LA - Hurricane Katrina, Doctors Euthanized Patients?, 2005

[CyberLaw]

The "diseases" that these people had, for lack of a better word(as we don't know if they had a "condition", chronic illness, an illness that was being treated") did not cause their deaths, the doctor that "ordered" the injection of lethal drugs did.

That was the "cause" of death........they did not die "from Katrina", they did not die for lack of drugs, they did not die from drowining, they died because one individual decided to kill them.

The Hurricane did not kill them either, as I don't recall "wind" and "rain" injecting patients with lethal drugs. Nor did they die outside from the "results" of the Hurricane.

The "horrible" lack of planning, may have "lead" to the conditions in the hospital, but again, no one from the Governmen showed up and injected them with drugs.

There is no "imminent death", none of these people were on their "death" beds, if they were, then they would not have "been killed" by another hand.

The law states, if you "help" along a person to die, if you "shorten" their life even by one minute, you are taking and helping the person to die. Which again is against the law.

A jury will convict as they look at "facts", evidence" charging provison, and Judges instructions.

People who do "mercy" killings, of "verified" terminal patients get convicted and sent to Prison.

Like the Dr. Death person who "assisted" terminal patients to die. He did this "out of mercy", it was their choice, and only gave them the means to die. He is still in prison. I guess he "thought" that he was doing the right thing also and he did not kill anyone and was "convicted". These people "were going to die, not "maybe" die.

There will be "outrage" as these people will think "wow" if this ever happens to me, I hope no one is going to "murder" me, without me knowing it.....

Why do you think the Coroner office was "doing" routine "tox screen" on elderly patients that died in hosptials.

Exactly for the reason that "they may have appeared at first blush" to be "Katrina" related and natural, but after the results came back, it was quite evident that "they were murdered".

These patients were not "terminal" and even if they could breathe for one more minute, no one on this planet had the "right" to take their life.

 

[Details]

I see the scenario, and hope and pray that if I am ever in their shoes, someone will help me along to die with the least pain and suffering that is possible, once it is inevitable and imminient (as it was here). And I hate the notion that someone who does provide this last essential helping hand may suffer for it because some prosecutor can't see the shades of gray, or worse still, that I will be condemned to pain and torment during my last pointless hours, for absolutely no reason, just because I am not in a state that respects my choices, just because there is no lawyer around, or, perhaps worst, just because I cannot speak nor communicate, merely exist in a world that consists only of pain for the sake of a nonexistient future.

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

The "diseases" that these people had, for lack of a better word(as we don't know if they had a "condition", chronic illness, an illness that was being treated") did not cause their deaths, the doctor that "ordered" the injection of lethal drugs did.

That was the "cause" of death........they did not die "from Katrina", they did not die for lack of drugs, they did not die from drowining, they died because one individual decided to kill them.

The Hurricane did not kill them either, as I don't recall "wind" and "rain" injecting patients with lethal drugs. Nor did they die outside from the "results" of the Hurricane.

The "horrible" lack of planning, may have "lead" to the conditions in the hospital, but again, no one from the Governmen showed up and injected them with drugs.

There is no "imminent death", none of these people were on their "death" beds, if they were, then they would not have "been killed" by another hand.

The law states, if you "help" along a person to die, if you "shorten" their life even by one minute, you are taking and helping the person to die. Which again is against the law.

A jury will convict as they look at "facts", evidence" charging provison, and Judges instructions.

People who do "mercy" killings, of "verified" terminal patients get convicted and sent to Prison.

Like the Dr. Death person who "assisted" terminal patients to die. He did this "out of mercy", it was their choice, and only gave them the means to die. He is still in prison. I guess he "thought" that he was doing the right thing also and he did not kill anyone and was "convicted". These people "were going to die, not "maybe" die.

There will be "outrage" as these people will think "wow" if this ever happens to me, I hope no one is going to "murder" me, without me knowing it.....

Why do you think the Coroner office was "doing" routine "tox screen" on elderly patients that died in hosptials.

Exactly for the reason that "they may have appeared at first blush" to be "Katrina" related and natural, but after the results came back, it was quite evident that "they were murdered".

These patients were not "terminal" and even if they could breathe for one more minute, no one on this planet had the "right" to take their life.

Actually one woman's legs were rotting off her body before the hurricane, so we do have an idea of what they're physical problems were. After all, they were in a hospital with records.

 

[Details]

Actually one woman's legs were rotting off her body before the hurricane, so we do have an idea of what they're physical problems were. After all, they were in a hospital with records.

Yep. If not for the hurricane, and the damage it caused, her legs could have been amputated, and saved her life... but the hurricane prevented that from happening.

Actually, even with the surgery, there'd still be a risk she could die, that they hadn't caught it in time. I mean, the consequences have to be pretty dire before the solution is amputation!

 

[Details]

Some new info: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/21/60minutes/main2030603.shtml

"I did not murder those patients," reiterates Dr. Pou. "Mr. Safer, I have spent my entire life taking care of patients, I have no history of doing anything other than good for my patients … Why would I suddenly start murdering people? I do not believe in euthanasia. I don't think that it's anyone's decision to make when a patient dies … What I do believe in is comfort care, and that means that we ensure that they do not suffer pain."

When pressed by Safer to comment on whether making patients comfortable with pain killers can sometimes include a secondary effect of shortening their lives, Dr. Pou quickly responds.

"Are we talking about in this case?" she asks.

"Yes," replies Safer.

"Any time you provide pain medicine to anybody, there is a risk," she says. "But, as I said, my role is to help them through the pain."

One thing that I find interesting - comfort care. Another forum I am on (TWOP House discussion) was discussing this issue recently, and they talked about what doctors do and don't do in real life. Many stated that flat-out euthanasia is not something they've ever seen, but that sometimes, as the end of a patient's life nears, with no hope of recovery, caring for their body stops being the top priority, and making them comfortable becomes a higher priority - even to the point where when trying to make someone comfortable, you are doing things that could shorten their life - that these patients die of an unplanned, unintended overdose of pain control medicine - the doctor is trying to keep the patient from being in pain, and keeping the patient alive falls behind that goal.

Which, of course, I like because I don't want to be sitting there dying, and kept in pain because some idiot doctor is worried about whether I might be hurt by the medicines that make the little tiny bit of my life remaining livable.

 

[Details]

Oh, and I almost forgot - the idiots in LE finally did go after the real criminals here - the nursing home owners who left all those residents to drown. About @#@## time!
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/20/katrina/main2027917.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStorieshttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/14/katrina/main842327.shtml

 

[Amraann]

Thanks for the update Details.


CYberlaw?? You still have not answered what these people should have done?
Should they have let them drown? That would be more humane?

Again laws are written and applicable in normal situations not with the notion that society has had a complete break down as in the case of the aftermath of Katrina.
In that case as stated above it is a triage situation and you save those you can and make the rest comfortable.

I am sure the same type of approach was taken during the aftermath of 9/11
Yet I don't recal medical professionals being sued then.

Also you made a good point about the families of these people..
Where the heck were they? If this is my loved one and I see devistation all around me I am not leaving it up to someone else to make sure they are safe.
Its pretty easy to not give a damn then blame someone else when they themselves weren't so worried to make sure their loved ones were safe.

 

[CyberLaw]

I saw a show: A man was "very critical", he was evacuated from a hospital, in a helicopter, his condition turned very, very bad quickly. The Doctor did what ever he could do with very little medical means, to operate upon him without painkillers, anethesia, proper "support", instruments and in an unsterile environment.

At the end: At this man's wedding, he made sure the Doctor was there and thanked him, because without his extraordinary means the man would not be alive and "waiting" for his child to be born.

The Doctor could have done nothing and let the man die, but he "was a Doctor" and did what he could to save the man's life.

This was at the "height" of Katrina....

Now if the hospital ONLY gave the patients an overdose of painkillers, the deaths may not have been noticed. But the fact, that they were sedated then given a massive dose of pain killer was the prime "red flag" for murder.

BTW, I read an article, that there are MANY technical advisors, who are Doctors who only consult on film and TV to ensure that "medical shows" are technically accurate. After all, the credability of said show would be in question if that was not the case.......the "article" was primarily about HOUSE.

My friend is a Palative Care Nurse, her job is to make terminal patients "comfortable", help them die with dignity, prepare the family and deal with the family. She is a Head Nurse, she checks her meds, three times. RCMP can do a "spot" check to check the meds also. There can be "zero" discrepany in any "meds".

Her job is not to "hasten" their death........but to care for them until their death from "natural" causes", not to overdose them to "kill them".

The difference between Doctors who "use methods" to "hasten death" is that the patient is terminal, the hospital and nursing home residents and patients were "not terminal".

Waiting to be "evacuated" or rescued is not a terminal condition......and if they did die waiting to be "evacuated or rescued" then the death would be as a result of Katrina, not at the hand of another person, which is called murder.

If the Doctor got a gun, shot the patients, the result and the charges would still be the same. The patient died, by another hand deliberatly with intent to harm. It is called "MURDER".

A Doctor who hasten the death of a terminal patient is "helping" his patient with the patient's consent. They have spoken "very quietly" about it, it is what the patient wants. The Doctor does not "wake up one" morning and make a decision for the patient and then "gives them a massive dose of sedative then an overdose of painkiller.

People have and will go to Prison for that type of behavior......

 

[Amraann]

Oh, and I almost forgot - the idiots in LE finally did go after the real criminals here - the nursing home owners who left all those residents to drown. About @#@## time!
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/20/katrina/main2027917.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStorieshttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/20/katrina/main2027917.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStorieshttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/20/katrina/main2027917.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStories

From the link Details provided....

In a lawsuit filed last month, the couple sued the government, saying federal, state and local officials failed to keep residents safe and evacuate vulnerable citizens as the storm approached.

The Manganos have argued that their hurricane plan — to keep frail residents in place with food, water and generators rather than risk moving them — was a responsible course of action, and that if the levees had held, the tragedy would have been avoided.



I tend to agree with this couple. Where their ambulances provided to move these people? And where were they going to move to the Superdome?

I am still trying to understand as all this blame is passed around what exactly these people were all suppose to do?

 

[CyberLaw]

Negligent Homicide - is the killing of another person through gross negligence.

Gross Negligence - Failure to use even the slightest amount of care in a way that shows recklessness or wilful disregard for the safety of others.

Unintentional homicide in which the person or person's should have known they were creating a "substantial and unjustified risk" by conduct that is grossly deviated from ordinary care.

So on one hand: The couple say: That the Federal Government "failed" to evacuate residence as the storm approached.

But on the other hand: They had a plan to "keep" the residence in place instead of risking evacuation. So they knew they were staying and had a plan and prepared for such.

Question being: Did the Government "in previous" hurricanes "offer" and have at their disposal "an evacuaton procedure in which they transported people before a hurricane approached. Did they "offer" private business "government help" and assistance in evacuations when they happened before in previous years.

The Government did not "evacuate" anyone when the storm approached.

They knew this from "hurricanes" before that the Government will not "assist" in evacuation, they only issue an order to evacuate, which the owners "ignored".

Have a plan to stay, but a plan without a back up is not a plan. They should have(as responsible people) had their "own" evacuation plan.

Evacuation orders were issued.

The Government will counter also with: We issued an evacaution order, you were ordered to evacuate and did not. What happens after that is your responsibility, not ours. We are not responsible for "evacuating" people from private homes and business, we tell you to leave, order you to leave and then the choice at that point is yours.

The point is "before the storm approached". But they cannot force a person to leave, it is again their choice and they can choose to stay(or have no means as a private person to evacuate, so they are "advised" to go to a safe place, like that Dome)or they can then leave, or as a business have a plan to leave, if you are "dealing" with frail people.

Who is responsible for the business - the owners, not the government.

 

[Details]

I saw a show: A man was "very critical", he was evacuated from a hospital, in a helicopter, his condition turned very, very bad quickly. The Doctor did what ever he could do with very little medical means, to operate upon him without painkillers, anethesia, proper "support", instruments and in an unsterile environment......

A show is a show - even if it is possible (as many things movies show are possible - but not reality), doesn't mean it works in every case nor this case. It's hard to recognize, because some things doctors are able to do amount to miracles, a person is dying, they reach in and manually massage the heart or even plug a hole in it, and the life is saved, but there are still a ton of things that can kill us, and medical science can do little to stop it, and other things do require all of the specialized medicines and machines and electricity to do - period. There is no alternative, other than death. Sometimes, a slow and painful, meaningless death.

Not everyone can be moved without dying on the spot. Operating in an unsterile environment, without proper whatever in a whole ton of cases will simply amount to torturing the patient without any chance at all of saving their life. When there is a chance, doctors do try. But sometimes, there isn't. So - what do you do? Leave them to drown?

And even if they don't drown, it's essentially the same thing, when their lungs are filling up with fluid, or gangrene is spreading into the blood, or so many of the other horrible, insanely painful things our bodies will do to us as they die. You know it's happening, you can see the water rising, you can see that it will not be stopped by anything now, no hilicopter, no supply, no nothing can stop it now (remember - medical science, not gods who can miraculously fix anything by being clever enough right before a commercial break), this person is going to sit there and slowly drown, in agony, alone in their own agony. You can sit there and watch them as the water comes up, as they struggle, as they scream - but you can't stop it. Nothing you can do can stop it - there are no heroes, there is no miracle, this is reality, this is a person's death, and it is a baaaad death. Your only choice is if you will let them endure the agony, or try to let them at least go on without pain. And what you give them for pain may, or may not, cause them to die sooner - but will you stand by and just let them experience nothing but mindless agony instead?

 

[Details]

I tend to agree with this couple. Where their ambulances provided to move these people? And where were they going to move to the Superdome?

I am still trying to understand as all this blame is passed around what exactly these people were all suppose to do?

By me - they were supposed to try. I just see that they gave up, let them all die easily. They ignored the evacuation order - that's the first point where they started to kill the residents - they're supposed to be responsible for these lives. They should have called the state, the gov't for help if they needed it, tell someone if they couldn't get ambulances, so they'd know these people were there. But still, so did many others.

Then, when they started to figure out they were in trouble, they did nothing but abandon ship - they didn't tell their rescuers about the residents who were left to drown, so they too could be rescued. That's the key point where I say they killed those residents. All they had to do was to tell. Their rescuer says if he had known what they were doing, he'd have left them behind to drown too.

 

[CyberLaw]

To clarify my point, this was a "documentary" of Katrina, a true documentary with the real people, so it was not a "show" it was " show" of actual events with actual people.

 

[CyberLaw]

So these people just left "frail and vulnerable" people that they were responsible for "evacuating" in the first place to die. They left, saved themselves, but the "frail and vulnerable" who could not leave on their own were left to drown.

When these two people were saved, they wanted to "cover their butt" not accept the responsibility for their "choices" and told no one that there were frail and vulnerable people left behind to be "saved".

That these frail and vulnerable people were in "very bad shape" and in "trouble" because the owners "decided" to stay rather then obey the order to leave. Then they do not tell the "people who rescued them" to save the others.

There are people on this board defending what they did........PLEASE.

They caused the death of 35 people, the Government did not.

They should have had a plan in place to evacuate the people....that is what would have been responsible.

Not leaving 35 people to die...........when an evacaution order was in place.

 

[Amraann]

Where I live the government does evacuate the elderly or sick 3 days before a storm even hits.

I still think that if these people are responsible then the government shares the blame and I do not blame the medical professionals at all.

About the documentary.. In a situation like that not everyone is in the same boat so to speak.
Clearly they had the means to evacuated the man from the documentary .. that doesn't mean that the medical professionals in this nursing home had the same luxary.

 

[CyberLaw]

Well if they had the luxury to care or evacuate people, then they took that same luxury and killed people whom they "felt" could not have been evacuated.

This is not a catch 22. They should have attempted to evacuate the people, if they died, then it would have been natural or a result of evacuation.

But they decided not to evacaute these people(and risk their death)but the Doc choose to "kill them" instead of risking their death through evacuation.

I don't under the "logic" of that situation.

As for the nursing home owners...I am not even going to "go there".

Maybe in some places, the Government will evacuate sick and elderly, but if you live in a hurricane area, know that this is not the policy and choose to stay, despite an evacaution order, knowing that these orders are "issued"
in the event of a "very bad hurricane" then you are negligent.

In some areas people have Hurricane parties. LE can and does go door to door, to "ensure" that everyone knows to leave. If you choose to "wait it out and see what happens and party", LE will then ask you "who is your next of kin". At that point they cannot force you to leave, only advise you. It is your choice..........

 

[Details]

To clarify my point, this was a "documentary" of Katrina, a true documentary with the real people, so it was not a "show" it was " show" of actual events with actual people.

OK, thanks.

Still, I also watch a bunch of real life medical shows, and I've also seen the occasional miraculous rescue when everything is against them, etc. But that's not always possible - you can hand-pump a ventilator (and they did) when the electricity goes out, but an Ecma? machine must have electricity. You can operate without anesthesia, but you can't eliminate an infection that is all throughout the blood without penacillin (or the appropriate medicine). So, it's all about the precise details of the case.

Also, the million to one shot of taking the risk and performing the operation - do you still do it if it will take you and 3 nurses 3 hours of time to do it, and there are 10 other people who will die for the lack of those nurses, but will stand an excellent chance to survive with them? That's the triage lesson that doctors and nurses are taught to think about. Sometimes you must make a choice that will result in death, and you must chose the one that results in the least harm. Given a choice between one dead or 10 dead - you choose to save the 10. Given a very slender chance to save one person, or a very good chance to save another person - you choose the person you are most likely to save, if it comes down to where you cannot in any way help them both.

What is your opinion if these people really were unable to be saved - can you accept that for the purpose of answering this question - they really are dying, period, no last minute solution, nothing. And they are in pain, and their mind is working so little that all they know is pain - no thought, no memories, no communication - just pain. And it could go on for hours, it could do lots of things, but it cannot be prevented. You can give pain meds, but to give enough to relieve the pain may harm or kill the patients. Given this scenario - what do you personally do?

Aside from that - what do you believe the actual situation was? Were the patients able to be saved, and why? Should their pain be alleviated if it might hurt their chances - when we are talking about severe pain that just continues on and on?

 

[Details]

LE can and does go door to door, to "ensure" that everyone knows to leave. If you choose to "wait it out and see what happens and party", LE will then ask you "who is your next of kin". At that point they cannot force you to leave, only advise you. It is your choice..........

I suspect - I don't know, but I do suspect, where it is not just some areas, but the whole city to evacuate, LE was overwhelmed - they had to tell people, help them evacuate, try to secure the Dome - it was just too huge. They probably figured that everyone had heard the TV and everything else telling them to evacuate, so no point to go door to door, better to help those that want to evacuate to do so.

 

[CyberLaw]

People are not 'usually" left in the amount of pain that you mention. Fetanyl is used.

In Switzerland, people have to make "coherent" intelligent consent to take their own lives. They must do it. They are only given the means to do so.

They cannot make and are not allowed to make the decision out of "desperation to end pain".

In the "fictional" case that you mention, a person may be allowed to by their own choice take their own life, but it is their decison, not another person's to make.

If a patient who "has unmanaged" pain asks to die, usually that patient is not "thinking logically" but is reacting to a temporary(without the appropriate amount of painkillers) to pain and choosing a "perm" solution as in ending their life. There is no "informed" consent.

People are above dogs and animals, who are "put out of their misery" and the choice is made by people.

I remember giving birth, before I was clouded with pain, at the DR's office some weeks before birth, I was asked to read and if I choose to "sign" a consent form for a spinal. There are many risks, I was not in pain, I read carefully and signed. That is informed consent, knowing the consequences and complications fully of your decision.

But asked me to sign the same document while in "pain" and I would have signed it "without hesitation" because I was not thinking logically, I just wanted the pain to end. That would not have been informed consent, I would have wanted the pain to end and not appreciate the consequences of my decision.

If a person can manage pain, then the thought of "ending" it all may never occur to them, that is why there are specialized clinics and "caring" doctors who will do their utmost to ensure that when you do die, you do not make the hasty "choice" to end you life sooner because you are thinking out of pain, not logic, and do not appreciate the consequences of your decision.

 

[kgeaux]

From the link Details provided....

In a lawsuit filed last month, the couple sued the government, saying federal, state and local officials failed to keep residents safe and evacuate vulnerable citizens as the storm approached.

The Manganos have argued that their hurricane plan — to keep frail residents in place with food, water and generators rather than risk moving them — was a responsible course of action, and that if the levees had held, the tragedy would have been avoided.



I tend to agree with this couple. Where their ambulances provided to move these people? And where were they going to move to the Superdome?

I am still trying to understand as all this blame is passed around what exactly these people were all suppose to do?

The Louisiana state evacuation and emergency preparedness plan calls for hospitals, nursing homes, etc. to come up with their own plan for evacuation. That plan is then submitted to the state and approved. When an evacuation is called, the hospital/care facility is notified and it is then UP TO THEM to put their plan into action.

This nursing home made a judgement call that the evacuation would cause more harm than staying and riding out the storm. The previous year, nursing home residents were evacuated and several died as a result of being transported while in very fragile health. So I understand the thought process behind deciding to stay.

Unfortunately, the levees failed and all the residents and the care givers who had stayed behind all drowned.

The delay in filing charges has something to do with the condition of the bodies----it was hard to prove that they'd died by drowning instead of natural causes. In fact, I think the coroner was never able to prove they drowned. (We all know they did, but it just can't be proven.)

I think what happened is horrible. And in hindsight, of course the facility should have been evacuated, but it was located in an area that had NEVER flooded like that before.

I really wouldn't be surprised if a jury finds the owners not guilty.