Tuesday, February 9, 2016
Alex Schadenberg, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: Assisted Death: I never thought this day would com...
Alex Schadenberg, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: Assisted Death: I never thought this day would com...: This article was published as a CMAJ blog on Feb 3, 2016 and republished with permission. Diane Kelsall By Diane Kelsall, Deput...
Sunday, February 7, 2016
Simon’s Law: “To Be Heard”
Simon’s Law: “To Be Heard”
Read this. Baby's death hastened because of an unauthorized DNR. Illegal DNRs are very common in my experience in British Columbia. DNRs (MOSTs) do not require the signature of the patient. How easy it is for a doctor for whatever reason, perhaps, in the best interest of the patient, to put a DNR on a patient. No oversight safeguard is necessary; just the word of a doctor. Doctors justify illegal DNRs since a patient is going to die anyways.
Read this. Baby's death hastened because of an unauthorized DNR. Illegal DNRs are very common in my experience in British Columbia. DNRs (MOSTs) do not require the signature of the patient. How easy it is for a doctor for whatever reason, perhaps, in the best interest of the patient, to put a DNR on a patient. No oversight safeguard is necessary; just the word of a doctor. Doctors justify illegal DNRs since a patient is going to die anyways.
Friday, January 29, 2016
Alex Schadenberg, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: CARP is now a pro-euthanasia advocacy group.
CARP speaks for 300,000 plus members without consulting each member on this most important issue. Susan Eng from CARP said CARP wants euthanasia on demand. According to the Carter decison, it is up to the patient to ask for euthanasia if the patient is suffering or thinks he is suffering. It is not up to a doctor.
Alex Schadenberg, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: CARP is now a pro-euthanasia advocacy group.:
Alex Schadenberg, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: CARP is now a pro-euthanasia advocacy group.:
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Euthanasia on Demand v. Free Trade (no regulations)
From Globe and Mail January 27 2016 CARP exec says she was fired over neutral approach to assisted dying.
Slippery Slope is already here.
CARP speaks for 300,000 Canadians, really (did 300,000 members vote on this issue)
Susan Eng was told on Tuesday that she was no longer needed as the executive vice-president of advocacy at CARP Canada. She then learned on Wednesday that she was being replaced by Wanda Morris, the head of Dying with Dignity Canada, which advocates for access to physician-assisted dying and against unnecessary barriers when safeguards are being imposed to protect the vulnerable.
The dismissal by Mr. Znaimer occurred as the federal government is preparing to change the law around assisted dying. Parliamentary hearings have already begun on the matter. "The only reason he fired me was so that they can put out an official position for CARP saying that they want to insist on assisted dying on demand," said Ms. Eng, a Toronto lawyer and former chair of the city's police services board.
Slippery Slope is already here.
CARP speaks for 300,000 Canadians, really (did 300,000 members vote on this issue)
Susan Eng was told on Tuesday that she was no longer needed as the executive vice-president of advocacy at CARP Canada. She then learned on Wednesday that she was being replaced by Wanda Morris, the head of Dying with Dignity Canada, which advocates for access to physician-assisted dying and against unnecessary barriers when safeguards are being imposed to protect the vulnerable.
The dismissal by Mr. Znaimer occurred as the federal government is preparing to change the law around assisted dying. Parliamentary hearings have already begun on the matter. "The only reason he fired me was so that they can put out an official position for CARP saying that they want to insist on assisted dying on demand," said Ms. Eng, a Toronto lawyer and former chair of the city's police services board.
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
the Noval case and how the medical system and his family hastened his death
The following article is from: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/06/43641.htm
A copy of the actual filing may be viewed here:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/06/Kaiser.pdf
and at
http://legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org/pdfs/victorino-noval.pdf
Grim Complaint Against Kaiser Hospital - Victorino Noval Kaiser victim and Hector A. Noval his Personal Representative
By WILLIAM DOTINGA
RIVERSIDE, Calif. (CN) -
A son claims a Kaiser hospital ignored his wealthy father's power of attorney so the plaintiff's greedy siblings could collect multimillion-dollar inheritances.
Hector Noval sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and affiliates, a doctor and two social workers on behalf of his father, Victorino Noval, who died in May 2010 after a "terminal extubation." Noval says his father had been involuntarily admitted to Kaiser's intensive care unit for pneumonia on April 28, 2010, while suffering from early-stage of Parkinson's and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Before being hospitalized, Noval, 78, "lived in his own home, drove his own vehicle, and performed his own activities of daily living," according to the Superior Court complaint. "He was worth $60 million and had annual income of $3 million. He made investments and controlled his finances. He suffered from no neurological deficiencies. He did not have dementia or diminished capacity, He functioned independent of others. He was in no way nearing death, an irreversible coma, or a persistent vegetative state. Upon hospitalization, he only required temporary oxygen support while the pneumonia infection in his lungs cleared and he regained his strength. His condition was no more serious than that."
However, Hector Noval says, two of his sisters, Lourdes Frost and Tania Noval, told Kaiser doctors, "falsely and fraudulently," that their father had "'advanced' Parkinson's disease" and had been declining for 6 months before his hospitalization.
He claims that his siblings' false and fraudulent statements included "that he 'would not want to be hooked to a machine like a ventilator,' even if just temporarily, and that 'he had expressed this to [his] daughter both when he is well, and when not so well.' Frost and Noval told defendants that decedent 'would not [have] wanted to be resuscitated if he is to pass away ... he would want to die peacefully if that was to happen.' Each of these statements were untrue. Defendants performed no diligence into their veracity and accepted them as true."
Neither sister is named as a defendant.
Plaintiff Noval claims that on the day his father was admitted, April 28, 2010, he "expressed his desire that decedent be transported to Cedar Sinai in Beverly Hills, California for treatment and that he not be treated at Kaiser. Defendants acknowledged these desires but refused to honor them." (Emphasis in complaint.)
Noval says he has three adult siblings. He says his sisters Lourdes Frost and Tania Noval "desired decedent's death to collect their multimillion-dollar inheritances." He claims that Tania Noval "had a pre-existing relationship with [defendant social worker Anthony] Tapia.
Hector Noval claims that after his father was "sedated for comfort," Frost filed with Kaiser a copy of their father's durable power of attorney for health care, dating from July 1999. He says the power of attorney named him and Frost as their father's attorney in fact, and that California law required the defendants to get consent from both of them to make health care decisions for their father.
But he says, "Defendants did not of this. They never disclosed the DPOA [durable power of attorney] to plaintiff or advised him of his rights or responsibilities therein. Neither did Frost or [defendant] Noval. Plaintiff was never made aware of the DPOA or his rights and responsibilities therein."
In the days that followed, Hector Noval says, his father's doctor, defendant Richard Bradburne, and social worker Tapia met with his sisters and discussed their father's condition, medical outlook and quality of life.
On May 3, he says, Dr. Bradburne prescribed "1-2 more weeks of continued aggressive treatment for the decedent. Plaintiff was at Kaiser at the time and again requested that defendants transport decedent to Cedar Sinai or a like facility. Defendants refused. They never disclosed the DPOA or discussed it with plaintiff, and plaintiff went unaware of his rights in the matter."
Hector Noval claims that on May 4 his sisters "met with Tapia and told him that 'the entire family' desired terminal extubation, i.e. the withdrawal of treatment and death. 'The entire family' did not desire terminal extubation. Frost and [Tania] Noval instructed Tapia to contact a Catholic priest to visit [Victorino] Noval and read his last rites. Tapia did so. Tapia then communicated to defendants that the 'family' desired terminal extubation. No one contacted plaintiff or informed him that any of this was taking place. "Plaintiff was unaware of all of this," according to the complaint.
Hector Noval claims that when he entered the Kaiser hospital on May 5, "Tapia appeared with security at the entrance and had plaintiff searched by security for weapons. No explanation was given. Tapia then took plaintiff to a conference room and told him that decedent was going to be terminally extubated the following day. He gave plaintiff no explanation for the change in treatment and didn't discuss the DPOA with plaintiff or advise plaintiff that he was a 'joint agent' for health care decisions and had the authority to prevent, delay, or postpone it."
Hector Noval says he asked that terminal extubation be delayed and asked again that he father be sent to Cedars Sinai. The complaint states: "Tapia tried convincing plaintiff otherwise but ultimately agreed to communicate his request to delay extubation and said he would 'continue to follow up' with plaintiff and have 'continued conversations' with him 'regarding treatment and terminal extubation.' This was plaintiff's only conversation with Tapia regarding treatment and extubation. They never spoke again despite Tapia's promise.
"Plaintiff left and retained counsel.
"Tapia recorded in decedent's medical file that 'the entire family is in agreement with the terminal extubation except now [plaintiff] showed up today and is causing conflict.' He also recorded that plaintiff 'had history of substance abuse and paranoid personality.' Neither statement was true, and neither was discussed with plaintiff. Tapia wrote them in the record after hearing them from Frost and {Tania} Noval and without performing any diligence or due care into their veracity." (Brackets, but not braces, as in complaint.)
Noval says Tapia "spread these misstatements to defendants, including Bradburne, who wrote in decedent's medical record: 'family discussion, all siblings except one son [plaintiff] and wife are in agreement [regarding terminal extubation] ... the son in disagreement [plaintiff] is a habitual drug user/addict and his judgments and motives are likely not sound in the context of acting as a surrogate decision maker.'" (Brackets as in complaint.)
Hector Noval adds: "One single telephone call to plaintiff or related effort would have cleared the matter. Yet no defendant sought to communicate directly with plaintiff. He was unaware these allegations were being made about him."
The complaint continues: "Bradburne has since apologized for the medical record, stating that Tapia 'had informed me at some point that this information [about plaintiff] had been alleged.' 'That is not a fair statement actually [about plaintiff].' 'I'm making a statement of fact there and that's not true.' 'The keyword that's left out of that sentence is "alleged."' ... He said 'frankly, I regret writing that way.'" (Brackets, but not ellipsis, as in complaint.)
Hector Noval claims that he called a meeting with the sisters on the evening of May 5. He says his sisters produced a will and a trust, and told him to "stop complaining about decedent's death because he'd inherit millions of dollars."
At the meeting, Hector Noval says, he and his lawyer demanded that no terminal extubation take place without his knowledge and consent and that when reasonable, their father be taken off sedation so he could communicate his wishes and direct his own care. He claims that both sisters "agreed to honor these demands. This was plaintiff's and counsel's last communication with Frost and/or Noval before decedent's death."
Hector claims that on May 6, his two sisters met with Kaiser, and said "that plaintiff had 'threatened violence' the evening before and that they were 'afraid' of him. These were false and fraudulent misrepresentations designed solely to discredit and disparage plaintiff and convince defendants to terminally extubate pursuant to their instructions."
He claims that had any of the defendants "made one single telephone call to plaintiff or related effort, they would have discovered the allegations of violence were untrue, that plaintiff had retained counsel, and that Frost and Noval were committing egregious fraud and fraudulent concealment to accomplish their father's death."
On May 6, Hector says, the defendants referred this "true conflict" to defendant Dan Wilson, "a 'bioethics director' and/or on the 'bioethics committee' at Kaiser, to perform an analysis into how to handle decedent's health care going forward."
Hector claims Wilson interviewed his sisters - but not him - "and concluded plaintiff was in a 'clearly impaired condition' and that Kaiser should proceed with terminal extubation at the desires of 'joint agent [Frost] and the remaining family members.'" (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector says that Wilson never met with him, never communicated with him, and that no one at the hospital ever informed him of Wilson's involvement or conclusions.
"Plaintiff believed, instead, from his discussion with Tapia on May 5 that Kaiser would communicate with him before terminal extubation, and from his discussion with Frost and [Tania] Noval on the evening of May 5, that Frost and Noval would not seek terminal extubation without obtaining plaintiff's expressed consent beforehand," the complaint states. (Brackets not in complaint.)
Hector claims that on May 6, "Frost told Tapia that she was traveling to a meeting with plaintiff and his counsel and that the family 'plans to move forward with the extubation [the next day].' This was a false and fraudulent misrepresentation. There was no such meeting ever scheduled with plaintiff and his counsel, and plaintiff was never in agreement with extubation." (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector claims that by then his father had shown "material improvement in his health condition," which Dr. Bradburne noted. He claims Bradburne noted, "'currently, [he] does not meet the ordinary criteria for extubation.'" (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector adds: "Bradburne never communicated any of this to plaintiff."
He claims that in a sworn deposition Bradburne was asked if extubation could have been postponed. "He said 'Absolutely,'" the complaint states. "He said that if anyone, including plaintiff, sought postponement, he would have done so. When asked how long he would have postponed extubation, he said 'Now till the cows come home.'" Hector claims that on May 7, moments before his father's terminal extubation, Bradburne told his sisters that their father's condition had further improved: that the pneumonia was clearing, his temperature had returned to normal, the ventilator had been replaced with a CPAP [continuous positive airway pressure] mask, "which meant there were no tubes, just a mask over his mouth and nose", that his father was "in no distress," with normal heart rate, stable blood pressure, and that he was "'awake to voice with eye opening and eye contact for more than 10 seconds.'"
He says Bradburne gave his sisters "the opportunity to postpone extubation at that moment. They declined."
Hector says Bradburne tasked Wilson with ensuring that he, Hector Noval, was aware of his father's terminal extubation and that he was still in favor of it. Hector says that Wilson never contacted him; he simply asked Frost.
"(A)ccording to his note in decedent's medical file, '[Frost] confirmed that her brother Hector has agreed to follow family wishes regarding extubation and has decided not to be present at actual event,'" the complaint states. (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector says that after his father's breathing tube was removed, Victorino Noval "maintained spontaneous breathing and satisfactory oxygen saturation (93-97%) on this 'simple mask.'" He says Bradburne again gave his sisters the opportunity to postpone their father's death. He says both sisters declined, and Bradburne quadrupled Noval's morphine "to quicken his death" and "effectively ended oxygen support".
Hector says his father died 4 hours and 40 minutes after being extubated, "after 85 minutes fighting to survive with effectively no oxygen and heavily sedated."
Hector says he learned his father had died when he arrived at the hospital for a visit that evening. He says his sisters told him that Kaiser "had done all they could and that the decedent had passed away in spite of active treatment, not because of any withdrawal of treatment or terminal extubation."
"At that point there was no reason to believe any wrongdoing had taken place," the complaint states. "Plaintiff had no knowledge of DPOA, no knowledge of the allegations of Frost and [Tania] Noval to defendants, and no knowledge of defendants' withdrawal of treatment and terminal extubation. He wasn't even aware of decedent's material improvement over the final days of his hospitalization. No one had communicated any of this to him. The only communications he received were from Frost and [Tania] Noval representing that decedent was gravely and terminally ill, that he was in agony, and that there was no likelihood of survival." (Brackets not in complaint.)
Hector says he learned of the durable power of attorney after his sisters' attorneys produced it with other estate planning documents they had been concealing. Only then, he says did he order his father's medical records from Kaiser and discover the facts.
Hector claims that in sworn depositions, both Bradburne and Tapia stated that Kaiser's policy is "to do all that is necessary to inform healthcare agents of their rights and responsibilities under a DPOA. They described past incidents wherein they would even search distant states and foreign countries for health-care agents and would even reach out to health-care agents through intermediaries and agents-of-the-agent. They testified with no doubt that defendants would go to great lengths to communicate with healthcare agents about their rights and responsibilities under a DPOA. It's that critical to a patient's care. Yet in this instant matter, defendants knew plaintiff, had his contact information, spoke to him and/or his family members multiple times, and had every opportunity to communicate with plaintiff about the DPOA and his rights and responsibilities therein, and they failed to perform even minimal diligence and due care in doing so. They undoubtedly wanted to believe Frost and [Tania] Noval and 'buried their heads in the sand.' This directly and legally caused the death of a relatively healthy, wealthy man with many more years left to live and love." (Brackets not in complaint.)
Hector Noval seeks damages and punitive from all the defendants on claims of willful misconduct, negligence, elder abuse, fraudulent concealment, constructive fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and wrongful death.
He seeks damages from Kaiser and Tapia for fraud and false promise; and damages from Kaiser and Bradburne for medical battery and lack of informed consent.
The corporate defendants are Kaiser Foundation Health Plant, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, and Southern California Permanente Medical Group.
Hector Noval is represented by Casey Young of Newport Beach.
KAISERPAPERS.ORG
legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org
A copy of the actual filing may be viewed here:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/02/06/Kaiser.pdf
and at
http://legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org/pdfs/victorino-noval.pdf
Grim Complaint Against Kaiser Hospital - Victorino Noval Kaiser victim and Hector A. Noval his Personal Representative
By WILLIAM DOTINGA
RIVERSIDE, Calif. (CN) -
A son claims a Kaiser hospital ignored his wealthy father's power of attorney so the plaintiff's greedy siblings could collect multimillion-dollar inheritances.
Hector Noval sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and affiliates, a doctor and two social workers on behalf of his father, Victorino Noval, who died in May 2010 after a "terminal extubation." Noval says his father had been involuntarily admitted to Kaiser's intensive care unit for pneumonia on April 28, 2010, while suffering from early-stage of Parkinson's and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Before being hospitalized, Noval, 78, "lived in his own home, drove his own vehicle, and performed his own activities of daily living," according to the Superior Court complaint. "He was worth $60 million and had annual income of $3 million. He made investments and controlled his finances. He suffered from no neurological deficiencies. He did not have dementia or diminished capacity, He functioned independent of others. He was in no way nearing death, an irreversible coma, or a persistent vegetative state. Upon hospitalization, he only required temporary oxygen support while the pneumonia infection in his lungs cleared and he regained his strength. His condition was no more serious than that."
However, Hector Noval says, two of his sisters, Lourdes Frost and Tania Noval, told Kaiser doctors, "falsely and fraudulently," that their father had "'advanced' Parkinson's disease" and had been declining for 6 months before his hospitalization.
He claims that his siblings' false and fraudulent statements included "that he 'would not want to be hooked to a machine like a ventilator,' even if just temporarily, and that 'he had expressed this to [his] daughter both when he is well, and when not so well.' Frost and Noval told defendants that decedent 'would not [have] wanted to be resuscitated if he is to pass away ... he would want to die peacefully if that was to happen.' Each of these statements were untrue. Defendants performed no diligence into their veracity and accepted them as true."
Neither sister is named as a defendant.
Plaintiff Noval claims that on the day his father was admitted, April 28, 2010, he "expressed his desire that decedent be transported to Cedar Sinai in Beverly Hills, California for treatment and that he not be treated at Kaiser. Defendants acknowledged these desires but refused to honor them." (Emphasis in complaint.)
Noval says he has three adult siblings. He says his sisters Lourdes Frost and Tania Noval "desired decedent's death to collect their multimillion-dollar inheritances." He claims that Tania Noval "had a pre-existing relationship with [defendant social worker Anthony] Tapia.
Hector Noval claims that after his father was "sedated for comfort," Frost filed with Kaiser a copy of their father's durable power of attorney for health care, dating from July 1999. He says the power of attorney named him and Frost as their father's attorney in fact, and that California law required the defendants to get consent from both of them to make health care decisions for their father.
But he says, "Defendants did not of this. They never disclosed the DPOA [durable power of attorney] to plaintiff or advised him of his rights or responsibilities therein. Neither did Frost or [defendant] Noval. Plaintiff was never made aware of the DPOA or his rights and responsibilities therein."
In the days that followed, Hector Noval says, his father's doctor, defendant Richard Bradburne, and social worker Tapia met with his sisters and discussed their father's condition, medical outlook and quality of life.
On May 3, he says, Dr. Bradburne prescribed "1-2 more weeks of continued aggressive treatment for the decedent. Plaintiff was at Kaiser at the time and again requested that defendants transport decedent to Cedar Sinai or a like facility. Defendants refused. They never disclosed the DPOA or discussed it with plaintiff, and plaintiff went unaware of his rights in the matter."
Hector Noval claims that on May 4 his sisters "met with Tapia and told him that 'the entire family' desired terminal extubation, i.e. the withdrawal of treatment and death. 'The entire family' did not desire terminal extubation. Frost and [Tania] Noval instructed Tapia to contact a Catholic priest to visit [Victorino] Noval and read his last rites. Tapia did so. Tapia then communicated to defendants that the 'family' desired terminal extubation. No one contacted plaintiff or informed him that any of this was taking place. "Plaintiff was unaware of all of this," according to the complaint.
Hector Noval claims that when he entered the Kaiser hospital on May 5, "Tapia appeared with security at the entrance and had plaintiff searched by security for weapons. No explanation was given. Tapia then took plaintiff to a conference room and told him that decedent was going to be terminally extubated the following day. He gave plaintiff no explanation for the change in treatment and didn't discuss the DPOA with plaintiff or advise plaintiff that he was a 'joint agent' for health care decisions and had the authority to prevent, delay, or postpone it."
Hector Noval says he asked that terminal extubation be delayed and asked again that he father be sent to Cedars Sinai. The complaint states: "Tapia tried convincing plaintiff otherwise but ultimately agreed to communicate his request to delay extubation and said he would 'continue to follow up' with plaintiff and have 'continued conversations' with him 'regarding treatment and terminal extubation.' This was plaintiff's only conversation with Tapia regarding treatment and extubation. They never spoke again despite Tapia's promise.
"Plaintiff left and retained counsel.
"Tapia recorded in decedent's medical file that 'the entire family is in agreement with the terminal extubation except now [plaintiff] showed up today and is causing conflict.' He also recorded that plaintiff 'had history of substance abuse and paranoid personality.' Neither statement was true, and neither was discussed with plaintiff. Tapia wrote them in the record after hearing them from Frost and {Tania} Noval and without performing any diligence or due care into their veracity." (Brackets, but not braces, as in complaint.)
Noval says Tapia "spread these misstatements to defendants, including Bradburne, who wrote in decedent's medical record: 'family discussion, all siblings except one son [plaintiff] and wife are in agreement [regarding terminal extubation] ... the son in disagreement [plaintiff] is a habitual drug user/addict and his judgments and motives are likely not sound in the context of acting as a surrogate decision maker.'" (Brackets as in complaint.)
Hector Noval adds: "One single telephone call to plaintiff or related effort would have cleared the matter. Yet no defendant sought to communicate directly with plaintiff. He was unaware these allegations were being made about him."
The complaint continues: "Bradburne has since apologized for the medical record, stating that Tapia 'had informed me at some point that this information [about plaintiff] had been alleged.' 'That is not a fair statement actually [about plaintiff].' 'I'm making a statement of fact there and that's not true.' 'The keyword that's left out of that sentence is "alleged."' ... He said 'frankly, I regret writing that way.'" (Brackets, but not ellipsis, as in complaint.)
Hector Noval claims that he called a meeting with the sisters on the evening of May 5. He says his sisters produced a will and a trust, and told him to "stop complaining about decedent's death because he'd inherit millions of dollars."
At the meeting, Hector Noval says, he and his lawyer demanded that no terminal extubation take place without his knowledge and consent and that when reasonable, their father be taken off sedation so he could communicate his wishes and direct his own care. He claims that both sisters "agreed to honor these demands. This was plaintiff's and counsel's last communication with Frost and/or Noval before decedent's death."
Hector claims that on May 6, his two sisters met with Kaiser, and said "that plaintiff had 'threatened violence' the evening before and that they were 'afraid' of him. These were false and fraudulent misrepresentations designed solely to discredit and disparage plaintiff and convince defendants to terminally extubate pursuant to their instructions."
He claims that had any of the defendants "made one single telephone call to plaintiff or related effort, they would have discovered the allegations of violence were untrue, that plaintiff had retained counsel, and that Frost and Noval were committing egregious fraud and fraudulent concealment to accomplish their father's death."
On May 6, Hector says, the defendants referred this "true conflict" to defendant Dan Wilson, "a 'bioethics director' and/or on the 'bioethics committee' at Kaiser, to perform an analysis into how to handle decedent's health care going forward."
Hector claims Wilson interviewed his sisters - but not him - "and concluded plaintiff was in a 'clearly impaired condition' and that Kaiser should proceed with terminal extubation at the desires of 'joint agent [Frost] and the remaining family members.'" (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector says that Wilson never met with him, never communicated with him, and that no one at the hospital ever informed him of Wilson's involvement or conclusions.
"Plaintiff believed, instead, from his discussion with Tapia on May 5 that Kaiser would communicate with him before terminal extubation, and from his discussion with Frost and [Tania] Noval on the evening of May 5, that Frost and Noval would not seek terminal extubation without obtaining plaintiff's expressed consent beforehand," the complaint states. (Brackets not in complaint.)
Hector claims that on May 6, "Frost told Tapia that she was traveling to a meeting with plaintiff and his counsel and that the family 'plans to move forward with the extubation [the next day].' This was a false and fraudulent misrepresentation. There was no such meeting ever scheduled with plaintiff and his counsel, and plaintiff was never in agreement with extubation." (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector claims that by then his father had shown "material improvement in his health condition," which Dr. Bradburne noted. He claims Bradburne noted, "'currently, [he] does not meet the ordinary criteria for extubation.'" (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector adds: "Bradburne never communicated any of this to plaintiff."
He claims that in a sworn deposition Bradburne was asked if extubation could have been postponed. "He said 'Absolutely,'" the complaint states. "He said that if anyone, including plaintiff, sought postponement, he would have done so. When asked how long he would have postponed extubation, he said 'Now till the cows come home.'" Hector claims that on May 7, moments before his father's terminal extubation, Bradburne told his sisters that their father's condition had further improved: that the pneumonia was clearing, his temperature had returned to normal, the ventilator had been replaced with a CPAP [continuous positive airway pressure] mask, "which meant there were no tubes, just a mask over his mouth and nose", that his father was "in no distress," with normal heart rate, stable blood pressure, and that he was "'awake to voice with eye opening and eye contact for more than 10 seconds.'"
He says Bradburne gave his sisters "the opportunity to postpone extubation at that moment. They declined."
Hector says Bradburne tasked Wilson with ensuring that he, Hector Noval, was aware of his father's terminal extubation and that he was still in favor of it. Hector says that Wilson never contacted him; he simply asked Frost.
"(A)ccording to his note in decedent's medical file, '[Frost] confirmed that her brother Hector has agreed to follow family wishes regarding extubation and has decided not to be present at actual event,'" the complaint states. (Brackets in complaint.)
Hector says that after his father's breathing tube was removed, Victorino Noval "maintained spontaneous breathing and satisfactory oxygen saturation (93-97%) on this 'simple mask.'" He says Bradburne again gave his sisters the opportunity to postpone their father's death. He says both sisters declined, and Bradburne quadrupled Noval's morphine "to quicken his death" and "effectively ended oxygen support".
Hector says his father died 4 hours and 40 minutes after being extubated, "after 85 minutes fighting to survive with effectively no oxygen and heavily sedated."
Hector says he learned his father had died when he arrived at the hospital for a visit that evening. He says his sisters told him that Kaiser "had done all they could and that the decedent had passed away in spite of active treatment, not because of any withdrawal of treatment or terminal extubation."
"At that point there was no reason to believe any wrongdoing had taken place," the complaint states. "Plaintiff had no knowledge of DPOA, no knowledge of the allegations of Frost and [Tania] Noval to defendants, and no knowledge of defendants' withdrawal of treatment and terminal extubation. He wasn't even aware of decedent's material improvement over the final days of his hospitalization. No one had communicated any of this to him. The only communications he received were from Frost and [Tania] Noval representing that decedent was gravely and terminally ill, that he was in agony, and that there was no likelihood of survival." (Brackets not in complaint.)
Hector says he learned of the durable power of attorney after his sisters' attorneys produced it with other estate planning documents they had been concealing. Only then, he says did he order his father's medical records from Kaiser and discover the facts.
Hector claims that in sworn depositions, both Bradburne and Tapia stated that Kaiser's policy is "to do all that is necessary to inform healthcare agents of their rights and responsibilities under a DPOA. They described past incidents wherein they would even search distant states and foreign countries for health-care agents and would even reach out to health-care agents through intermediaries and agents-of-the-agent. They testified with no doubt that defendants would go to great lengths to communicate with healthcare agents about their rights and responsibilities under a DPOA. It's that critical to a patient's care. Yet in this instant matter, defendants knew plaintiff, had his contact information, spoke to him and/or his family members multiple times, and had every opportunity to communicate with plaintiff about the DPOA and his rights and responsibilities therein, and they failed to perform even minimal diligence and due care in doing so. They undoubtedly wanted to believe Frost and [Tania] Noval and 'buried their heads in the sand.' This directly and legally caused the death of a relatively healthy, wealthy man with many more years left to live and love." (Brackets not in complaint.)
Hector Noval seeks damages and punitive from all the defendants on claims of willful misconduct, negligence, elder abuse, fraudulent concealment, constructive fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and wrongful death.
He seeks damages from Kaiser and Tapia for fraud and false promise; and damages from Kaiser and Bradburne for medical battery and lack of informed consent.
The corporate defendants are Kaiser Foundation Health Plant, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, and Southern California Permanente Medical Group.
Hector Noval is represented by Casey Young of Newport Beach.
legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Cauliflower
Cauliflower is now $11.00 a head. I never particularly liked cauliflower and now I want it. Why. I do not know why. Price creaets a demand.
Thursday, January 21, 2016
Euthanasia and the Canadian Medical Association
Today being Thursday January 21 2016, the Canadian Medical Association is presenting its Principles-based Recommendations for a Canadian Approach to Assisted Dying. What a joke.
The Recommendations (if the government accepts the recommendations) will be stealth law giving 99.9% power to doctors to do euthanasia when they want. There is a window, so it will be opened. The window is ...a standard waiting period is not appropriate for all requests ...this could be shorter ...the attending physician must wait no longer than 48 hours, or as soon as is practicable, after the written request is received.
Think about it why have a waiting period as each day costs $big, so why wait. More importantly, the patient may change her mind and all the preparation are for naught. Doctors do not like patients who change their minds. This is what Ro Ang, the manager of GPC, told me. So was Randy declared incompetent because he might change his mind. Is this one of the reasons used to justify his incompetence.
Like the young woman (Brittany Maynard) in Oregon, she changed her mind against assisted suicide as it was too soon, she said (there was a video), and the next day she was dead. Was she forced to follow through with her original date to commit suicide. Also, Gloria Taylor, who was happy with all the attention she was getting. She must have had a DNR on her and emergency refused to agressively treat her. She did not want to die from an infection.
The first few of those who will be euthanized will have perfect oversight to satisfy the public as to safe safeguards but after that what: confidentiality; and a death certificate, not mentioning euthanasia so an insurance company (I think that is criminal fraud) will never know.
CORRECTION; Quebec is already euthanizing patients against federal law and details (the process) is confidential. We live in Dodge City.
The CMA recommendations are not even dated. Trust doctors, you cannot even trust them to date a document recommending how they are going to euthanize patients. What an oversight.
Listen to this: http://rewardsradiotv.com/AUDIO/vickie-t/index2.htm. This is also what is happening in Canada not only to the elderly but to anyone the system targets as not having a meaningful quality of life. This parallels what happened to Randy and I. The legislators in the US and also in Canada know that this is happening but do nothing except to maintain the status quo thus creating a culture of death.
.
The Recommendations (if the government accepts the recommendations) will be stealth law giving 99.9% power to doctors to do euthanasia when they want. There is a window, so it will be opened. The window is ...a standard waiting period is not appropriate for all requests ...this could be shorter ...the attending physician must wait no longer than 48 hours, or as soon as is practicable, after the written request is received.
Think about it why have a waiting period as each day costs $big, so why wait. More importantly, the patient may change her mind and all the preparation are for naught. Doctors do not like patients who change their minds. This is what Ro Ang, the manager of GPC, told me. So was Randy declared incompetent because he might change his mind. Is this one of the reasons used to justify his incompetence.
Like the young woman (Brittany Maynard) in Oregon, she changed her mind against assisted suicide as it was too soon, she said (there was a video), and the next day she was dead. Was she forced to follow through with her original date to commit suicide. Also, Gloria Taylor, who was happy with all the attention she was getting. She must have had a DNR on her and emergency refused to agressively treat her. She did not want to die from an infection.
The first few of those who will be euthanized will have perfect oversight to satisfy the public as to safe safeguards but after that what: confidentiality; and a death certificate, not mentioning euthanasia so an insurance company (I think that is criminal fraud) will never know.
CORRECTION; Quebec is already euthanizing patients against federal law and details (the process) is confidential. We live in Dodge City.
The CMA recommendations are not even dated. Trust doctors, you cannot even trust them to date a document recommending how they are going to euthanize patients. What an oversight.
Listen to this: http://rewardsradiotv.com/AUDIO/vickie-t/index2.htm. This is also what is happening in Canada not only to the elderly but to anyone the system targets as not having a meaningful quality of life. This parallels what happened to Randy and I. The legislators in the US and also in Canada know that this is happening but do nothing except to maintain the status quo thus creating a culture of death.
.
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
BC's Health Authorities on how to effectively communicate with the public
A You Tube video.
If the video does not show up on the blog page, please click the title below.
BC's Health Authorities on how to effectively communicate with the public,
1. delay
2, deny
3. divide
4, discredit
5. demoralize
The menu/recipe did not mention the 6th "d" being death. Death is the result leaving the victim traumatized and scared of the health authorities, horrified that she was part of the premeditated menu and unable to do anything.
I was expected to become stockholmed in which the abused identify positively with the abusers (and in my case Vancouver Coastal Health) and all would be forgiven.
Below explanation from Wikipedia.
Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes "strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other."[4] One commonly used hypothesis to explain the effect of Stockholm syndrome is based on Freudian theory. It suggests that the bonding is the individual's response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be perceived as a threat.
"Of all forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhuman."
Martin Luther King, Jr. (1966)
740 views on You Tube jan03/16
Saturday, January 9, 2016
The Red Cross, it is corrupt
I did not know that the Red Cross was corrupt. So if I did not know this I assume 99.9% of the population out there is not aware of what is happening.
I am sure that the Red Cross is like the Vancouver Food Bank that it has no members from the public. Do not give any money to any charitable cause unless you can be an active members i.e. access to detailed financial records ,membership lists, attending board meetings, all that should be transparent, ability to become a director.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/04/red-cross-haiti-report_n_7511080.html
Years ago I was part of a conversation and I was told that well-educated parents were directing their children to enter the non-profit sector rather than public service as the non-profit sector is where the money is with job security and very little accountability. Governments are downloading their social responsibilities to non-profits.
When there is an environmental disaster the military should be sent in to reconstruct. Roosevelt got tired of the prima donnas that were constructing the Hoover Dam so he sent in the military to finish its construction: those who had to followed orders and could not quit.
----------
I am sure that the Red Cross is like the Vancouver Food Bank that it has no members from the public. Do not give any money to any charitable cause unless you can be an active members i.e. access to detailed financial records ,membership lists, attending board meetings, all that should be transparent, ability to become a director.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/04/red-cross-haiti-report_n_7511080.html
Years ago I was part of a conversation and I was told that well-educated parents were directing their children to enter the non-profit sector rather than public service as the non-profit sector is where the money is with job security and very little accountability. Governments are downloading their social responsibilities to non-profits.
When there is an environmental disaster the military should be sent in to reconstruct. Roosevelt got tired of the prima donnas that were constructing the Hoover Dam so he sent in the military to finish its construction: those who had to followed orders and could not quit.
----------
Thursday, January 7, 2016
Inconsistency of Modern Biothics ( health care)
The inconsistency of modern bioethics is breathtaking. On the one hand,
if you want to end your chronic suffering or deal with a terminal
illness by committing suicide, today’s utilitarian ethicists will invoke
personal autonomy as the guiding principle and endorse your plans. But
if you choose to continue living in spite of your suffering or terminal
diagnosis, those same ethicists brush aside the notion of personal
autonomy, label your request as unreasonable, and conclude that you are
sadly incapable of making the “right” choice.
Philip Hawley, Jr. MD.
Public Discourse
No one is allowed to believe in miracles.
------------
Note: I was told that it was in Randy's best interest to die.
At the time when I was told on my cell that Randy was being moved to a private room at GPC because he was dying I was at VGH talking to his doctor there and he said Randy was okay. Randy just returned from VGH to GPC. So why was he forced to return against Randy's objections as he was afraid of being returned there to GPC and I advised VGH since 2010 that Randy nor I wanted him in GPC as it was not safe they kept sending him back. I remember being told by VGH that although Randy was full code and that VGH had no power over what Dr. Dunn would do when he was returned to GPC. GPC is a satellite of VGH and VGH said it has no power over GPC and it would not investigate our concern that it was not safe for Randy to be at GPC. How inconceivable. I remember asking for VGH/GPC to send Randy home if he was dying as this was not what Randy wanted and both refused. So I assumed he was not going to die. Trust the health authority, I think not.
As I understand the euthanasia act to be on Februaty 6 2016, that it only takes two doctors to collude together to rid the system of costly longterm chronic patients.
Randy was not on a ventilator, he was on a trach and he was not in pain. Although he was on a trach and could not talk, he knew exactly what they were trying to do with him: hasten his death without his authority to do so by using a do not attempt DNR. I always wondered why they would say do not attempt a DNR on a document that the patient did not sign. Does that mean to tell the health professionals covertly if they had a patient who had signs of an upcoming heart attack because he had a high temperature (pneumonia) or that if a patient was having a trouble breathing not to assist him: put him in an isolated private room "pull the curtain" and let him die alone. Just do not go near the room so you can not hear him gasping for oxygen because then you would have to do something. My musing.
To the patients (and loved ones out there) INSIST that you read and get a copy of your medical report each single day. If your relatives/friends want a copy, the hospital or care home can send them a copy via fax with a caveat by your that all entries have to be readable. Or the hospital can use a cell phone., take a picture of the record, and send it to them. If you are a substitute decision maker, you are entitled to this information: you should be aware of his up-to-date medical file. How else can you make an informed decision; it is easy for the health authority to say you are not capable to make medical decisions and appoint the PGT. This is what they did to me. A copy could be sent to anyone that the patient would want to monitor his progress (advocacy groups).
It is up to the patient to decide who he wants to know his health condition and treatment and not the hospital or the government.
.
Philip Hawley, Jr. MD.
Public Discourse
No one is allowed to believe in miracles.
------------
Note: I was told that it was in Randy's best interest to die.
At the time when I was told on my cell that Randy was being moved to a private room at GPC because he was dying I was at VGH talking to his doctor there and he said Randy was okay. Randy just returned from VGH to GPC. So why was he forced to return against Randy's objections as he was afraid of being returned there to GPC and I advised VGH since 2010 that Randy nor I wanted him in GPC as it was not safe they kept sending him back. I remember being told by VGH that although Randy was full code and that VGH had no power over what Dr. Dunn would do when he was returned to GPC. GPC is a satellite of VGH and VGH said it has no power over GPC and it would not investigate our concern that it was not safe for Randy to be at GPC. How inconceivable. I remember asking for VGH/GPC to send Randy home if he was dying as this was not what Randy wanted and both refused. So I assumed he was not going to die. Trust the health authority, I think not.
As I understand the euthanasia act to be on Februaty 6 2016, that it only takes two doctors to collude together to rid the system of costly longterm chronic patients.
Randy was not on a ventilator, he was on a trach and he was not in pain. Although he was on a trach and could not talk, he knew exactly what they were trying to do with him: hasten his death without his authority to do so by using a do not attempt DNR. I always wondered why they would say do not attempt a DNR on a document that the patient did not sign. Does that mean to tell the health professionals covertly if they had a patient who had signs of an upcoming heart attack because he had a high temperature (pneumonia) or that if a patient was having a trouble breathing not to assist him: put him in an isolated private room "pull the curtain" and let him die alone. Just do not go near the room so you can not hear him gasping for oxygen because then you would have to do something. My musing.
To the patients (and loved ones out there) INSIST that you read and get a copy of your medical report each single day. If your relatives/friends want a copy, the hospital or care home can send them a copy via fax with a caveat by your that all entries have to be readable. Or the hospital can use a cell phone., take a picture of the record, and send it to them. If you are a substitute decision maker, you are entitled to this information: you should be aware of his up-to-date medical file. How else can you make an informed decision; it is easy for the health authority to say you are not capable to make medical decisions and appoint the PGT. This is what they did to me. A copy could be sent to anyone that the patient would want to monitor his progress (advocacy groups).
It is up to the patient to decide who he wants to know his health condition and treatment and not the hospital or the government.
.
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
Chris Dunn died today.
Chris Dunn died today 23 December 2015 of natural causes. He was 46. What do they mean by natural causes. If he was going to die anyways why did the Houston Methodist Hospital decide to withdraw life support. Or was it just the money that the Hospital would save by extending the life of Chris by a few hours, a few days, or a few weeks.
It is unconsciousable.
Quote by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in healthcare is the most shocking and most inhumane."
It is unconsciousable.
Quote by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in healthcare is the most shocking and most inhumane."
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Do Not Resuscitate Orders
http://life.org.nz/euthanasi/euthanasia/euthanasiakeyissues/dnr-orders/Default.htm
At VGH the patient doesn't even sign a DNR, only the doctor, and no witnesses are required.
Under our forthcoming Euthanasia law, euthanasia cannot be executed on a patient who is incompetent. My understanding is that with a DNR, it is the reverse, if a patient is incompetent his surrogate can authorize a DNR.
from the Terry Schiavo Life and Hope Network:
"What is happening to Chris Dunn at Houston Methodist happens daily in medical facilities nationwide," says Bobby Schindler, brother of Terri Schiavo and president of the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network.
Schindler continues, "The rights of patients and their family members have been abrogated and turned over to complete strangers—ethics committees, hospital boards and health care professionals. Even in such heartbreaking cases as Mr. Dunn, who is literally begging for his care to be continued, the hospital seems to be taking whatever action possible to remove him from its balance sheet. Hospital administrators should not be able to summarily deny the civil liberties of a disabled patient."
Vancouver Coastal Health denied Randy his civil liberties and also imprisoned him so that I could not access him. We do not have to say that Chris Dunn is in the USA, the same thing is happening here in Canada. Bobby Schindler at least laid the blame on money which is the reason for draconian decisions.
I have asked that the Public Guardian and Trustee to investigate George Pearson Centre, but it hasn't even answered my communication.
Harry Rankin once said to say "coverup" and you will get action but VGH/PGT are immune to even that. I do not know what to do.
Quote from Martin Luther King, Jr., "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in healthcare is the most shocking and most inhumane."
- When a DNR order is on a chart, doctors often refrain from implementing other life-sustaining treatment
- Some patients are pressured to sign DNR orders, worded with medical jargon they do not understand, when they are in a confused state.
At VGH the patient doesn't even sign a DNR, only the doctor, and no witnesses are required.
Under our forthcoming Euthanasia law, euthanasia cannot be executed on a patient who is incompetent. My understanding is that with a DNR, it is the reverse, if a patient is incompetent his surrogate can authorize a DNR.
from the Terry Schiavo Life and Hope Network:
"What is happening to Chris Dunn at Houston Methodist happens daily in medical facilities nationwide," says Bobby Schindler, brother of Terri Schiavo and president of the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network.
Schindler continues, "The rights of patients and their family members have been abrogated and turned over to complete strangers—ethics committees, hospital boards and health care professionals. Even in such heartbreaking cases as Mr. Dunn, who is literally begging for his care to be continued, the hospital seems to be taking whatever action possible to remove him from its balance sheet. Hospital administrators should not be able to summarily deny the civil liberties of a disabled patient."
Vancouver Coastal Health denied Randy his civil liberties and also imprisoned him so that I could not access him. We do not have to say that Chris Dunn is in the USA, the same thing is happening here in Canada. Bobby Schindler at least laid the blame on money which is the reason for draconian decisions.
I have asked that the Public Guardian and Trustee to investigate George Pearson Centre, but it hasn't even answered my communication.
Harry Rankin once said to say "coverup" and you will get action but VGH/PGT are immune to even that. I do not know what to do.
Quote from Martin Luther King, Jr., "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in healthcare is the most shocking and most inhumane."
Thursday, December 10, 2015
Texas decides Chris Dunn should die ..
American hero faces death sentence in a Texas hospital ... euthanasia! Is a version of this happening in British Columbia.
Right now, an American hero is fighting for his right to make that decision from his hospital bed at Houston Methodist Hospital.
David Christopher “Chris” Dunn is one of countless Texans who have been victimized by the draconian Texas Advance Directives Act (TADA), enacted by the Texas Legislature in 1999.
The law – which benefits the medical lobby and jeopardizes medically vulnerable Texans – protects the financial and discriminatory interests of hospitals and physicians by abrogating the civil liberties of patients.
When a hospital or physician determines for any reason that they disagree with a patient’s decision about his or her own medical treatment and invokes TADA, Texas law protects those healthcare providers as they remove life-sustaining treatment from the patient even when doing so means overriding the patient’s desire and right to live—and even when the treatment is benefitting the patient.
The law does not require that the hospital inform the patient or family about the reasons or basis for the removal of treatment, which could include financial reasons, discrimination, or subjective quality of life value judgments about the life of the patient.
Chris, who has served Texas and the nation as an EMT, in the Harris County Sheriff’s office, and Homeland Security employee, received his death sentence when Methodist invoked the TADA statutory process last month.
After the hospital announced that care would be forcibly removed from Chris against his will, Chris’s family contacted Texas Right to Life, and, with legal aid, an extension of the ten-day waiting period was secured. (The law requires this ten-day period ostensibly to provide time for a patient to transfer to another facility that will accept him and follow his medical directive.).
A Harris County judge has granted two consecutive two-week extensions thus far, but Houston Methodist Hospital has countered these interventions with additional court filings to remove Chris’s mother from the process. His mother, Evelyn, has been vigilant in protecting Chris since he is intermittently sedated. In this You Tube video below, a conscious and alert Chris Dunn pleads for legal assistance from his attorneys:
Most Texans are incredulous upon learning that a patient who is conscious and communicating his desire to live can be killed by the forcible removal of life-sustaining care, which is euthanasia by hospital committee. But this is exactly the scenario you just saw in this powerful video.
What makes the Texas Advance Directives Act even more despicable is the airtight power of the hospital to kill patients without any recourse to appeal the death sentence imposed by the hospital committee. That’s right – the final arbiter over the hospital’s fatal decision is the hospital!
For this reason, Texas Right to Life has been at-the-ready with pro bono lega lcounsel equipped to help countless patients and their families navigate the mind-boggling labyrinth of the hospital system for many years. TADA is an anti-Life, anti-Texan law and endangers all hospitalized patients, and particularly the disabled and the indigent who may not be able to pay for their care.
In no other state are patients subjected to this level of legally-protected abuse of power among hospitals and physicians. Texas Right to Life has spent the last decade working to repeal TADA and restore the Right to Life of hospitalized Texans at the mercy of the powerful medical lobby year after year.
Enough is enough. Join Texas Right to Life to help Chris see Christmas.
#HelpChrisSeeChristmas
video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v+67FquofEeo
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
Houston family seeks to protect life of ailing patient | Texas Right to Life
Houston family seeks to protect life of ailing patient | Texas Right to Life
What is happening in Texas seems to happening here in Canada. If you do not agree with the medical team they will take away your Representation Agreement etc. and give it to a third party (PGT) who will agree with the medical team to put down the one you have a fiduciary duty to in favour of death against a patient's wish. This is what Vancouver Coastal Health did to me and I live in British Columbia, not Texas.
See the video. https/youtube.com/watch?vFquofEeo
If a patient does not agree to die, he will be declared incompetent and so will his surrogate. We do not need an euthanasia law, we already have it.
In November, Methodist Hospital delivered a letter to the mother of David Christopher Dunn, “Chris,” confirming plans to remove and withdraw medical treatment at the end of ten days. Because Chris is intermittently conscious due to sedation, his mother is acting as his Medical Power of Attorney.
However, Methodist has invoked the statutory process found in the Texas Advanced Directives Act (TADA-Chapter 166.046 of the Health & Safety Code), which allows the hospital to override medical directives of a patient and provide only ten days’ notice before withdrawing life-sustaining treatment. Dunn’s only recourse is to find another facility that will offer him an ICU bed – a daunting task on a rushed time frame for anyone, but even more so for patients without insurance such as Chris.
Chris is an American hero, who has served his community and the nation as an EMT, a police dispatcher, a Harris County Sheriff, and a Homeland Security employee. Chris even fought Somali pirates as part of a security team. Rather than protecting Chris’s Right to Life, the state of Texas is rewarding his lifetime of selfless service by relinquishing him to a hospital panel who have judged his quality of life too low to merit continued treatment.
Tragically, this is the way countless Texans have lived out their final days since 1999, when TADA unconstitutionally bestowed on healthcare facilities authority over Life and death.
Doctors who decide their patients’ cases are “futile” – regardless of their motive or reasons for doing so – hold the power to remove patients from medical treatment or to issue a Do-Not-Resuscitate order on the patient, even if such action is against the expressed wishes of the patient or his surrogate.
If the patient or his surrogate cannot find a transfer facility willing to take the patient within that ten-day period, there is no appellate process for the decision of the hospital panel. In other words, hospital panels have the right to decide which medically vulnerable Texans live and die.
Texas Right to Life has assisted Chris’s family in navigating this legal labyrinth to ensure that he continues to receive care. As a result of Texas Right to Life’s advocacy, Methodist Hospital agreed to extend the time for Chris, and the family was granted a two-week extension by a Harris County judge. Yesterday, a second two week extension was granted.
However, yesterday Methodist Hospital also filed an injunction seeking custodial guardianship of Chris. If granted, this injunction would legally prevent his mother, Evelyn, from fighting for the rights of her son. The family has released a video in which Chris clearly communicates that he wants to live and that he wants his lawyers to continue to fight for his life.
Since Evelyn would not succumb to pressure from the hospital to impose death upon Chris, Methodist’s lawyers are now trying to remove Evelyn from Chris’s bedside and from his medical care. The hospital is attempting to neutralize her ability to protect the life of her 40-something year old son.
The Office of the Attorney General sent a strong message that the law could not be defended if challenged, stating that the OAG would not be involved in the case. Chris’s attorneys plan to file a constitutional challenge to the law. This cannot take place if Evelyn’s rights to speak for her son are stripped and the ill-intended hospital garners all control over the care, treatment, and life of Chris.
What is happening in Texas seems to happening here in Canada. If you do not agree with the medical team they will take away your Representation Agreement etc. and give it to a third party (PGT) who will agree with the medical team to put down the one you have a fiduciary duty to in favour of death against a patient's wish. This is what Vancouver Coastal Health did to me and I live in British Columbia, not Texas.
See the video. https/youtube.com/watch?vFquofEeo
If a patient does not agree to die, he will be declared incompetent and so will his surrogate. We do not need an euthanasia law, we already have it.
by Texas Right to LifeFriday, December 04, 2015
Houston, Texas- December 4, 2015:In November, Methodist Hospital delivered a letter to the mother of David Christopher Dunn, “Chris,” confirming plans to remove and withdraw medical treatment at the end of ten days. Because Chris is intermittently conscious due to sedation, his mother is acting as his Medical Power of Attorney.
However, Methodist has invoked the statutory process found in the Texas Advanced Directives Act (TADA-Chapter 166.046 of the Health & Safety Code), which allows the hospital to override medical directives of a patient and provide only ten days’ notice before withdrawing life-sustaining treatment. Dunn’s only recourse is to find another facility that will offer him an ICU bed – a daunting task on a rushed time frame for anyone, but even more so for patients without insurance such as Chris.
Chris is an American hero, who has served his community and the nation as an EMT, a police dispatcher, a Harris County Sheriff, and a Homeland Security employee. Chris even fought Somali pirates as part of a security team. Rather than protecting Chris’s Right to Life, the state of Texas is rewarding his lifetime of selfless service by relinquishing him to a hospital panel who have judged his quality of life too low to merit continued treatment.
Tragically, this is the way countless Texans have lived out their final days since 1999, when TADA unconstitutionally bestowed on healthcare facilities authority over Life and death.
Doctors who decide their patients’ cases are “futile” – regardless of their motive or reasons for doing so – hold the power to remove patients from medical treatment or to issue a Do-Not-Resuscitate order on the patient, even if such action is against the expressed wishes of the patient or his surrogate.
If the patient or his surrogate cannot find a transfer facility willing to take the patient within that ten-day period, there is no appellate process for the decision of the hospital panel. In other words, hospital panels have the right to decide which medically vulnerable Texans live and die.
Texas Right to Life has assisted Chris’s family in navigating this legal labyrinth to ensure that he continues to receive care. As a result of Texas Right to Life’s advocacy, Methodist Hospital agreed to extend the time for Chris, and the family was granted a two-week extension by a Harris County judge. Yesterday, a second two week extension was granted.
However, yesterday Methodist Hospital also filed an injunction seeking custodial guardianship of Chris. If granted, this injunction would legally prevent his mother, Evelyn, from fighting for the rights of her son. The family has released a video in which Chris clearly communicates that he wants to live and that he wants his lawyers to continue to fight for his life.
Since Evelyn would not succumb to pressure from the hospital to impose death upon Chris, Methodist’s lawyers are now trying to remove Evelyn from Chris’s bedside and from his medical care. The hospital is attempting to neutralize her ability to protect the life of her 40-something year old son.
The Office of the Attorney General sent a strong message that the law could not be defended if challenged, stating that the OAG would not be involved in the case. Chris’s attorneys plan to file a constitutional challenge to the law. This cannot take place if Evelyn’s rights to speak for her son are stripped and the ill-intended hospital garners all control over the care, treatment, and life of Chris.
Why is Houston Methodist Hospital trying to take Chris's life? | Texas Right to Life
Why is Houston Methodist Hospital trying to take Chris's life? | Texas Right to Life
by Texas Right to LifeWednesday, December 09, 2015
Last week, we alerted supporters and media to the harrowing ordeal of
American hero Chris Dunn at Houston Methodist Hospital, where
administrators are fighting to remove him from life-sustaining
treatment. Texas Right to Life has been at the helm of efforts to save
Chris, and we have seen a tidal wave of support – along with thoughtful
and poignant questions – from our friends.Chris was admitted to Methodist Hospital over eight weeks ago, and the hospital is currently withholding diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment for Chris’s ailment because they have arbitrated that Chris’s life is no longer worthy of care – even though Chris and his family disagree with that conclusion.
Chris’s case seems unbelievable to many Texans who cannot imagine that our state boasts a law allowing hospitals to remove patients from life-sustaining treatments against their will. Sadly, this is exactly what the Texas Advance Directives Act (TADA), passed in 1999, permits. Rendering Chris’s case even more shocking is video documentation, filmed in his hospital room last week, of Chris pleading for his life to attorneys who are fighting the hospital’s directive on his behalf.
Under TADA, in Section 166.046, Texas Health and Safety Code, a hospital can take away treatment from a patient (conscious or unconscious) against his will, his advance directive, or his Medical Power of Attorney. The hospital only is required to give the family 10 days’ notice before removing treatment, but the process for patients in these situations to find another facility that will provide care often takes weeks. We have been working to secure care at a different facility, but the law inhibits this process by imposing impossible deadlines and the hospital has abandoned efforts to treat Chris, further delaying the transfer.
The law is barbaric and gives faceless hospital panels the sole authority to take a person’s life instead of empowering patients and families to make their own decisions about their care. Essentially, the law not only allows Chris to be killed against his will, but also hinders our ability to help him live. Pro-Lifers have long warned of the dangerous death panels which threaten to become commonplace under Obamacare. Because of TADA, Texas has served as a tragic example of what this kind of legislation looks like in action for the last sixteen years. No other state has as merciless a statute as the Texas Advance Directives Act. Only Virginia has a similar law, which, unlike in Texas, remains rarely if ever invoked.
Many have asked what Chris’s medical diagnosis is. In short: no one – including his doctors – knows. This is not because Chris is suffering from an inexplicable illness, but simply because his physicians refuse to investigate his symptoms to find a cause. Chris was admitted with a mass on his pancreas which, to date, the hospital has not biopsied.
What we do know about Chris’s medical state is that he is not brain-dead; he is conscious and responds to commands and answers questions by nodding his head and waving his arms. He has persisted in his condition with little change since his admittance at Methodist two months ago. Chris’s condition may be treatable, but the hospital has discriminated against Chris by ruling treatment futile based on an arbitrary “quality of life” judgment, and they have done this without even investing due diligence in diagnosing him.
The hospital has not predicated this decision on Chris’s inability to pay. Instead, the hospital has focused on subjective quality of life judgments as the reason for denying Chris life-sustaining care. Although he did not have insurance when admitted, Chris is eligible for emergency Medicaid, and Chris is receiving other treatment at Methodist.
The issue at hand is the hospital’s insistence on removing Chris from a ventilator, which would kill him.
Wielding the power over Chris’s life, the hospital has myriad options available to them. Houston Methodist could reverse the decision to invoke TADA and allow Chris to live on his own terms. They could biopsy the mass on his pancreas and initiate a treatment plan. They could continue treating Chris without a deadline pending his transfer to another facility – whenever that can be achieved. But the hospital has eschewed these alternatives and stubbornly clung to their intention of ending Chris’s life.
Last week, the hospital petitioned a court to allow them to usurp the authority of Chris’s mother as his Medical Power of Attorney and instead name an unknown staff member at Houston Methodist as Chris’s custodial guardian – all in an effort to ensure his demise.
The provisions of the Texas Advance Directives Act have ravaged vulnerable hospital patients and their families long enough. Please help Texas Right to Life save Chris by contacting Houston Methodist CEO Marc Boom at 713-441-2671 or mboom@tmhs.org, and sign our petition to #HelpChrisSeeChristmas here. Then, alert your family and friends to Chris’s situation by participating in our December 15 Thunderclap, and using the hash tag #HelpChrisSeeChristmas on social media.
Finally, we must work to ensure, through legislative change, that Texas hospitals do not impose unjust death sentences as any more patients. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has affirmed that the Texas Advance Directives Act is legally indefensible, and Texas Right to Life has spent the last several Legislative Sessions working to overturn the statute. But rogue Republicans have consistently upended these efforts. That’s why we must elect thoroughly Pro-Life leaders in the 2016 election. We can protect Life from fertilization to natural death; will you join us in the fight?
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
The day Randy should have died.
Today is the 18th of November, the anniversary of when Randy should have died. I remember it with clarity. When |I asked Dr. Dunne to remove the DNR/DNT hours before, he told me that he would consider it after he returned from his trip to Prince George...the horror of it all and there is no relief for me...
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Randy Michael Walker and the College
I keep thinking about Randy and why he had to die when he did. Why VCH decided that his death should be hastened because it was in Randy's best interest. Randy should have died on November 18 2013; the near death incident could have been prevented if Dr. Dunne would have removed the DNR Order a few hours before when I asked him to. Randy never agreed to a DNR. I told staff that this was not what Randy wanted and for them to ignore the November 15, 2013 DNR. The night nurse made a terrible mistake. He knew Randy was dying and instead of waiting until he died he phoned me and I rushed to George Pearson Centre. When Randy saw me he was reaching out for me to save his life. Since he had a purported DNR/DNT on him, the staff refused to do anything. I phoned 911. Chaos.
Because of my intervention I was able to save Randy's life. Mostly he needed a vent assist. As soon as Randy was stabilized I contacted the police as I believed that Dr. Dunne by putting on a DNR Order was somehow criminally culpable (attempted homicide) and notified the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons. VGH Emergency and the ambulance people knew of what happened as well as the police as 911 attended.
Considering the seriousness of my allegation and the seemingly apparent culpability of Dr. Dunne, the College should have immediately suspended Dr. Dunne pending an investigation. Yes, the College has the power to suspend a doctor in the public interest. I also asked that Dr. Dunne be replaced as Randy's doctor and this request was refused. Dr. Dunne should have reclused himself. The only reason that I even knew of the DNR/DNT was that I asked a nurse on November 15 2013, what Randy's status was, and I was showed the DNR/DNT Order signed by Dr. Dunne. On 14 November 2013 Randy was in VGH and his status was Full Code, Level IV. Randy was 57. He had no disease nor was he in pain.
After that, VCH went on a further sojourn to discredit and demoralize me claiming that I did not have Randy's best interest and I was incapable to be Randy's substitute decision maker. VCH took this to the Public Guardian and Trustee and VCH stripped me and Randy of all his rights. What was Randy's best interest. Was it that his death be hastened.
After Randy died I wasn't able to access any of Randy's things as Randy was now the property of the Public Guardian and Trustee. He had become a non-person. I wanted to place one of Randy's Steeler's baseball caps in his coffin as he wore a cap even when he was sleeping. The manager at GPC refused to give me one of his hats. Randy was dead and GPC were still being bullies.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons' Decision said that Randy was among things too sick as he had a temperature of 39.9 rendering him incapable of making any medical decisions. The Certificate of Incapability was made (rubbered stamped on the recommendation of the PGT) by VCH who issued the CI on April 4 2014; the day Randy should have died was 18 November 2013; the day I was banned from ever seeing Randy again was January 29 2014 (with the help of the Public Guardian and Trustee). I was never told that I was being investigated or that Randy was.
Because of my correspondence to the PGT, I thought the PGT was investigating George Pearson Centre and its treatment of patients there. One of my concerns was when I spoke to GPC patients there, they did not seem to know what a DNR was or whether or not a DNR/DNT was on them.
The PGT complaint against me was mostly based on collateral evidence (parallel gossip). All my supposed legal rights to Randy were taken away from me by the Public Guardian and Trustee on April 4, 2014 ( but in reality it was January 29 2013 as VCH 100% banned me from seeing Randy) the day I was to access his medical records so I could find out what was going on and such records were denied me by the PGT.
I really do not know what Randy died from. Maybe his death could have been prevented at that time. Months later the coroner changed the alledged cause of death from multiple organ failure to say Randy died from his accident, an accident that happened in 2010. What a stretch. He was readmitted to VGH on 4 April 2014 (my mother's birthdate). The day Randy died was 13 April 2014.
I was acting in Randy's best interest for him to live and have a quality of life and VCH et al did everything possible to discredit and demoralize me (and Randy) while saying that I was not good for Randy and I should never see him again. This questioning of my goodness happened in January 2014; prior to that I was good. How scared Randy was. He couldn't talk or write so he could not ask questions or defend me. How horrible for Randy knowing that VCH was trying to hasten his death and and how horrific it was for me knowing I could not save him. My bereavement will never end.
Randy was only 53 years old when he had his accident, he had a traumatic brain injury in 2010, he had no disease, he was not in pain. Randy had a trach so he could not talk. So why did VCH want to hasten his death and ban me from ever seeing him again.
A DNT Order is a Do Not Transfer Order so if a patient is in medical distress the patient would not go to acute care (VGH) for treatment. As far as I am concerned it is a death sentence. The DNT was a guarantee that the nurses would not even attempt to overrule as it was a Doctor's Order and they were instructed not to call 911 or even phone the doctor-on-call if Randy was in acute medical distress.
Audrey Jane Laferriere
5976 Cambie Street
Vancouver, B.C.
V5Z 3A9
604-321-2276; 778-689-2276
audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com
refer to blog: voiceofgoneballistic
P.S. There is a medical-legal battle going on in Texas over a law that Texas has in which it can without explanation put a DNR on a competent conscious patient and disconnect life support against his wishes. And the hospital is now making application to take away his mother's substitute decision making power. I suspect such powers are also replicated somewhat here in Canada (BC) sub rosa (under the rose, secrecy) or worse yet in open sight.
see video of Chris Shaw http:://youtube.com/watch?vFquofEeo.
TexasRighttoLife.com
Because of my intervention I was able to save Randy's life. Mostly he needed a vent assist. As soon as Randy was stabilized I contacted the police as I believed that Dr. Dunne by putting on a DNR Order was somehow criminally culpable (attempted homicide) and notified the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons. VGH Emergency and the ambulance people knew of what happened as well as the police as 911 attended.
Considering the seriousness of my allegation and the seemingly apparent culpability of Dr. Dunne, the College should have immediately suspended Dr. Dunne pending an investigation. Yes, the College has the power to suspend a doctor in the public interest. I also asked that Dr. Dunne be replaced as Randy's doctor and this request was refused. Dr. Dunne should have reclused himself. The only reason that I even knew of the DNR/DNT was that I asked a nurse on November 15 2013, what Randy's status was, and I was showed the DNR/DNT Order signed by Dr. Dunne. On 14 November 2013 Randy was in VGH and his status was Full Code, Level IV. Randy was 57. He had no disease nor was he in pain.
After that, VCH went on a further sojourn to discredit and demoralize me claiming that I did not have Randy's best interest and I was incapable to be Randy's substitute decision maker. VCH took this to the Public Guardian and Trustee and VCH stripped me and Randy of all his rights. What was Randy's best interest. Was it that his death be hastened.
After Randy died I wasn't able to access any of Randy's things as Randy was now the property of the Public Guardian and Trustee. He had become a non-person. I wanted to place one of Randy's Steeler's baseball caps in his coffin as he wore a cap even when he was sleeping. The manager at GPC refused to give me one of his hats. Randy was dead and GPC were still being bullies.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons' Decision said that Randy was among things too sick as he had a temperature of 39.9 rendering him incapable of making any medical decisions. The Certificate of Incapability was made (rubbered stamped on the recommendation of the PGT) by VCH who issued the CI on April 4 2014; the day Randy should have died was 18 November 2013; the day I was banned from ever seeing Randy again was January 29 2014 (with the help of the Public Guardian and Trustee). I was never told that I was being investigated or that Randy was.
Because of my correspondence to the PGT, I thought the PGT was investigating George Pearson Centre and its treatment of patients there. One of my concerns was when I spoke to GPC patients there, they did not seem to know what a DNR was or whether or not a DNR/DNT was on them.
The PGT complaint against me was mostly based on collateral evidence (parallel gossip). All my supposed legal rights to Randy were taken away from me by the Public Guardian and Trustee on April 4, 2014 ( but in reality it was January 29 2013 as VCH 100% banned me from seeing Randy) the day I was to access his medical records so I could find out what was going on and such records were denied me by the PGT.
I really do not know what Randy died from. Maybe his death could have been prevented at that time. Months later the coroner changed the alledged cause of death from multiple organ failure to say Randy died from his accident, an accident that happened in 2010. What a stretch. He was readmitted to VGH on 4 April 2014 (my mother's birthdate). The day Randy died was 13 April 2014.
I was acting in Randy's best interest for him to live and have a quality of life and VCH et al did everything possible to discredit and demoralize me (and Randy) while saying that I was not good for Randy and I should never see him again. This questioning of my goodness happened in January 2014; prior to that I was good. How scared Randy was. He couldn't talk or write so he could not ask questions or defend me. How horrible for Randy knowing that VCH was trying to hasten his death and and how horrific it was for me knowing I could not save him. My bereavement will never end.
Randy was only 53 years old when he had his accident, he had a traumatic brain injury in 2010, he had no disease, he was not in pain. Randy had a trach so he could not talk. So why did VCH want to hasten his death and ban me from ever seeing him again.
A DNT Order is a Do Not Transfer Order so if a patient is in medical distress the patient would not go to acute care (VGH) for treatment. As far as I am concerned it is a death sentence. The DNT was a guarantee that the nurses would not even attempt to overrule as it was a Doctor's Order and they were instructed not to call 911 or even phone the doctor-on-call if Randy was in acute medical distress.
Audrey Jane Laferriere
5976 Cambie Street
Vancouver, B.C.
V5Z 3A9
604-321-2276; 778-689-2276
audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com
refer to blog: voiceofgoneballistic
P.S. There is a medical-legal battle going on in Texas over a law that Texas has in which it can without explanation put a DNR on a competent conscious patient and disconnect life support against his wishes. And the hospital is now making application to take away his mother's substitute decision making power. I suspect such powers are also replicated somewhat here in Canada (BC) sub rosa (under the rose, secrecy) or worse yet in open sight.
see video of Chris Shaw http:://youtube.com/watch?vFquofEeo.
TexasRighttoLife.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)