioedema or that a dry cough is a common side effect of these drugs but is not an "allergic reaction".  There simply isn't enough time in the day to cover every single possible adverse effect with every drug.  At best, they might get a handout that they most probably won't read.  Hell, most of the population doesn't know the difference between a true allergy and a simple adverse effect.  

Your doctor it sounds like is practicing good medicine.  That doesn't mean it's a "standard of care" and in really busy clinics, you are struggling to simply get everyone seen/treated in time.

There is also a more cynical reason:  reimbursement.  Doctors are not reimbursed for practicing preventive medicine.  And the second people bring up the notion of doing that, the right has conniption fits.  The right expects a physician to give away their "product", which is their medical knowledge and expertise for free.  It's bewildering.  Maybe if we started reimbursing primary care physicians for their time in doing prevention, we'd have better outcomes.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 8, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



How about picking up a phone and trying to call the Medicaid office to see if the child was covered? Doctors, pharmacies and hospitals probably have a different avenue they follow to find out about coverage that the average person does not.

When I got laid off, and my insurance switched to COBRA, there was a gap when we were not showing as being covered. My pharmacist called the insurance company, and didn't hang up until she was assured my wife's meds were being paid for.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 8, 2011)

Typically what happens is the CLIENT calls their caseworker, and the caseworker then talks to the pharmacy, then back to the client to tell them what they need to do and what resources are available.

I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that the mother didn't do what could be reasonably expected of her.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 8, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



COBRA sucks


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Sep 8, 2011)

NGSamson said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Tell me about it. They didn't bother to send me their paperwork until 4 days before my insurance expired, so I had to overnight it back to make sure it got there on time. And there was still a one week gap in coverage.


----------



## NGSamson (Sep 8, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



And the money? ouch


----------



## Xchel (Sep 8, 2011)

it is the thought that it isn't the responsibility of the doctor to tell you every side effect of your meds or every little thing about your illness...a person has their own responsibility. The doctor has the responsibility to diagnose and treat you period and to do so in an efficient and proper manner.  You and I know doctors overbook patients on a regular basis for the simple fact some patients do not keep their appointments.

Now that said, I am surprised you didn't have one and you are right you don't learn it all in one semester but you get the semantics of what you can and cannot do in that class, especially if it is a mal prac attorney teaching you.  I don't know what state you went to school in or are in school in but I went to a U in Georgia.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 8, 2011)

Xchel said:


> it is the thought that it isn't the responsibility of the doctor to tell you every side effect of your meds or every little thing about your illness...a person has their own responsibility. The doctor has the responsibility to diagnose and treat you period and to do so in an efficient and proper manner.  You and I know doctors overbook patients on a regular basis for the simple fact some patients do not keep their appointments.
> 
> Now that said, I am surprised you didn't have one and you are right you don't learn it all in one semester but you get the semantics of what you can and cannot do in that class, especially if it is a mal prac attorney teaching you.  I don't know what state you went to school in or are in school in but I went to a U in Georgia.



Primary care providers overbook because Medicaid/Medicare reimbursements keeep going down and the demand is that high.  

I don't really see the point in taking Med Mal classes before going to medical school.  It's somewhat the cart before the horse.

It certainly isn't a requirement.  I don't think the MSAR is free online, but the only non-science coursework that is typically required to get into med school is 1-2 semesters of English.  There really isn't a "pre-med" degree or requirement.  Basically you take the 8 or so classes that are generally required by most med schools, take the MCAT, major in what you want and apply.

I went to Tulane for undergrad and am at a state school in the Midwest for Medical School.  Like I said, med mal isn't even required in med school.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 8, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > it is the thought that it isn't the responsibility of the doctor to tell you every side effect of your meds or every little thing about your illness...a person has their own responsibility. The doctor has the responsibility to diagnose and treat you period and to do so in an efficient and proper manner.  You and I know doctors overbook patients on a regular basis for the simple fact some patients do not keep their appointments.
> ...



Depends on the state and what you are going to study.  My intention was not to be a General prac or even specialized...my goal was Physician assistant, perhaps the difference as well as the state being Georgia...even their medical assistants have to take it which is pretty lame.   That said, I couldn't afford med school so I had to start out with what I could afford which was the University of Georgia....I went back to school after my youngest grew some and was in school himself.


----------



## Texanmike (Sep 9, 2011)

Seriously? 
You're joking right?
So her son has asthma, they don't fill his meds because of a glitch in the government computer and the kid dies?  
It gets better, she blames everyone in the situation but herself.  For Christ's sake woman, you're his mom.  Not only are you his mom, you're a shitty mom.  Terrible mom.  You win shitty mom of the year award.  If your calls aren't being returned you go back to the case worker and you tell her.  If that doesn't work you go to her boss.  Hell you drive to the Governor's Mansion and you camp out to make a point.  

Or you could wait on the government.  

Holy crap, I'm actually pissed about this.  First, this is a lesson of what happens to you when you depend on your neighbors to take care of you.  Sometimes you fall through the cracks.  When you do, you don't know how to handle the situation because you live a life that is provided for you by other people.  You don't need to be able to... because everything comes from somewhere else.

I look at recipients of government assistance kind of like domesticated animals.  Wait... slow down.... relax your anger... I'm not saying they are animals, this is an analogy. If you take a domesticated animal and put it in the wild it loses its ability to fend for itself.  If you take a 4th or 5th generation animal they have virtually none of the instincts to survive.  That is what happened here.  Medicare DID kill this woman's baby.  It did it because it contributed to creating a person who is now incapable of solving her own problems. 

Mike


----------



## Xchel (Sep 9, 2011)

Depending on the state you are in..some of them require that you only use one pharmacy if you get medicaid so she may have not been able to go to another pharmacy..and how is it her fault that they refused to fill her kid's meds?


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 9, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Depends on the state and what you are going to study.  My intention was not to be a General prac or even specialized...my goal was Physician assistant, perhaps the difference as well as the state being Georgia...even their medical assistants have to take it which is pretty lame.   That said, I couldn't afford med school so I had to start out with what I could afford which was the University of Georgia....I went back to school after my youngest grew some and was in school himself.



Maybe it is a state curriculum thing.  It's the exception, and not the rule.  And you don't get to Med School without going to undergrad first, so you would have had to have started out at UGA and done the undergrad work.  

What did you intend to do as a PA?  I am just curious, because by and large PAs are General Practitioners.  Some NPs can specialize and focus on one area (i.e. pediatric cardiology) but for the most part PAs go to PA school to practice under the license of a physician.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 9, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > Depends on the state and what you are going to study.  My intention was not to be a General prac or even specialized...my goal was Physician assistant, perhaps the difference as well as the state being Georgia...even their medical assistants have to take it which is pretty lame.   That said, I couldn't afford med school so I had to start out with what I could afford which was the University of Georgia....I went back to school after my youngest grew some and was in school himself.
> ...



I wanted to work in obstetrics and with Doctors without borders.  I right now do not have the money to continue my education because I am going through a divorce so it is on hold for the time being.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 9, 2011)

Xchel said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



Sorry for your troubles.  When you get back on track, you might want to look at the BSN program, become a obstetrics nurse, and then a licensed NP that specializes in midwifery.  I would think you'd have more practice latitude then a PA and you are employable out of college as a nurse and can work on your NP while you work.  I have a couple of friends doing that.  

That being said, I don't know much about the two fields, so take my advice for what it is worth.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 9, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



Don't be sorry, while divorce is never fun and is always difficult it was the best decision I have ever made in my adult life leaving an abusive relationship is always positive even when financially and emotionally crushing.  That said, you are right it is something to consider except I don't know how well an NP will help me when it comes to working with Doctors without Borders, but I will look into it.  For the meantime I spend time with my youngest child and friends and neighbors that have truly been my strength.  Leaving my dream of working in the medical field is temporary at 40 I am not getting younger, but I still am not old.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 9, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Doctors do not have any obligation to inform you of all of the symptoms of your illness..that is your job..their job is to dx you with your illness and treat you..not tell you what might happen to you.  It does not make a dr incompetent to say oh asthma is going to kill you...especially if it isn't going to...as another poster pointed out...not all asthma is created equal...and btw, I spent 4 years pre med so I know what I am talking about.  One of your first classes that you are given is MALPRACTICE LAW.



You're in Honduras, according to your profile.  I have no idea what medical care is like there.  Here, we have informed consent laws, meaning that a doctor is required to make sure a patient is fully informed about the risks and benefits of a treatment or procedure before he (the patient) can consent to it.  Which would mean, of course, that if the illness that is being treated is life-threatening, the patient would need to know that.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 9, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > Doctors do not have any obligation to inform you of all of the symptoms of your illness..that is your job..their job is to dx you with your illness and treat you..not tell you what might happen to you.  It does not make a dr incompetent to say oh asthma is going to kill you...especially if it isn't going to...as another poster pointed out...not all asthma is created equal...and btw, I spent 4 years pre med so I know what I am talking about.  One of your first classes that you are given is MALPRACTICE LAW.
> ...



Here we have universal health care...but I am from the USA..not Honduras, so I know what health care is like in the US and have a doctor in the US.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 9, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > Doctors do not have any obligation to inform you of all of the symptoms of your illness..that is your job..their job is to dx you with your illness and treat you..not tell you what might happen to you.  It does not make a dr incompetent to say oh asthma is going to kill you...especially if it isn't going to...as another poster pointed out...not all asthma is created equal...and btw, I spent 4 years pre med so I know what I am talking about.  One of your first classes that you are given is MALPRACTICE LAW.
> ...



A procedure is not an illness and is not pharmacologic medical treatment.  Informed concent in no way legally obligates a doctor to run down the risks and benefits of every medication they write a script for.  

It also doesn't legally obligate a doctor to teach patients pathology.  I am all for educating patients, but you are confusing the notion of "informed consent".  

Informed consent means I can't do an invasive procedure on you without your permission.  I has nothing to do with standard medical treatement.

Dear Lord, rounds would take forever if we had to obtain informed consent before we changed a patient's medication regimen.

The exception would be certain experimental drugs that are not FDA approved.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 9, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



If you believe any of that you need to Google informed consent + lawsuit.  Informed consent is a BIG deal.  If you work in an accredited facility your accrediting body will eat you alive for not obtaining it, yes, even for new scripts.  I have been a prescriber for 16 years and you most certainly DO have to advise patients of the risks, benefits, and alternatives of every medication you prescribe.  Unless, of course, your license and your livelihood mean nothing to you.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 9, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



Then you shouldn't be so bewildered about the concept of a doctor being required to tell you if your medical condition is potentially life-threatening.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

except not all asthma is life threatening and in fact rarely is.


----------



## MeBelle (Sep 10, 2011)

Mom could have brought the child to an ER, Medicaid eligible or not, and they would have given the child enough medication to tide them over for while.
Also, if Mom used the same pharmacy for the same child for the same condition, most decent pharmacists would also have given Mom the medication until the issue was straightened out.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 10, 2011)

Well mom's either an idiot, or she didn't suspect the child was as bad as he was. Either way, it's not the fault of a pencil pusher.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

MeBelle60 said:


> Mom could have brought the child to an ER, Medicaid eligible or not, and they would have given the child enough medication to tide them over for while.
> Also, if Mom used the same pharmacy for the same child for the same condition, most decent pharmacists would also have given Mom the medication until the issue was straightened out.



Yeah sit in an ER for 15 hours sometime waiting in their triage unit to be tended to and then they just write you a script for the same medicine, they don't give it to you.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 10, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



I guess I'll have to brush up.  It's not been a practice I've observed at any of the hospitals I've rotated through.  Maybe they sign a blanket statement before admission.  I don't know.  We certainly obtain consent before any procedures or surgeries, but not for writing scripts.  It doesn't seem to be the standard of care where I am at (and it's not my license on the line) nor do we have to tell someone with asthma about ever single facet of the disease.  

*Edit*:  Just asked the wife and pulled her lawbook off the shelf:  

Schloendorf v. Society of New York Hospital (1914):  basically states that every adult human being has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body and involved surgery.  I quickly flipped through the chapter and couldn't get any real information about basic medical management.  There was one vignette about anti-psychotics and the psychotic patient but that didn't seem relevant.  I certainly didn't find any cases or decisions that demanded basical medical management fell under informed consent.  I would think consent would be implied upon filling the script or agreeing to admission. I don't know.  You are a lawyer and a practitioner, so if you have the relevant case law or what not, I'd be happy to look at it.  I am more than happy to admit when I am wrong and want to fix any discrepancies before I make a mistake.  

I certainly didn't see anything in there where a Dr. had a legal duty to go over every single facet of a disease.  In other words, if her Dr. didn't tell her that her son could die of asthma, I don't think she could sue him on that basis.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 10, 2011)

Xchel said:


> MeBelle60 said:
> 
> 
> > Mom could have brought the child to an ER, Medicaid eligible or not, and they would have given the child enough medication to tide them over for while.
> ...



That's not true.  People who come to EDs for care are triaged.  The people that wait for 15 hours are the people who have minor conditions and shouldn't be in the ER.  Of course more severe people are going to jump them in line, that is the point of an ER.  Any child that came in in respiratory distress would instantly go back for a medical resuscitation.  You don't mess around with the airway.  

And any patient who comes to the ER is owed a survey and exam under EMTALA.  They can't just hand you a script without you being seen.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 10, 2011)

Xchel said:


> except not all asthma is life threatening and in fact rarely is.



I didn't say "was".  I said "potentially".    And that's no exception to informed consent laws.  Even if your asthma isn't currently serious, you still need to know that it could become so in order to be properly informed about the necessity of following your treatment program carefully.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 10, 2011)

Xchel said:


> MeBelle60 said:
> 
> 
> > Mom could have brought the child to an ER, Medicaid eligible or not, and they would have given the child enough medication to tide them over for while.
> ...



Are you just TRYING to be stupid, or is this a natural talent for you?

They don't make you "sit in an ER for 15 hours" when you present with urgent and/or life-threatening symptoms.  Don't make a bigger fool of yourself publicly than you absolutely have to.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > MeBelle60 said:
> ...



It took them 15 hours to get my son in for RSV and he was 2 years old..that is respiratory distress.  I picked the 15 hours on purpose.  I am pointing out though that getting them into the ER is going to do nothing except get them another script..she already had a script she didn't need another one.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 10, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



Generally for meds they do sign a blanket consent, but your documentation MUST show that you have discussed the risks, benefits, and alternatives of every medication you prescribe.  AND it is your responsibility to teach the person about their illness and what constitutes a medical emergency related to the same.  Even my MD, knowing that I am a nurse discussed these things with me.  (4 hours off my medication pump, get myself to an ER.)  He also told me that my disease is fatal after 6 months with no treatment.  

I doubt your wife's old law book has every case in it.  I have the JD AND I am a prescriber.  There have been cases over lack of informed consent as well as the provider not educating the patient about his/her illness.  It is a standard where I work that we put in every note we chart the medication teaching that we did AND that we told the patient when and how to access an emergency room.  And of course you know the chart is considered your sworn testimony, so you better not lie in it.

The extent of what you teach is contingent upon the patient's ability to understand.  Many times the teaching is given to a caregiver.  Also, if a situation is emergent, consent may not be necessary.  _May_ not be.

I hope that as you develop as a provider you will learn to search out facts and think for yourself.  I have _SEEN_ many abominable practices both in the hospital and in clinics.   Just because I have _SEEN_ them does not mean that I infer that they are correct or that I should practice that way.  

There are many good workshops out there for medical providers.  It is not too early in your career to seek them out and avail yourself of them.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 10, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Sunshine said:
> ...



LOL.  My wife passed the bar last year.  The book is from '08 I believe.  We are in our 30s.  C'mon!

I think the "reasonable" person standard applies.  You can get sued for anything, it doesn't mean the case is winnable.

I am just stating fact, I can't find a statute that extends informed consent to cover every medication you prescribe and telling patient's about every facet of the disease.  I fully agree that it is good care, I just don't know if it's a legal standard or a breech of duty or negligence.  I only say that because I can't find any cases that support that notion.  There are certainly cases and law about procedures, surgeries, experimental drugs.  

I am fully aware that a medical chart is a legal document.  I would never intentionally fudge a chart.  I am particularly anal about that.  If I don't ask an ROS question, I don't indicate positive or negative and I never revert to the 12 point ROS negative unless indicated above (as annoying as the ROS is).  If I chart something wrong, it is due to human error and I try and correct it if possible.  (once I charged DPP 2+/4 bilaterally and they guy's foot was in a cast).  A stupid mistake.  I noted the error in the next day's note.  Anyways, if I got called to the floor for that, I would just have to admit that I made a mistake.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 10, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



Here is some help for you and your baby lawyer wife:

Medical Malpractice: Informed Consent - Free Legal Information - Nolo 



> Medical Malpractice: Informed Consent Informed consent is required before a medical procedure ortreatment.
> Doctors must fully inform their patients about the risks involved in any proposed medical procedure or treatment. In both medical and legal terminology, this is called "informed consent." If a doctor does not get informed consent from a patient, and the patient is injured, the patient may have grounds to sue the doctor for medical malpractice. (To learn more about medical malpractice, read Nolo's article Medical Malpractice Basics.)
> 
> Here are the details of what constitutes informed consent, when it is required, and what exceptions can be made.
> ...




When I was in law school, we didn't have any case that I recall about informed consent per se.  In fact, law school generally does not include cases other than appellate cases.  You have to learn to find the others on your own.  Good luck to your wife on this.

There are MANY informed consent cases out there.

LAW.com - Quest - "informed consent" Results


If you go to this site, you will find page after page of lawsuits involving informed consent.

BTW: The spelling is consent, not concent.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

you give informed consent when you fill the medication...the pharmacist has to inform you, not the doctor..that is why you get the little flyer in with your medication.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 10, 2011)

Xchel said:


> you give informed consent when you fill the medication...the pharmacist has to inform you, not the doctor..that is why you get the little flyer in with your medication.



Sorry, but the MD cannot bump his responsibility off to the pharmacist.  They are both responsible to be sure you know what you need to know.  And a 'little flyer' to a person who cannot read, understand the language, or who is blind would be useless.

I know of a Spanish woman who got a bottle of steroids with the instructions:  "Take one tablet once a day."  She read the 'once' as the spanish word for 'eleven'.....


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > you give informed consent when you fill the medication...the pharmacist has to inform you, not the doctor..that is why you get the little flyer in with your medication.
> ...



an MD is not a specialist in pharmaceuticals he is a specialist in diagnostics and treatment..the pharmacist has to have a degree in pharmacology for a reason..not a single case that you listed had anything to do with any lawsuit for the doctor not telling a patient about side effects of medicine.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 10, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



So you read all 50+ pages of those cases?  Riiiiiiiiiiiiight!  

I beg your pardon.  And MD is most definitely a specialist in the pharmaceuticals he prescribes.  Otherwise the state would not license him to prescribe.  Every person who practices under a license is responsible for the consequences of what they do under that license.  

Sweetie.  Stick with something you know.  This isn't it.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > Sunshine said:
> ...



he can give meds in script form, when you buy the medicine you are consenting to take it, you get the side effect information on the flyer, so you have been informed period.  Second of all, something I know is this..evidently you don't or you would have pointed the specific case and not fifty pages of pharmaceutical lawsuits against PHARMACIES and drug manufacturers not doctors.  It is up to you to read the flyer, not the doctor's responsibility to read it to you.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 10, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



There are plenty of cases against pharmacists.  

LAW.com - Quest - "pharmacist malpractice" Results

And pharmacists can be equally as sleazy as doctors in their practice.  There is one pharmacy that had a lined sheet and each person picking up a script was told to 'sign for your medicine.'  At the top of the page was a little blurb no one bothered to read stating that the signature indicated the pharmacist had done the necessary patient educations.

Patient education and in formed consent is the responsibility of everyone who holds a license to practice in the medical field.  Every licenses person practices under his/her OWN license and cannot shut the burden off to the next person down the line.

You little ninny, you are talking to someone who has 2 nursing degrees and a law degree and who has worked in health care for 22 years.  You apparently are not even from/in this country.  You don't know jack shit about how this system works.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 10, 2011)

Sunshine said:


> Here is some help for you and your baby lawyer wife:



I asked my wife about it because she clerked in Med Mal for a couple of years and then practiced in it for about a year before moving on.  That doesn't make her an expert, of course, but she is familiar with med mal so I would deem her opinion as relevant as anyone else on the board on this matter.  Do you currently practice law?

From your link, this is what I was referring too (obviously procedures are covered):  



> What Risks Must be Disclosed?A doctor doesn't have to tell a patient about every possible thing that might happen as a result of a procedure or treatment, but only those risks that are important. But what is considered important? For the most part, states use one of two standards to determine this.
> 
> Would Other Doctors Have Disclosed the Risk?In states that use this first standard, an injured patient who is suing a doctor must hire a medical expert to testify that other competent doctors would have informed the patient of this risk. The doctor being sued will also hire an expert to testify that a competent doctor would not necessarily have disclosed the risk to the patient.
> 
> ...



It sounds very subjective.  I just saw the worst case of angioedema.  Like, so bad it would make a textbook.  Did the doctor disclose the risk of angioedema to the patient prior to giving out the ACEI?  I am not sure.  The patient didn't seem to have made the connection until we made it for them.  We don't tell someone about angioedema every time we start an ACEI.  

Since this is a tort, there doesn't seem to be a hard and fast rule about disclosing information or informed consent when it comes to medical management.  

This doesn't even touch a physicians responsibility about what to tell a patient about their condition.  It's good medicine to teach patients.  To what degree is it a legal obligation?  



> When I was in law school, we didn't have any case that I recall about informed consent per se.  In fact, law school generally does not include cases other than appellate cases.  You have to learn to find the others on your own.  Good luck to your wife on this.



She said they didn't even touch informed consent in her torts class.  The professor focused on product liability and other things that were more "high yield".  



> There are MANY informed consent cases out there.
> 
> LAW.com - Quest - "informed consent" Results
> 
> If you go to this site, you will find page after page of lawsuits involving informed consent.



It requires a subscription to view the documents.  I guess I could opt for the 90 day free trial, but I suspect there are strings attached.  I am certainly not paying $395 for a regular subscription.

You could always do your own legal research, you know.  



> BTW: The spelling is consent, not concent.



Did I misspell it somewhere?  I don't see that in my posts.  But thanks for the tip.  I know how to spell consent.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 10, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > Here is some help for you and your baby lawyer wife:
> ...



Well, the cases are out there if you want them.  Get your practicing wife to look them up on WestLaw.  There are many of them.  I haven't decided if you are displaying arrogance or just lack of knowledge.  I doubt a law clerk has a great handle on the entire spectrum of medical malpractice of which informed consent is a big part.  Right now you are learning  medicine.  But you will not succeed unless you learn to cover your ass.  And right now you don't know how, nor apparently do your mentors.  The day will come when you work somewhere that is accredited and you will find that your accrediting body will DEMAND that your facility DEMAND its providers to give informed consent.  Any idea where those accrediting bodies like the JCAHO get their standards?  Think about it!~  Every new standard follows on the heels of some case or other.  

I have stated repeatedly that I do not practice law.  But I do have my own seminar company and I teach these concepts to others.  Teaching law does not require a license.  I did not go to law school to practice, and most people who get the JD do not practice.  Many people get the JD to become better and more knowledgeable  in their current professions.  

And yes you misspelled consent a couple of times.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 10, 2011)

you point to cases against pharmacists not doctors.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 10, 2011)

Fucking A, who pissed in your wheaties this morning? 



Sunshine said:


> Well, the cases are out there if you want them.  Get your practicing wife to look them up on WestLaw.



My wife has better things to do, and using the court's Westlaw subscription for an internet squabble is not an appropriate use of taxpayer's dollars. 

Dear lord, you were the one that dumped 10,000 cases on my head from a site that requires a $395 bill.  Do you have access?  Why don't you provide the relevant cases. It is your claim.  Are you just going for "death by bandwidth"?



> There are many of them.  I haven't decided if you are displaying arrogance or just lack of knowledge.



At first I was truly interested in learning something.  Now I am just annoyed.   



> I doubt a law clerk has a great handle on the entire spectrum of medical malpractice of which informed consent is a big part.



She also practiced, now she's a judicial clerk.  I don't know if you mean to sound so patronizing, but she has passed the bar and has a license to practice.  From what I gather, you do not and may not have ever practiced.  So she had her hand in med mal cases for about 4 years.    

At any rate, as I said, it doesn't make her an expert, but for whatever her time was worth she didn't think the world of med mal was ripe with "informed consent cases" that didn't involve procedures.  



> Right now you are learning  medicine.  But you will not succeed unless you learn to cover your ass.  And right now you don't know how, nor apparently do your mentors.



My mentors are outstanding.  As for your competence, I just have to take your word for it.  Thank God the approach they take is simply in trying to do what is right and not "we do this to cover our ass".  Do you need to order a CT if someone comes in with a white count and a hot abdomen and a classic story for appendicitis?  Absolutely not.  Is it malpractice to if you do an appy and find a normal abdomen that a CT might have demonstrated?  Absolutely not.  



> The day will come when you work somewhere that is accredited and you will find that your accrediting body will DEMAND that your facility DEMAND its providers to give informed consent.  Any idea where those accrediting bodies like the JCAHO get their standards?  Think about it!~  Every new standard follows on the heels of some case or other.



Do you think my current institution and the attached hospital isn't accredited?  Also, I have never doubted the legitimacy of informed consent.  I have doubted that its scope extends to what you and Cecille apparently think it does.   



> I have stated repeatedly that I do not practice law.  But I do have my own seminar company and I teach these concepts to others.  Teaching law does not require a license.  I did not go to law school to practice, and most people who get the JD do not practice.  Many people get the JD to become better and more knowledgeable  in their current professions.



I guess I lost track of your CV.  Anyways, good for you.  I respect people that seek knowledge.



> And yes you misspelled consent a couple of times.



You are right.  I made one typo.  I say typo, because I spelled it correctly in the same post and every subsequent time before you decided to become obnoxious about the ordeal.  If you want to be a jack ass though, then by all means, can I just pay my Grammar Ticket now and avoid an annoying appearance in Grammar Court?


----------



## frazzledgear (Sep 11, 2011)

freedombecki said:


> NGSamson said:
> 
> 
> > freedombecki said:
> ...



Why assume she went to the pharmacy several times when she already knew the screw up did not occur there?  It doesn't say that and she isn't suing the pharmacy.  She is suing the state and state employees -not any pharmaceutical company and she wouldn't have grounds to sue them anyway.  The pharmacy is not a magical place where they just hand out drugs for free to whoever has the best sob story that day.  They MUST follow the law regarding prescription medications or face felony charges!  There is no such thing as using "discretion" and just handing it out for free!

When the woman was told Medicaid refused to cover it she could have just paid for it herself -emergency inhalers cost as little as $20 and can almost always be substituted for the cheaper generic.  Any doctor hearing she would be paying for it out of pocket would have made sure it was the least expensive one possible.  She CHOSE not to pay for it herself.  Not even ONE time. For MONTHS.  *What is it you people don't get about that?  Just because she had Medicaid doesn't mean she had no access to his medication -it meant she CHOSE not to buy it herself out of her own pocket while trying to get the mistake fixed.  For MONTHS.*  Even though she knew for a fact if he didn't have it the risk he would die during an acute attack SHARPLY INCREASED.  So let's not pretend she was shocked when he died -she KNEW for a fact he was extremely likely to die.  And he did.    

This is not an issue where the pharmacy screwed up because they didn't -their hands were tied on this.  This really isn't an issue about government health care either because these mistakes occur under any system both private and public (although based on other countries it is a much more common one under government health care systems).

This is about a woman who refused to give her child at least the same level of care she would have given herself.  As if because she used a government entitlement program meant she was allowed to deny her son his life-saving medication so she could spend that $20 elsewhere -and she clearly valued spending it on ANYTHING but her son's medication.  Just ONCE in all those months.  And now she wants to be enriched for it -also at taxpayer expense.  

What is it some of you don't get about this?  Using a government entitlement program doesn't shift your responsibility to your kid off on strangers or government or some pharmacy or anyone or anything else.  It doesn't mean you just got a free pass to deny him his life-saving medication because you had to buy it once out of your own pocket instead of getting it for free.  Getting entitlements doesn't mean you don't have to spend your money on your kid if it is necessary!  And it was necessary this time -but she CHOSE not to do it.  We aren't talking about expensive chemo or something but a CHEAP EMERGENCY INHALER.  Not even talking about buying his maintenance medications -just the CHEAP EMERGENCY INHALER.  Just to make sure he didn't kick the bucket during the next acute attack.  And SHE refused to do that.  WHO DOES THAT?

You only need to know the answer to one question to decide whether she should be awarded a bunch of taxpayer money for this:

Would she have coughed up the $20 for HER life-saving medication in all those MONTHS?  Does anyone in their right mind really believe this woman would have refused to pay $20 for her life-saving medication?   Spend $20 just once and live -or refuse to spend it and die.  Not much choice there, is there?   Of course she would have bought it for herself.  WE ALL KNOW IT because everyone here would have done that too -it is what any reasonable person would have done.   

This is where some of you apparently get really, really lost but try to follow me here.  Since we all know she would have spent that $20 for her own life-saving medication   -then she owed her kid at the very minimum the exact same thing she would have done for herself.  Because he couldn't do it for himself.  That is the MINIMAL level of care a parent OWES their child -to do at the very least for their child as they would have done for themselves in the same situation.  Because their child cannot do it for himself yet.  Gee, looks like parenting is a bit more involved than just popping out a kid.  Can't just stick them in a box when you are tired of playing mommy.  * A parent must do for his child what they would do for themselves -because their child cannot do it for himself!  Get that one? *   That is what a parent would naturally do anyway -but it is also what a parent is OBLIGATED to do.    Even when its inconvenient.  Even when its a pain in the ass.  Even when it means you don't get to spend that $20 on getting your hair fixed this week or new shoes or fast food or whatever. We are talking about buying a $20 emergency inhaler just ONCE in all those months -which have between 100-250 doses and would have saved his life.  

But what she CHOSE to do was something any self-centered, callous, cold-hearted bitch could have done.  She took the easy out which meets with the approval of liberals of course but not normal people.  She chose zero doses knowing it would never save his life and in fact would likely end it.   I have serious questions about her refusal to buy his inhaler even ONCE in all those MONTHS when we all know she would have bought her own in the identical situation.  I'd like to know why she refused to buy it even ONCE in all those MONTHS given the fact she absolutely KNEW what would likely happen as a result.  I'd like to know why she thinks she's entitled to taxpayer money for her bad parenting and lethal decisions she made about her child.  *Why is she entitled to MY money now when she is the one who decided her OWN money was better spent on ANYTHING but her child's life-saving medication?*  Something she absolutely knew would end up killing him and it was just a matter of when.   

Some of you really suffer from misguided feelings of sympathy here while overlooking the ONLY person deserving of it.  THE CHILD.  The child got screwed over MAJORLY here.  And it was by his own mother, who certainly proved she sure didn't think blood was thicker than that $20 bill.  She got to spend it on what she wanted come hell or high water -and he got to die.  Who really got screwed by her decision to refuse to buy his emergency inhaler?  This was a decision she made repeatedly over the course of MONTHS - not just once.  And who is the one asking to be enriched for it now?


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 11, 2011)

I do believe that at the very least it was not the fault of the pharmacist, the clerk, the caseworker that this woman's child died.

Notice that she was intelligent enough to get an attorney pronto....which makes me doubt she lacked the capacity to pursue assistance,even though she was penniless (if she was). I doubt she had a retainer, but she was able to find an attorney anyway, which means she had enough intelligence to seek and follow referrals until she found one that would work on the chance of a portion of a settlement, which tells me she did have the know how to seek referrals for free services.

I know there are people (a lot of people) who cannot function without people telling them what to do and who do not have the wherewithal to seek referrals and information on their own. They have a preconceived notion about something, or they just don't want to call, say, the insurance company, or the hospital, or seek knowledge on their own. I know people personally like this, who will dismiss a course of action out of hand because they think they know the answer. I will tell them, "why don't you call so and so to find out" and it NEVER EVEN CROSSED THEIR MINDS to do that. I don't know if they think the information isn't out there, or doubt their ability to find it. These are intelligent, working people, too. I don't know what the disconnect is.

But even in that case, they are responsible for themselves. It's not MY responsibility to make sure they pursue all avenues to get adequate care, to find the lowest cost for services, or whatever else it might be that they are jyping themselves out of. It's not the job of the pharmacist to recognize "this person is too lazy to figure out how to get this medication...I'd better help them" or even the caseworker who made an error. It is the responsibility of the client to research their coverage and to care for their kids...even if they don't have insurance, or there's a glitch in the coverage that isn't their fault or is in error.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 11, 2011)

You assume that it was a $20 inhaler...I already pointed out that meds for asthma, maintenence or inhalers can cost up to $300 a month.  People every day make the choice between food and meds..and if she had medcaid she can't afford expensive meds, because face it rich folks with extra money do not get medicaid.  If they are her insurance company and they are..and they don't pay for something that they should have paid for then yes, they are negligent when the child dies. We don't know what steps she took to deal with the problem, so it should be a little clear to us that if an attorney took it on a percent basis and he likely did...because she don't have the money for an attorney, that he thinks he has a winnable case...which means she did things to try to solve the problem and it wasn't solved.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 11, 2011)

Wrong, they are not. People make mistakes, if one was actually made. She had months to pursue this, and there are direct client hotlines to medicaid to straighten out and educate oneself about coverage. There is also the ER, which WILL TREAT a child in acute distress.

This bullshit about holding low paid caseworkers accountable for the stupidity of their clients is just that...bullshit. They don't pay (and couldn't afford) malpractice insurance to cover, and they carry immense caseloads. Coding is complicated, as is determining eligibility. You all want the government to be involved in life or death decisions of poor people, you need to accept that the government makes mistakes, and people WILL DIE. This is what has been said from the beginning....state medical care will not save people. It will kill them. And it won't be anybody's fault except the retards who think the government is there to hold your hand from birth to (early) death.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



First of all, unverifiable anecdotes are not evidence.  Was I there?  Did I see your child?  Have I any way of knowing how much imminent danger your child's life was in when you took him in?  Am I going to trust YOUR word for it?

Epic fail.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> you give informed consent when you fill the medication...the pharmacist has to inform you, not the doctor..that is why you get the little flyer in with your medication.



Actually, BOTH of them have to inform you.  Your doctor is not allowed to simply assume that the pharmacist will handle it.  And neither of them are allowed to assume the "little flyer" is enough.


----------



## Sunshine (Sep 11, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > you give informed consent when you fill the medication...the pharmacist has to inform you, not the doctor..that is why you get the little flyer in with your medication.
> ...





That is correct.  And 'patient teaching' as part of the state Nurse Practice Act is a duty of nurses as well.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> You assume that it was a $20 inhaler...I already pointed out that meds for asthma, maintenence or inhalers can cost up to $300 a month.  People every day make the choice between food and meds..and if she had medcaid she can't afford expensive meds, because face it rich folks with extra money do not get medicaid.  If they are her insurance company and they are..and they don't pay for something that they should have paid for then yes, they are negligent when the child dies. We don't know what steps she took to deal with the problem, so it should be a little clear to us that if an attorney took it on a percent basis and he likely did...because she don't have the money for an attorney, that he thinks he has a winnable case...which means she did things to try to solve the problem and it wasn't solved.



I don't assume anything about the cost of the inhaler.  I assume that her child's life was in danger, and she diddled around for months without resolving the problem one way or another, until he finally died.

Medicaid should have found the glitch and cleared it up sooner, sure.  SHE, on the other hand, should have done a lot more to make sure they did than just make some phone calls and then wring her hands when all that happened was that she was mailed a letter stating that her kid was eligible.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 11, 2011)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > You assume that it was a $20 inhaler...I already pointed out that meds for asthma, maintenence or inhalers can cost up to $300 a month.  People every day make the choice between food and meds..and if she had medcaid she can't afford expensive meds, because face it rich folks with extra money do not get medicaid.  If they are her insurance company and they are..and they don't pay for something that they should have paid for then yes, they are negligent when the child dies. We don't know what steps she took to deal with the problem, so it should be a little clear to us that if an attorney took it on a percent basis and he likely did...because she don't have the money for an attorney, that he thinks he has a winnable case...which means she did things to try to solve the problem and it wasn't solved.
> ...



actually you make lots of assumptions..the doctor didn't do anything wrong and the only way he can be sued is if he gives the wrong script...not for giving a script and not telling every little minute detail about it.  The pharmacy is responsible for the side effects, making sure that the script is filled according to doctor orders..no one is going to give a patient money for the dr not telling them all the side effects of the meds..or for getting a signature to approve the meds they are given..the doctor hands you the script you either get it filled or you don't...your choice.  You get it filled you have agreed to that treatment period...you gave consent.  That said, if you were truly a professional you wouldn't be making assumptions about this woman based on one newspaper article...you know zero about the case.


----------



## Intense (Sep 11, 2011)

> No one resolved the computer glitch. Most of Lucero-Mills' calls weren't returned.
> 
> Her son's asthma worsened after several months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, which kept the disease manageable.
> 
> ...



Why did Mom not take further action? Why was Mom conditioned to take further action? Conditioned State Dependency? This is not about  blaming Republicans now is it? Really?


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> If the child was legally eligible for the medicine and either medicaid glitches or the pharmacy glitch caused her a denial that resulted in his death..yeah they are legally responsible.  Nurses and doctors can be sued individually as well as hospitals so why not pharmacies when they are neglectful? All it would have taken is them calling medicaid to verify eligibility.  The mother tried several times to get the child´s medication so she was not the one that was neglectful.



But this wasn't a pharmacy error.  When the pharmacy prints a label for your Rx they are contacting the computer system of your ins co and that computer decides if the Rx can be filled or not.  If ins won't pay, the computer won't print a proper label.  The pharmacy staff can over ride that if the patient wants to pay in cash, but it is the ins co (or in this case, our tax dollars) that calls the shots.   Clearly the mother wasn't willing to pay even $10 for an emergency inhaler, Albuterol.  I hardly see how this is the fault of the pharmacy.



freedombecki said:


> That's how I concluded the pharmacy was in the big middle of it and refused to provide the correct medications for the victim, her son. According to what this says, it was Walgreen's who told her that her son was ineligible for Medicaid. That makes Walgreen's a spokesperson in behalf of a government that screwed up big time.



No, it doesn't.  Not in the least.  Everyone screams at the pharmacy as though they have the ability to tell the ins co what to do.  If a doctor writes an Rx and ins does not cover the Rx that is not the fault of the pharmacy, they are merely doing as they were told.

To suggest that a pharmacy should pay for every Rx someone can't afford is as realistic as suggesting every grocery store, every doctor, every dentist, every eye doctor, every shoe store should pay when someone is unable or unwilling to pay.

This is not the fault of the pharmacy.  Much as I hate Walgreens, this time it isn't their fault.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



Fine.  You're happy with your incompetent doctor . . . or possibly you just weren't paying attention to him.  _Mazel tov_.  But don't try to apply your shitty doctor and ER experiences to everyone else and assume they're the norm.  Comprehend the fact that the world doesn't begin and end with YOUR experiences.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 11, 2011)

Intense said:


> > No one resolved the computer glitch. Most of Lucero-Mills' calls weren't returned.
> >
> > Her son's asthma worsened after several months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, which kept the disease manageable.
> >
> ...



after several months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, 

Advair is not a $20 drug it is a $250 drug...most folks can't afford it. Cecille, if you are in the medical field you should know that Advair is not an emergency inhaler it is a maintenence drug and it is an expensive one..and it isn't an inhaler either it is a disc that has powder that you inhale.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > > No one resolved the computer glitch. Most of Lucero-Mills' calls weren't returned.
> ...



Advair is an expensive drug and it takes days to weeks to start working, it's a steroid.  Albuterol is a rescue inhaler, takes seconds to work, it's probably one of the most popular asthma drugs around and I used to pay $10 for it at Costco pharmacy.  In months and months this mother couldn't spend $10, maybe $20 at a Walgreens for a rescue inhaler that she should have had on hand anyway for break-through asthma attacks.

Bleh....


----------



## Xchel (Sep 11, 2011)

> Clearly the mother wasn't willing to pay even $10 for an emergency inhaler, Albuterol.



Advair cannot be replaced with Albuterol.  If you know about asthma meds and I do..Albuterol is an emergency medication for an attack and Advair is a maintenence medicine for severe asthma..you cannot replace one with the other..Advair costs in the area of $250...Albuterol isn't so cheap either and your body can become accustomed to it to the point that it no longer works.

Here is what Albuterol costs..



> Patients without insurance can expect to pay between *$30 and $60 for their albuterol and the inhaler. *The cost varies depending upon the dosage and brand of medication. Those with insurance will pay typical copays and coinsurance rates, which can range from $5 for the generic version to $50 for a brand name.



Cost of an Albuterol Inhaler - Get Information and Prices - CostHelper.com

If the child is small they usually give them a nebulizer which costs from $200 to $300 without insurance..but the medication we are talking about is not Albuterol it is Advair.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...



You can't replace Advair with an emergency inhaler, one is maintenence...the Advair, and the other is for an attack alone which is Albuterol, combivent or something of that sort...Advair is the drug he needed not Albuterol.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> > Clearly the mother wasn't willing to pay even $10 for an emergency inhaler, Albuterol.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Xchel said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



You do not need a nebulizer, an inhaler is very effective.  I know asthma meds well as well and I never claimed they were the same.  What I wrote is that it is a RESCUE INHALER.  Most kids with asthma have one at home and one at school in case of a severe problem.

As a nurse I know of very few severe asthmatics that do not keep a rescue inhaler on hand.  Mom didn't even have THAT.  THAT would have saved the child's life.  This would be a non issue had she had that.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > > Clearly the mother wasn't willing to pay even $10 for an emergency inhaler, Albuterol.
> ...



She had a rescue inhaler...it didn't work..he died...what she needed was the Advair..a maintenence medication that is very very expensive. The child I believe died in the hospital..rescue inhalers don't always work depending on the advanced stage of the attack and if you are using your maintenence meds or not..in this case he was not using his maintenence meds which caused him to die..the maintenence meds are clearly not just ten bucks...


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

Xchel said:


> She had a rescue inhaler...it didn't work..he died...what she needed was the Advair..a maintenence medication that is very very expensive. The child I believe died in the hospital..rescue inhalers don't always work depending on the advanced stage of the attack and if you are using your maintenence meds or not..in this case he was not using his maintenence meds which caused him to die..the maintenence meds are clearly not just ten bucks...



I just reread this article:

Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post

I must have missed it or perhaps it was in another article that I haven't read.  Could well be.  But I see no mention of Albuterol.

Yes, we are all aware that Advair is a maintenance drug, for many so is Albuterol.  It was for me.

Bottom line, this is a career welfare mother that couldn't be bothered to go down to the office and throw a fit and do any bloody thing needed to get her child medication.  But now that the poor child is dead, she suddenly has time for lawsuits and interviews.

I'm not impressed.

JFTR, even with drugs like Advair break through asthma attacks happen, that is the reason for rescue inhalers.  Well, one reason.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > > Clearly the mother wasn't willing to pay even $10 for an emergency inhaler, Albuterol.
> ...



It's a non-issue.  The kid was either a moderate or severe asthmatic.  He needed advair, the combination of inhaled corticosteroid and the long acting B2 agonist.  Albuterol is a rescue inhaler.  It's not for maintainance.  In fact, the number of times you use albuterol indicates the severity of your asthma.  It doesn't treat it.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> It's a non-issue.  The kid was either a moderate or severe asthmatic.  He needed advair, the combination of inhaled corticosteroid and the long acting B2 agonist.  Albuterol is a rescue inhaler.  It's not for maintainance.  In fact, the number of times you use albuterol indicates the severity of your asthma.  It doesn't treat it.



Okay, let's try a new approach. 

Who has claimed he did not need Advair?  Please list your sources.

He didn't get it, I believe it was a combination of Mom and welfare that he didn't get his meds.

That does not mean he couldn't have used a rescue inhaler to SAVE HIS BLOODY LIFE!

And finally, many doctors do indeed use Albuterol to treat asthma.  I'll take their advice over yours.  There is more than one school of thinking and some people just don't handle steriods well and can't take it even when not used systemically.


----------



## xotoxi (Sep 11, 2011)

frazzledgear said:


> If you wouldn't have allowed your kid to go without his life-saving medication then where do you get off excusing this woman for being so irresponsible?
> 
> 1.  She could have gone to or called the Medicaid office and insisted on getting the error fixed, making sure they knew a child's life was at risk until it was fixed.  She didn't even bother with this minimal step.
> 
> ...



I read the article and I didn't see any facts to back up your 3 points.

Kindly share a link so we can have a better understanding of this woman's blatant negligence.


----------



## xotoxi (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > It's a non-issue.  The kid was either a moderate or severe asthmatic.  He needed advair, the combination of inhaled corticosteroid and the long acting B2 agonist.  Albuterol is a rescue inhaler.  It's not for maintainance.  In fact, the number of times you use albuterol indicates the severity of your asthma.  It doesn't treat it.
> ...



A rescue inhaler (albuterol) ceases to be effective when the inflammatory effects of asthma become worse than the bronchospastic effects.

And when this happens, a steroid (inhaled or systemic) is needed.

Besides, I have read nothing that says he was not using albuterol.


----------



## xotoxi (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> *this is a career welfare mother*



What the fuck is with you assholes?


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

xotoxi said:


> A rescue inhaler (albuterol) ceases to be effective when the inflammatory effects of asthma become worse than the bronchospastic effects.
> 
> And when this happens, a steroid (inhaled or systemic) is needed.
> 
> Besides, I have read nothing that says he was not using albuterol.



A rescue inhaler is referred to as a rescue inhaler for a reason.  A steroid inhaler does not work for days or weeks.  It is a drug that has to build up over time.  It is not a rescue drug.

I DID read something indicating he wasn't using a RESCUE inhaler, Mom claims he had NONE of his Rx's filled in months.  Albuterol is an Rx.


----------



## xotoxi (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> I DID read something indicating he wasn't using a RESCUE inhaler, Mom claims he had NONE of his Rx's filled in months.  Albuterol is an Rx.



I DID NOT read that.  Please share.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

xotoxi said:


> I DID NOT read that.  Please share.



If he couldn't get multiple Rx's filled because he was not in the system, what leads anyone to believe they would cover Albuterol?



> A Denver mother whose son died after *she was unable to fill his multiple prescriptions* because pharmacists kept telling her he was not eligible for Medicaid  even though records proved he was  has filed a lawsuit against the city and county of Denver.


  (emphasis my own)

Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post


----------



## xotoxi (Sep 11, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > I DID NOT read that.  Please share.
> ...



Therefore, you made an assumption that the prescription included albuterol.  That is probably a safe assumption.

But, seeing that albuterol is no longer generic and only comes in the brand names Ventolin HFA, Proventil HFA, or ProAir HFA, and each cost around $50, it would seem reasonable that she might not be able to afford it.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 11, 2011)

xotoxi said:


> Therefore, you made an assumption that the prescription included albuterol.  That is probably a safe assumption.
> 
> But, seeing that albuterol is no longer generic and only comes in the brand names Ventolin HFA, Proventil HFA, or ProAir HFA, and each cost around $50, it would seem reasonable that she might not be able to afford it.



I have to fess up, at first I did not believe you.  I used to buy Albuterol all the time and while I am an RN I have not worked in that area of medicine for about 6 years.  I'm a clinical case manager now.

I just called Walgreens (this one:  (602) 943-3192) and talked to the male RPh.  He verified that what you write is true.  He explained that generic Albuterol inhalers used freon and due to the FDA that is no longer okay and this happened about 2 years ago.

But.... he also said that Pro Air is the cheapest.  If you join Walgreens prescription plan for $20 a year a Pro-Air inhaler is less than $17 each.  Otherwise, it is almost $70.

If I make no other point here this is the one I want to make.  If my child needed life saving meds and the total cost would be $38 for the first inhaler and $18 for each one from there on and my child's life depended on it, I would go to any extreme to get it.  I'd sell off personal items, I'd pitch a tent at the welfare office and not leave until their records were straightened out, I would call my congressman, I would picket the welfare office, hell... I'd work a street corner if I had to in order to come up with $38.

I would go to ANY extreme to save the life of my child.  You can't honestly say this mother did that.  I blame both welfare and Mom for this.  Nothing I have read yet changes my opinions.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 12, 2011)

Annie, pro air is not as good as the others.  It is quite possible that her doctor did not want him to have it for precisely that reason. The Pro Air has negative reviews all over the net..the longest it lasts is a week..so 17 bucks a week gets expensive for someone on medicaid...and it never lasts the 200 burst that it is supposed to..imagine it failing during an attack.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 12, 2011)

she called Denver County Human Services several times a week in the spring and summer of 2009 after she tried to get 9-year-old son Zumante's asthma medications at Walgreens and was told he wasn't eligible for Medicaid.



> Her son's asthma worsened after several months of being off the anti-inflammatory drug Advair, which kept the disease manageable.
> 
> The boy died in July 2009. He fainted at his home after telling his mother he couldn't breathe and then died a few days later at Children's Hospital when he was taken off a ventilator.
> 
> ...



nothing said he died from the lack of an emergency rescue inhaler..it says he died because he didn't use Advair, his maintenence medications....so he fainted she took him to the hospital and he died a few days later in the hospital.  This woman even got a print out and they still would not fill this very expensive medication..that quite honestly is difficult for anyone to afford.  Annie I want to know where you get that she is a career welfare mother? As far as we know she works 2 jobs and still does not make enough money.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 12, 2011)

If she works 2 jobs at some point overthe past couple of months she got a paycheck.

Any way you cut it, the responsibility, if it's not just a plain old tragedy, is hers.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 12, 2011)

koshergrl said:


> If she works 2 jobs at some point overthe past couple of months she got a paycheck.
> 
> Any way you cut it, the responsibility, if it's not just a plain old tragedy, is hers.



even getting a paycheck..paying out 300 bucks or more is not child's play...especially if the difference is you aren't going to eat nor is your child. She had the paperwork that showed she was eligible and she tried for months to get it straight talking to someone sometimes and many times no returned phone call and no answer...if you have ever tried calling one of those places you know exactly what happened...the incompetent DFACS office or however they call it in her state..was an issue..


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 12, 2011)

You don't let your kid die because some office worker brushes you off. That's the long and short of it.

And she didn't pursue it or she would have gotten the issue fixed.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 12, 2011)

Xchel said:


> nothing said he died from the lack of an emergency rescue inhaler..it says he died because he didn't use Advair, his maintenence medications....so he fainted she took him to the hospital and he died a few days later in the hospital.  This woman even got a print out and they still would not fill this very expensive medication..that quite honestly is difficult for anyone to afford.  Annie I want to know where you get that she is a career welfare mother? As far as we know she works 2 jobs and still does not make enough money.



You are right, it's her attitude that the system should do for her instead of her dealing with the system.  However, if she had 2 jobs in months and months surely she could afford $38 for a rescue inhaler in a pinch.  I know that personally I would have FOUND a way.



> even getting a paycheck..paying out 300 bucks or more is not child's play...especially if the difference is you aren't going to eat nor is your child. She had the paperwork that showed she was eligible and she tried for months to get it straight talking to someone sometimes and many times no returned phone call and no answer...if you have ever tried calling one of those places you know exactly what happened...the incompetent DFACS office or however they call it in her state..was an issue..



Correction, for a rescue inhaler it's $38 for the first one and $18 for each one from there on for a year.

Making a few phone calls is nothing.  Pitching a tent in front of the welfare office would have probably gotten some attention.  Anyone can sit and make phone calls, sometimes you have to fight and Mom did not.



Xchel said:


> had a rescue inhaler...it didn't work..he died...what she needed was the Advair..a maintenence medication that is very very expensive. The child I believe died in the hospital..rescue inhalers don't always work depending on the advanced stage of the attack and if you are using your maintenence meds or not..in this case he was not using his maintenence meds which caused him to die..the maintenence meds are clearly not just ten bucks...



Again, I'm asking you for a source that shows she had a rescue inhaler and it didn't work.  Or, is this an assumption on your part?  Where are you getting YOUR info?


----------



## Xchel (Sep 12, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > nothing said he died from the lack of an emergency rescue inhaler..it says he died because he didn't use Advair, his maintenence medications....so he fainted she took him to the hospital and he died a few days later in the hospital.  This woman even got a print out and they still would not fill this very expensive medication..that quite honestly is difficult for anyone to afford.  Annie I want to know where you get that she is a career welfare mother? As far as we know she works 2 jobs and still does not make enough money.
> ...



Advair does not cost $38, what part of the lack of the Advair is what killed him do you not understand? That is what is in his autopsy report...says nothing about the lack of an inhaler but the fact he went without maintenence meds killed him.  Inhalers don't work properly all of the time especially if you don't have maintenence meds.  Somehow you think that Advair is an inhaler, it isn't..it is a carticosteroid that is in powder form in a disc that you inhale..and it costs about $250 not the little amount you scream about...you need to read up on this...also, have you bothered to see that she tried to deal with the system...she called and went down to the offices several times a week...she was even given a printout showing her eligible, they still did not fix the glitch even after months of doing this...you clearly never have dealt with those idiots.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 12, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Annie, pro air is not as good as the others.  It is quite possible that her doctor did not want him to have it for precisely that reason. The Pro Air has negative reviews all over the net..the longest it lasts is a week..so 17 bucks a week gets expensive for someone on medicaid...and it never lasts the 200 burst that it is supposed to..imagine it failing during an attack.



Odds are, it would have only taken one $38 rescue inhaler to save is life.  I say she could have sold personal possessions to get that money, you say she might have had two jobs.  So why not save her sons life and fight harder to deal with a crappy system?   When your child's life is at risk you don't just make a few phone calls every week.  You kick your ass into high gear and you go fight for your child.  Mom claims she called several times.

Bleh...

Tell me something, is that all you would do for your child?  Make a few phone calls and let it go?  Is it?

Nobody is suggesting the welfare office was correct.  We are suggesting Mom was also at fault for not jumping in there and fighting for her son.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 12, 2011)

kosher girl, she did persue it, she had a printout because she persued it...it still didn't fix the problem and the pharmacy still did not issue the meds because the computer did not show him as eligible for medicaid.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 12, 2011)

Welfare is not meant to eliminate the tough choices, or provide a care free living. It is meant to keep children off the streets and from starving for the amount of time it takes their parent to figure out how to provide for them herself.

I've had to choose between electricity and food, or going to the doctor and rent. My mother also made those choices. I didn't go to a dentist regularly growing up, I didn't get regular dental care because POOR PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE MONEY FOR THOSE THINGS. Welfare doesn't mean suddenly all your needs and desires are meant. It means you are in such dire straits you are in danger of starving and living on the street. 

This woman did not provide reasonable care. I get calls all the time from clients who say "I've left message after message and nobody has called me back!" and they ARE LYING. I have voicemail, I know who calls, and when. No, you probably won't get an answer if you call at noon or after 5 or on a weekend, or at 4:45. And you won't get a call back if you don't leave a number, or don't have your cell turned on, or don't pick up, or leave a message number that doesn't pick up. Does that mean you give up? NO. It means you make yourself available, it means you KEEP CALLING, it means you bring your happy ass down to the office and sit there until you get some attention.

Welfare offices have hearings requests strewn like confetti throughout their offices, and the federal government requires they be processed immediately. Welfare offices have the numbers to the GOVERNOR'S ADVOCACY OFFICE posted prominently in their offices. All government workers have supervisors who take complaints and act upon them promptly.

This woman did nothing until her kid was dead. She didn't make a reasonable effort to take care of the problem or to draw it to the attention of anyone. She was locked into making one person fix everything, too lazy to seek other avenues of assistance in a system that is GEARED towards providing assistance to EVERYBODY. That is lazy, stupid, and criminal.

She is the only one to blame. If you don't like the system, get the hell out of it. It's not supposed to be and will never be cushy and fun to be on welfare. It's not a premium system with limitless money and resources meant to remove responsibility from parents and eliminate all the difficulty that goes with poverty.


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 12, 2011)

Xchel said:


> kosher girl, she did persue it, she had a printout because she persued it...it still didn't fix the problem and the pharmacy still did not issue the meds because the computer did not show him as eligible for medicaid.


 OBVIOUSLY she did NOT pursue it to the degree needed, or her kid would have gotten his meds.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 12, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Advair does not cost $38, what part of the lack of the Advair is what killed him do you not understand? That is what is in his autopsy report...says nothing about the lack of an inhaler but the fact he went without maintenence meds killed him.  Inhalers don't work properly all of the time especially if you don't have maintenence meds.  Somehow you think that Advair is an inhaler, it isn't..it is a carticosteroid that is in powder form in a disc that you inhale..and it costs about $250 not the little amount you scream about...you need to read up on this...also, have you bothered to see that she tried to deal with the system...she called and went down to the offices several times a week...she was even given a printout showing her eligible, they still did not fix the glitch even after months of doing this...you clearly never have dealt with those idiots.



Okay, I don't know how to be more clear about this.  I will try one more time and then I will wait for your documentation showing he was on a rescue inhaler and it didn't work or I'll assume you pulled this out your back side.

Nobody here has claimed that an Advair inhaler is $38.00.  Nobody.  If I am wrong you are free to show me you didn't lie to make a point but you actually have a legit point.

Advair IS considered an inhaler.  It's inhaled in a powder form.  It's a round purple disk and you inhale one dose as prescribed.  Then there is also Advair HFA inhaler.  That too, is inhaled.  Please stop confusing yourself here, it's not a complicated scenario.

A RESCUE inhaler is $38 at Walgreens for the first inhaler and the first inhaler is very likely what this child needed to save his life.  We aren't talking daily maintenance meds, we are talking a life saving product on the day he died, one he did not have.

Even the Advair website explains a rescue inhaler is also needed at times.

Using ADVAIR HFA Inhaler - ADVAIR.com



> ADVAIR is not for, and should not be used to treat, sudden, severe symptoms of asthma. ADVAIR won't replace a rescue inhaler.



Sometimes when people have chronic asthma they have break through asthma attacks, yeah!  Even with Advair!  So that is why it's usually pretty standard for someone especially with chronic or severe asthma to have a rescue inhaler.   Mom didn't even have the emergency meds for her son.  Although you claim otherwise I haven't seen your documentation yet.

I don't need to read up on this but apparently you do.  You keep seeing where people are writing Advair is $38 and Mom had a rescue inhaler and it didn't work.  Nobody else is seeing these written statements.  You also see where she went down to the welfare office several times a week but Mom explains that she called the welfare office several times a week.

Ohhh, but I have dealt with these idiots.  I've never been on welfare but as a medical professional I have gone up against them over various issues and I generally won.  But I put up the fight.

So let's recap here:

Xchel writes that the autopsy report says he died from a lack of Advair.  The article doesn't say that, what it says is:



> State investigators later found the boy died of complications from his condition, which was covered by a state health plan that should have paid for the prescription medication he needed.



Please provide this copy of the autopsy report you apparently have.  An autopsy report won't say, 'he died because he didn't have Advair or maintenance meds,' it's focused on the diagnosis, not the lack of treatment.  It will say he died of asthma.  

Annie writes a rescue inhaler is $38.  Xchel says that's not true, an Advair inhaler is $250.  ???  Just ???

Xchel says the boy had a rescue inhaler and it didn't work.  According to the link in the opening post it doesn't say that at all.

Xchel says Mom called the welfare office and went down there several times a week.  Mom says she called several times a week.

Are we really to extend you credibility at this point, Xchel?


----------



## koshergrl (Sep 12, 2011)

And this is the problem. There is something ingrained in a large portion of our population that thinks it is ALWAYS somebody else's fault if something goes wrong. Or more precisely, NEVER their fault.

The fact that this kid died is very sad and tragic. It's awful that the pharmacy folks were difficult and probably uneducated about the programs they have agreed to accept. That is common. The programs are complicated, the computer screens they view are hard to access and hard to read. They don't understand the jargon that is associated with them....I've had pharmacists tell me they have never heard of programs that I know they deal with every single day...

But at the end of the day, it is the MOTHER'S RESPONSIBILITY to get her child the care he needs. These resources are great, but they don't always work without a hitch. You don't STOP TRYING because one particular pharmacist at one particular pharmacy doesn't return your call. Of COURSE they don't return your call, they aren't obligated to return your call.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 12, 2011)

Advair IS considered an inhaler.

no it is considered a carticosteroid that is a maintenence med...inhaler is for an asthma attack itself...when the maintence meds do not work. You cannot replace the Advair with an emergency inhaler.

Kosher under medicaid they can only use one pharmacy not just go to any pharmacy.


----------



## Lovebears65 (Sep 12, 2011)

blu said:


> Mom sues Denver, three workers over child's death - The Denver Post
> 
> but as we know, america has the best health care system in the world!
> 
> If only this 9 year old had worked hard in school, got a real job, etc then he wouldnt have been in this position!



working for express scripts ( pharmacy benefit provider) for a few years. I know there is are programs out there that would get her RX by mail with in a day with a RX from her doctor for free.  She could have also called the manufacturer if she was low income  and got her meds for free. IT was her ignorance why her child died not  city of Denver fault


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 12, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > It's a non-issue.  The kid was either a moderate or severe asthmatic.  He needed advair, the combination of inhaled corticosteroid and the long acting B2 agonist.  Albuterol is a rescue inhaler.  It's not for maintainance.  In fact, the number of times you use albuterol indicates the severity of your asthma.  It doesn't treat it.
> ...



You've said you are a nurse, I believe?  Have you ever been in an ED?  Have you ever seen someone in status asthmaticus?  Or respiratory failure?  What does respiratory therapy treat them with?  DuoNebs at my hospital:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipratropium_bromide/salbutamol

They don't hand them an albuterol inhaler in triage   

Even with the proper meds, people with asthma get intubated all the time.  When you stop moving air, all the albuterol in the world isn't going to help you.  If it did, then we wouldn't really need the stepwise management protocol for mild, moderate, and severe asthma.  Albuterol is where asthma management starts, not stops.  

If this kid couldn't handle steroids, then he could have tried a mast cell stabilizer or a leukotriene inhibitor.  That was not the case.  He was on advair.  He was out of his advair, that's how he got into trouble.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 12, 2011)

xotoxi said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...



And that is such a load of horseshit (the work around the generic albuterol) not your statement.  

Good to see you back.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

Xchel said:


> Advair IS considered an inhaler.



That is what we have been trying to tell you.



> no it is considered a carticosteroid that is a maintenence med...inhaler is for an asthma attack itself...when the maintence meds do not work. You cannot replace the Advair with an emergency inhaler.



You realize this makes no sense, right?  Yes, Advair is a cOrticosteroid, it is an inhaler, and it is not used for emergency break through asthma attacks.  Or COPD emergency situations either, for that matter.  SOME inhalers are for emergency asthma attacks, Advair is not one of them.



> Kosher under medicaid they can only use one pharmacy not just go to any pharmacy.



I'm sure any rational person could figure out that various ins co's including welfare use contracted pharmacies.

BTW, still waiting for you to defend all these claims outlined above.  Can you do it?


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



He wasn't in an ED, he was at home.  This could have potentially been prevented had Mom done what was necessary to keep emergency meds at home.

Please show me where anyone is saying he should not have had Advair?  NOBODY is freak'en saying that!  The bottom line, what could be done by BOTH mom and welfare was not done, not even emergency meds that are routine to be kept at home.  It may not have escalated to this point had she either done her job as a mother or spent the $38 for emergency HOME meds.

I never claimed he couldn't handle steroids.  Please read the post again.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 13, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > AnnieInMexico said:
> ...



Making the point that the emergency management of respiratory failure is not albuterol.  If asthmatics in severe exacerbation are really luck, they avoid the tube.  

What other emergency home meds could she have had?  Albuterol is _not_ for true emergencies it "rescues" people when they have fallen below their baseline.  Not when they are dying of bronchoconstriction.  

At best, she could have gotten him to an ED, but there is no telling how quickly he decompensated.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> Making the point that the emergency management of respiratory failure is not albuterol.  If asthmatics in severe exacerbation are really luck, they avoid the tube.
> 
> What other emergency home meds could she have had?  Albuterol is _not_ for true emergencies it "rescues" people when they have fallen below their baseline.  Not when they are dying of bronchoconstriction.
> 
> At best, she could have gotten him to an ED, but there is no telling how quickly he decompensated.



I am well aware of your point.  MY point is that we will never know if basic emergency asthma meds would have prevented a death on his way to ER or not.  Mom didn't do much to try and obtain them.  But she has the time and mental ability to sue and do interviews.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 13, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > Making the point that the emergency management of respiratory failure is not albuterol.  If asthmatics in severe exacerbation are really luck, they avoid the tube.
> ...



What emergency meds are those?  As far as I know, duonebs have to be administered by a respiratory tech.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



Most ED respiratory techs don't make house calls.  I think you are in over your head on this one.


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 13, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > AnnieInMexico said:
> ...



No doubt.  You claimed the mother should have had the emergency medications at home.  I am asking you what emergency medications those are.  

What did you expect her to hit the kid with etomodate/succinylcholine and stick a tube down his throat?


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

geauxtohell said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



And here I would have thought the obvious would have come to you naturally.  I won't make that error again.  A HOME emergency med is a rescue inhaler.  You see, that is what is used until paramedics get there.  But Mom didn't even have THAT.

Allow me to explain, there is a difference between home emergency meds and ED emergency meds.  Another example of a home emergency med is an EpiPen for severe allergic reactions.

Seriously, if you can't come up with a bit of logic I really have to be done wasting time with you.  There are others here that wish serious and logical discussion.

You get one more chance at being rational then your chances are up.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 13, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > AnnieInMexico said:
> ...



inhalers are not emergency medications.  Epipen is for allergies not for asthma.  I have to wonder how it is you are a nurse..you realize you cannot diagnose anyone with anything right? You learn little about the diagnostics and it seems you really need to brush up on Respiratory therapy because you clearly know nothing about it.  An inhaler can only be used TWICE and that is it because after that you need to find an emergency room!!!.  It is useless after that and it can only relieve you from an attack and does not always stop them and after two or three puffs is not going to stop one..the inhaler stops the occasional wheeze not a full blown attack.  I had an attack and my inhaler did not work..and that was after using ADVAIR religiously and combivent the combivent did not work after the fourth puff I passed out behind the wheel of a car...yeah that is not an emergency med...it is a relief med..you get your tail to the hospital when the attack is beyond a wheeze because you might suffocate. Stick with crap you know something about Annie, this isn't it...immigration isn't your strong suit either.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

Xchel said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > geauxtohell said:
> ...



Stupid twat;

Allergies can bring on brochospasm.  EpiPens can fix that.  OMG I just can't believe so much stupid is wrapped up in one ignorant twat.

Using Albuterol can buy you time to get to an ER.

Fucking idiot.

How long have you been on welfare?  You have the mentality and ignorance so one can only assume you are a teat sucking welfare loser.  You defend to the end welfare users to the point of insanity.  You can't defend a single one of your claims, mutliple people have called you on this and you STILL pretend to have a clue.

Twat.


----------



## Xchel (Sep 13, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> Xchel said:
> 
> 
> > AnnieInMexico said:
> ...



keep calling people names and insulting..it is amusing Annie, because it shows that you have lost your argument and have nothing further to add.  How is it I am on welfare when I don't live in the US? Epipens are for allergic reactions alone...they are not for asthma.
I see your problem with this woman is she is poor....it isn't about whether she was right or wrong he son and her deserve to die because they aren't wealthy according to your statement above.  I don't need welfare and never have...but I also dont' condemn people for being poor like you do.  I hope you don't practice with that nursing degree of yours because you would make a lousy nurse.


----------



## AnnieInMexico (Sep 13, 2011)

Xchel said:


> AnnieInMexico said:
> 
> 
> > Xchel said:
> ...



You bitch, when YOU suggest I think it is 'cool' to murder 9 year old children in PMs, all bets are off.  You ignorant piece of filth.  How sick are you anyway?


----------



## geauxtohell (Sep 13, 2011)

AnnieInMexico said:


> geauxtohell said:
> 
> 
> > AnnieInMexico said:
> ...



I wouldn't call it an "emergency med".  It's a rescue inhaler for baseline breathing.  That's why it's at the top of the treatment algorithm and not the bottom.  Might it have helped?  Maybe, maybe not.  It depends on how clamped down the bronchioles were.  I thought you were suggesting some other medication that I wasn't aware of.    

An EpiPen is a different situation, but we aren't talking about anaphylaxis now, are we?  

Finally, If you don't want to talk, then don't talk.  This "one more chance" shit like you are my mother is lame.


----------

