What is Digg?456 Comments
- shosterman, on 11/13/2007, -135/+1767Wow, kids really do cost an arm and a leg.
- Pissoff, on 11/06/2007, -27/+1168What the *****!?
Hopefully she gets a huge settlement so she can obtain robot arms in a few years, and then give them the clamps! - DrunkenPirate34, on 11/09/2007, -2/+834This article is very misleading. Here is what happened:
Claudia Mejiacutea, 24, of Stanford, checked into Orlando Regional South Seminole Hospital on April 28 to give birth to a baby boy, but after the delivery, she got a rash and had severe pains in her stomach, the Orlando Sentinel reported for Saturday editions.
Two days later, she was moved to intensive care, and then later transferred to the Orlando Regional Medical Center. She then went into shock, her kidneys began to shut down, and gangrene set in, according to her medical records.
....On Jan. 13 Mejiacutea sued Orlando Regional Healthcare System Inc., which operates the hospital, asking a judge to order the company to release records of any other adverse medical incidents related to flesh-eating bacteria before her discharge on Aug. 4. The company refused to divulge the information, citing patient privacy, the newspaper said.
ORHS lawyer Jennings L. Hurt III has said Mejiacutea could not obtain records involving other patients because despite a constitutional amendment requiring their disclosure, state lawmakers have yet to pass enabling legislation. - aroundtheblock, on 11/06/2008, -48/+602wtf this happened in america?
I was assuming this happened in some third world country before I read the story.. - awm4, on 10/12/2007, -18/+415"The hospital maintains the woman wants to know information that would violate other patients' rights."
How does it violate "other patients' rights" if she only wants to know what happened to herself?
How was any other patient involved? This is definitely fishy. - 47f0, on 10/27/2007, -21/+312The CDC estimates that 90,000 Americans will die this year from largely preventable hospital-acquired infections.
http://www.chiro.org/ChiroZine/ABSTRACTS/cdc.shtml
We have a war on terror - a war that has claimed 3,000 lives at home and another 3,000 American lives in combat. And we spend billions on that war - but we can't seem to save 90,000 Americans a year. Something is upside-down. - noreturn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+214From another article:
"The Orlando hospital says Claudia and her attorneys are requesting information on other patients, to see if someone on the floor had the bacteria. The hospital says they will not release information on other patients."
I'm not sure if that makes this any less frustrating, but it does answer the question of why they can't release the information. - saska, on 10/24/2007, -14/+197I'm sorry, I know it's cool to be outraged, but the answers are all right here in the article.
"The couple wants to know how she caught streptococcus, during labor or after. She doesn't know. She knows she didn't leave the hospital the same."
[...]
"ORMC said Mejia is requesting information on if there were other patients or someone on her floor with the streptococcus. They said, if they release that to her, that would be a violation of other patients' rights."
In other words, yes, we do know why she ended up a multiple amputee. She ended up a multiple amputee because she contracted streptococcus.
What would she do with the information about other patients with the disease if she had it? Sue them? The fact of the matter is that current laws in the US prevent hospitals from releasing medical information about other patients. Direct your outrage at that law if you must, but before you do, think twice about whether your ex-spouse, manager, scheming coworker, or friendly neighborhood stalker ought to be able to get the scoop on your health condition.
(Edit: oops, cross-posted with Drunken Pirate.) - blahtastic, on 10/12/2007, -10/+183@pissoff
Oddly enough, the station letters are WFT. I originally read them as WTF, which, as you are aware, describes this disturbing article appropriately. - Crass22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+155"If I want to live, they want to cut off my arms and legs. If I don't, I'll keep my arms and legs but I'll die. Is this a dream?" Mejia said.
It's not like she woke up and her arms and legs were gone. She was aware of the amputations going into it, she just doesn't know how she got the virus. further reading http://www.wesh.com/news/9148849/detail.html - grendelboogie, on 11/06/2007, -4/+144What is is today with all the strange Florida stories, the jailed rape victim and now this? I'm staying away from Florida.
- PDelahanty, on 10/12/2007, -11/+118I'd like to point out that this article is from LAST YEAR.
- drlha, on 10/12/2007, -5/+79You realise that the doctors who did the amputation did it to save her life?
- edrift101, on 10/12/2007, -21/+70So basically, someone at the hospital being treated infected her or one of the hospital staff did. Either way a huge settlement should go her way.
- hANDoFdEVIL, on 10/12/2007, -1/+41@Crass22
thanks for the link. The original post is so prejudiced. It makes you believe she woke up one day and found herself amputated without her knowledge. Looks like she gave consent to the doctors to amputate her. The question should be why/how she got Strep and not why she was amputated. Original post is inaccurate, biased and misleading. - rudy23, on 10/17/2007, -0/+38OK LETS CUT DOWN THE TABLOID STYLE REPORTING.
She did lose her arms and legs which is bad. but it isn't as if she went into labor and woke up without them. She Delievered. After that she caught some infection. 12 days later they did the amputation.
Terrible anyways. - adidos, on 10/17/2007, -0/+34The title is rather sensationalist...She didn't just mysteriously wake up without arms/legs...She somehow caught streptococcus and they amputated her arms/legs BECAUSE of this. She doesn't know how/when she caught the flesh eating disease though.
- gronne, on 10/12/2007, -20/+51Good thing the Republicans never got that $250,000 cap on medical malpractice like this. This young woman will be grossly disabled for the rest of her life. Not only would she have made a lot more than 250K, her opportunities in life would be much greater.
- chefsam, on 10/12/2007, -10/+40"Hi, Everybo-dy!"
"Hi, Doctor Nick!" - finkployd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26"How can a hospital cut you up and not tell you why?"
The same way people can read headlines and blurbs but not read the article and still comment on them. - skell, on 11/06/2007, -3/+28What I'd like to know is, where the hell was her husband in all of this? He's only her next of kin. They didn't tell him anything more? This seems really suspicious. I'd like to see what becomes of this...
- DrDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25That is alright. Call us morons, we still will care for you. We are above that.
- DerProfi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22Still pissed about the one who dropped you on your head at birth?
- heffae, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23@Stumpfarmer
Actually to me it looks like the Hospital has some serious liability issues if she contracted streptococcus while in the hospital to give birth. Given that (to the best of my knowledge) most Hospitals have a maternity ward separate from the rest of the hospital for her to have contracted streptococcus while in the hospital would constitute extreme negligence and malpractice on the part of the hospital.
If on the other hand she had the bacteria before she entered the hospital then congrats to the hospital for saving her life.
Without the facts about other patients in the hospital (the information she is suing for) it's difficult to tell if the doctors and hospital staff almost killed her or if they saved her life. (Actually the Orlando Regional Medical Center the performed the surgery is the one that saved her life and is not the same hospital that she may have been infected in)
I don't blame the hospital for not handing over other patient's information without a court order the (fairly new) federal HIPPA (Health Insurance Privacy and Portability Act) regulations are rather strict when it comes to releasing patient information with some rather nasty possible penalties. And even though there is a State Amendment regarding a patients right to know. I believe (IANAL) that a federal law almost always trumps a state law. I would imagine that once they are presented with a signed court order they will hand over the information that the woman is requestion - br0ck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Here's a recent follow up.. she's still looking for answers:
http://www.wesh.com/news/9148849/detail.html - mymomsaysimcool, on 11/06/2007, -11/+29Do you see the date on the article? This is a year old.
- ltbarcly, on 11/01/2007, -3/+21This is total crap. The article very carefully says things like "I went in to have a baby, and came out like this", and talks about how she was moved from one hospital to another. She doesn't 'wake up' without arms and legs as the tagline claims.
Here is what likely happened. She went in to give birth. She stayed do to complications, and contracted an infection on her arms and legs. She then had toxic shock from the infection, and her arms and legs had to be amputated.
Twelve days after giving birth, the article says, she "became' a quadriplegic", and that language should be enough to tell you that the author of this article is intentionally misleading. Did they amputate her arms and legs or did they fall off? Obviously they amputated them. Did she or her husband sign a consent form? They certainly would have, since they had to move her to a different hospital for the operation. Did they know before the operation what would be happening? Obviously they either knew it was an amputation or that there was a risk of amputation (sometimes surgeons can't tell until they are operating how bad damage is).
So I repeat, total misrepresentation == bullcrap. - gwinerreniwg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Everyone is missing the real story here: The rise of antibiotic immune bacteria. This woman contracted (what used-to-be-rare) a flesh-eating bacterial infection. We should be more concerned about the fact that there were no drug treatments for what was essentially a simple staf infection. In this month's Wired, there is a fascinating and scary article on another drug-resistant bacterium that's showing up in the medical community due to sanitation issues in the military medical chain (Link: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.02/enemy.html ). Doctors tend to over-proscribe antibiotics leading to a huge rise in bugs that we can no longer cure! Treatments for infections that were easily cured less than a decade ago, are no longer effective, and even our more toxic drugs of last resort are become less effective. Sad what happened to this lady, but it is no mystery - we should be more worried about the impending health crisis here.
- kingace, on 10/27/2007, -5/+20Rise... Darth Vader.
- saska, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14They didn't. She was given a choice between having her limbs amputated and dying.
- Zythryn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17@Achalemoipas
Read the story. She didn't wake up from giving birth. She contracted streptococcus and later had the amputation to save her life. She chose amputation over death.
In this situation, there was no accidental amputation. It was done on purpose to save her life.
The information she requested was if any other patients had contracted streptococcus. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Everything is Flordia is 80, the Temperatures, the IQ's, and the Age.
- ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@RadiantBeing, RTFA!
She was there to deliver a baby and caught the streptococcus there too. - Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12WTF? He did not say it was no ones fault. He just said the summary and headline and sensationalist crap. And it is true.
She did not give birth, fall asleep, woke up and found she had no limbs. She got an infection. And it is no mystery why their limbs are gone, she signed off on the sadly necessary amputation.
The ONLY thing that is unclear is how she got the infection. She is wondering if it was from another patient and asks to see their records. The hospital says they cannot just give her these records, as they are confidential, they may not even say "yes" or "no" to that question. The person handling over the records would face criminal and civil charges. This confidentiality can only be broken in court. And that is what the hospital answered. - HarryBauzonia, on 10/13/2007, -0/+11If she had a streptococcus infection she could have died within hours if they hadn't taken action. It's a weird infection.
My best friend's wife scratched herself in the kitchen one morning, and by late afternoon she was in intensive care while the doctors were discussing amputating her leg if the massive amounts of antibiotics they gave her didn't kick in within a few minutes. Turns out it was a strep infection and she wouldn't have lived through the night if she hadn't gotten herself to the hospital immediately.
This story is too one-sided anyway. There is no background given as to what happened before the hospital sent a letter saying she would have to sue them, and the only views given are those of the woman, her husband, and their lawyer. Something stinks about this story. - wild, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Anyone else think the name of the TV station is two transposed letters away from gold?
- DrDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@connor2k
I don't understand what you don't understand. The article states that the woman contracted a strep infection and lost her arms to it. She knows what happened, her lawyer just wants to know if other people had the infection at the hospital. Why? I imagine so they can sue, right or wrong. - DrDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Thank you, finally someone read the article.
- sifelltneytandi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Yeah, the whole thing is misleading as hell. The real story isn't a whole lot better, but the title (and even the article) make it seem as if the whole thing is shrouded in mystery, when the only real question is "how the ***** did she end up with this disease?"
- mufasa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11i dont know.. but the same happened to me, my grandfather died in a routine surgery when he was 67 and they refused to say what happened.
- humpy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13gotta love the loveline reference. (Germany or Florida)
im sure she's going to get a nice chunk of change out of her experience, there's no excuse for something like this. - thegcinfo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9OK regardless that some people might think this Digg is misleading because she had streptococcus and that's why she had quadruple amputations performed, think about how ***** up this story is either way. She went to give birth, she went home with a baby and no arms and legs. That is not an everyday occurrence so yes I think I might be mighty pissed and wanting to know every damn minute detail of what the hell happened to cause me to end up in this permanent situation. Also the hospital may be deliberately being evasive because it was caused by a nosocomial infection, which means they did this to her and they need to get a hold on their infection control process or figure out what went wrong. I hope she owns that hospital if her situation was caused by them, and if it wasn't I still feel so much empathy towards someone having to deal with that for their entire life.
- Stumpfarmer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12It seems that certain facts of the story have been selected by the news agency to provoke outrage, from the title on down. Looks like the hospital not only might have saved her life, but also has a promising libel case to pursue in my humble "not a lawyer" opinion.
- Kerjo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Wow, you're blocked.
And messed up. - Retsudo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8THEY DID HAVE PERMISSION TO AMPUTATE, RTFA
- finista, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12- Amputate the right leg!
... zzzink!
- I said LEG!
... zzzink!
- I said RIGHT!!
... zzzink! - scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Seriously. This is about the 4th ***** UP Florida story so far today on Digg.
If I lived there, I'd be building a raft to escape to Cuba. - TriSight, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Simple, if she caught the disease from someone else that was housed in the same room or somehow the room wasn't sterilized or someone made a mistake in which she caught this disease from someone else, then they don't have to explain the whoops because it would be in violation of the other patients rights.. and that's how they are using it as a cop out it seems.
- sumrandommember, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14So that means this god-awful story shouldn't receive attention?!?
- DerProfi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7In other news, some visitors to hospitals in the UK are refusing to use anti-bacterial gel that helps to prevent the spread of this kind of infection:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006600358,00.html -
Show 51 - 100 of 461 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is