Ebola outbreak - general thread #9

[nrdsb4]

How exactly could she have taught anyone infection control?

Perhaps she was a preceptor for a new nurse. I got the impression, however, that the quoted nurse simply meant that she led by example. Not all HCW practice optimal infection control.

 

[SStarr33]

They settled with Mr. Duncan's family. They could have gone to court. TX has a limit on how much one could get for a wrongful death lawsuit. So they wouldn't risk much if they went to court.
They could potentially settle with her to make it go away.

At the end of the video the reporter said that since she is suing for gross negligence, the sky is the limit on the lawsuit.

 

[MyBelle]

oh you disagree with whether or not the hospital did anything wrong in breaching hr confidentiality etc, yeah i got that from your first post.

i just didnt see how that related to whether or not they "forced her" to meet with obama, and what any of that had to do with the idea that she can both be entitled to her privacy and confidentiality in one regard and then be public and promote her feelings/agenda in another regard.

If she didn't want the publicity, she didn't have to participate. I believe it was her family who provided photos of her dog, her, etc. Once that is in the public domain, she had no right to privacy. Once they were diagnosed, all of the Ebola patients were publicly identified because it was a matter of public health which trumps the right to privacy. It is simply stunning that she is now trying to profit by suing those who took their own risk in providing care to her.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

At the end of the video the reporter said that since she is suing for gross negligence, the sky is the limit on the lawsuit.

Of course. This was anticipated months ago when the CDC announced the nurse was infected because she had failed to follow protocol. No surprise there.

JMO

 

[liljim]

If she didn't want the publicity, she didn't have to participate. I believe it was her family who provided photos of her dog, her, etc. Once that is in the public domain, she had no right to privacy. Once they were diagnosed, all of the Ebola patients were publicly identified because it was a matter of public health which trumps the right to privacy. It is simply stunning that she is now trying to profit by suing those who took their own risk in providing care to her.

JMO

it sounds like you have not read the points in the suit.

 

[nrdsb4]

MyBelle, if you are not impressed with Nina Pham's lawsuit, I predict you will be even less sympathetic to this one:

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2015/03/02/woman-on-flight-with-north-texas-ebola-patient-plans-to-sue/

A passenger who traveled on the same flight to Dallas with Amber Vinson, and who was never infected with ebola, plans to sue the hospital as well.

On the orders of the Centers for Disease Control Golz subsequently spent three weeks quarantined in her home.

I would have to go back and read, but it makes no sense that the CDC would "order" anyone to be quarantined, particularly since all ebola experts insisted and continue to insist that quarantines of asymptomatic individuals are unnecessary. And does the CDC have the authority to quarantine asymptomatic individuals in any case?

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

If she didn't want the publicity, she didn't have to participate. I believe it was her family who provided photos of her dog, her, etc. Once that is in the public domain, she had no right to privacy. Once they were diagnosed, all of the Ebola patients were publicly identified because it was a matter of public health which trumps the right to privacy. It is simply stunning that she is now trying to profit by suing those who took their own risk in providing care to her.

JMO

Her public statements, or those of her family, do not negate her privacy rights under HIPAA. In the Jahi McMath case, the family made all kinds of public statements but the hospital is restricted from making any statements, corrections, allegations, etc. due to HIPAA.

I don't believe the public health angle makes a difference in this case either. First, there were Ebola patients whose names were not made public. Second, in the measles outbreak no patient names were released even though measles is far, far more contagious.

Moo

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

I would have to go back and read, but it makes no sense that the CDC would "order" anyone to be quarantined, particularly since all ebola experts insisted and continue to insist that quarantines of asymptomatic individuals are unnecessary. And does the CDC have the authority to quarantine asymptomatic individuals in any case?

Sbm

LOL, remember the nurse in NY? NJ? who refused to be quarantined? Certainly, they can tell you it's mandatory, but it sure looks like it's not legally enforceable. This suit will be interesting.


Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

MyBelle, if you are not impressed with Nina Pham's lawsuit, I predict you will be even less sympathetic to this one:

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2015/03/02/woman-on-flight-with-north-texas-ebola-patient-plans-to-sue/

A passenger who traveled on the same flight to Dallas with Amber Vinson, and who was never infected with ebola, plans to sue the hospital as well.



I would have to go back and read, but it makes no sense that the CDC would "order" anyone to be quarantined, particularly since all ebola experts insisted and continue to insist that quarantines of asymptomatic individuals are unnecessary. And does the CDC have the authority to quarantine asymptomatic individuals in any case?

The quarantine is voluntary. This young woman probably got a letter from the airline that told her the quarantine period and to contact the health department if she got sick. The quarantine must be a huge inconvenience but she should be suing the nurse who ignored protocol and boarded the plane rather than her hospital employer.

My son was exposed to an outbreak of Legionnaire's disease at a Marriott Hotel several years ago. The letter he received told him to contact the Cook County Health Dept if he had any symptoms. At the time he received the letter, he was just getting sick with an upper respiratory infection. Scary stuff.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Sbm

LOL, remember the nurse in NY? NJ? who refused to be quarantined? Certainly, they can tell you it's mandatory, but it sure looks like it's not legally enforceable. This suit will be interesting.


Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

Didn't a Judge order that nurse into quarantine?

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Didn't a Judge order that nurse into quarantine?

I don't believe so. If I remember right, there was an "agreement reached" that she would stay something like three feet away from people. Remember the news clips of her out riding her bike? As I recall the commentary at the time, it was thought the government did not want a judge to rule on a quarantine order because it was likely unconstitutional.

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

Her public statements, or those of her family, do not negate her privacy rights under HIPAA. In the Jahi McMath case, the family made all kinds of public statements but the hospital is restricted from making any statements, corrections, allegations, etc. due to HIPAA.

I don't believe the public health angle makes a difference in this case either. First, there were Ebola patients whose names were not made public. Second, in the measles outbreak no patient names were released even though measles is far, far more contagious.

Moo

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

All diagnosed Ebola patients have had their names released because it is a public health concern. People who were around them have a right to know. The names that have been kept confidential belong to those who are in quarantine but haven't been diagnosed.

Measles is highly contagious but it is rarely a deadly disease. The location of every place visited is the information that is publicized, not the name of the individual.

JMO

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

All diagnosed Ebola patients have had their names released because it is a public health concern. People who were around them have a right to know. The names that have been kept confidential belong to those who are in quarantine but haven't been diagnosed.

Measles is highly contagious but it is rarely a deadly disease. The location of every place visited is the information that is publicized, not the name of the individual.

JMO

Not true.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hiding-s-moved-home-undisclosed-location.html



ETA. With Ebola patients they could easily do the same thing... publicize the locations visited. More easily, in fact, since Ebola is not airborne and the risk of infection extremely low.


Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

I don't believe so. If I remember right, there was an "agreement reached" that she would stay something like three feet away from people. Remember the news clips of her out riding her bike? As I recall the commentary at the time, it was thought the government did not want a judge to rule on a quarantine order because it was likely unconstitutional.

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

I remember the bike ride. There was also a young doctor who flitted around NYC. I can't remember the Supreme Court ruling but I think it is constitutional if the public interest out-weighs the personal right.

 

[jjenny]

Not true.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hiding-s-moved-home-undisclosed-location.html

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

As far as I recall, no one on the plane with Amber was ordered into quarantine. They were considered very low risk, because Amber was barely symptomatic.

 

[nrdsb4]

Sbm

LOL, remember the nurse in NY? NJ? who refused to be quarantined? Certainly, they can tell you it's mandatory, but it sure looks like it's not legally enforceable. This suit will be interesting.


Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

Right, but IIRC, that never happened in Texas. I know the HCW who were exposed to Duncan were asked to self isolate, but I don't believe it was ever ORDERED. After the Amber Vinson incident, the Texas Health Dept. then told the HCW they couldn't travel on mass transit. Had that been legally challenged, I doubt it would have held up. And this woman was not exposed to a person as sick as Mr. Duncan. So if she willingly quarantined herself in the interest "of not harming her patients," that was her doing, as the science does not back that up. The science says you "self monitor," not "self quarantine." I am doubtful this lady has a good case, but of course, anyone can file a lawsuit, and the defendant still has to go through the hassle and expense of defending themselves.

 

[MyBelle]

Not true.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hiding-s-moved-home-undisclosed-location.html


ETA. With Ebola patients they could easily do the same thing... publicize the locations visited. More easily, in fact, since Ebola is not airborne and the risk of infection extremely low.

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

He didn't contract the disease in the U.S., he contracted it in a foreign country and didn't fly on public transit. That's the difference. Mr. Duncan and the two nurses were actively about on American soil when they were diagnosed.

JMO

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

I remember the bike ride. There was also a young doctor who flitted around NYC. I can't remember the Supreme Court ruling but I think it is constitutional if the public interest out-weighs the personal right.

It's been held constitutional with extremely infectious diseases... typhoid, measles, etc. As I recall, quarantine of asymptomatic people has not been ruled on (could be remembering wrong). Ebola is not airborne and is nowhere near infectious enough IMO to be a serious public health issue in this country.

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk

 

[MyBelle]

Right, but IIRC, that never happened in Texas. I know the HCW who were exposed to Duncan were asked to self isolate, but I don't believe it was ever ORDERED. So if she willingly quarantined herself in the interest "of not harming her patients," that was her doing, as the science does not back that up. The science says you "self monitor," not "self quarantine." I am doubtful this lady has a good case, but of course, anyone can file a lawsuit, and the defendant still has to go through the hassle and expense of defending themselves.

iirc, the health care workers were told to avoid public transit. Her goal might be to have others on the flight join in the lawsuit so it will become a class action that the hospital will settle rather than litigate.

JMO

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

He didn't contract the disease in the U.S., he contracted it in a foreign country and didn't fly on public transit. That's the difference. Mr. Duncan and the two nurses were actively about on American soil when they were diagnosed.

JMO

Actually, neither the hospital nor the CDC released Duncan's name. They were very careful not to release any personal information about him. It was like that for several days before his sister went to the press and disclosed his name and other info. (I just reread the first Ebola thread).

I don't recall who disclosed Nina's name, but if it was the hospital they were definitely in the wrong.

ETA. just skimmed back over Ebola thread 5. It looks like the relatives released the names of the nurses as well, not the hospital. The hospital did release a number of statements on behalf of Nina, actually on hospital letterhead. I didn't think anything of it at the time, but in retrospect I find it odd. Who thinks of issuing a public statement when they are isolated in the hospital, sick with a deadly disease? Quite possible, IMO, that the statements were... encouraged, perhaps, in some way.

Sent from my KFJWA using Tapatalk