The hospital would send the child home, not hospice. Hospice would come into her home for care.
What can I tell ya? The articles say she was released from hospice to live with mother.
The hospital would send the child home, not hospice. Hospice would come into her home for care.
Hospice only cares for those at the stage of imminent death. I can only assume they decided this baby was not at risk for imminent death and therefore released her to her mothers care until such time the baby met the criteria for hospice care.
At this point I am choosing to believe the child was dead before being set on fire.
What I am gathering the baby was released from the hospital to her mom. Hospice hadn't yet started and mom probably overdosed the baby and panicked
I wanted to post this for comparison. Here are the parents trying to do everything possible for a child with this same disorder.
"Three-year-old Amelia Rivera of Stratford, N.J. needs the transplant because of complications from Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, described by WebMD as "an extremely rare chromosomal disorder caused by a partial deletion (monosomy) of the short arm of chromosome 4."
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news...abled-Child-Transplant-Surgery-137437788.html
This article has me fuming! Unbelievable!
It's quite a contrast, isn't it? These parents are trying to do everything for their child, while the woman we are discussing allegedly stuck her child's body (whether dead or alive, not clear at this point) in a plastic bag and lit it on fire. Both children have the same genetic disorder.
If the mother was given morphine to administer to the child does it mean that hospice personnel wasn't coming anymore to take care of the child, otherwise wouldn't they do it themselves? I am not convinced this child was terminal, but even if she were going to die soon, I don't think what happened to her was right.
Have we any information on the COD yet?