Another CPS Kidnapping (For Seeking a Second Opinion)

[diplomat]

May 2, 2013 9:16:56 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 2, 2013 8:52:06 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

I think that what bothers me the most about this whole thing, ... How do we protect our kids without infringing upon a parent's rights?

When doctors began discussing the possibility of heart surgery, the parents decided to leave without a proper discharge ... (from the OP)

Step one, get a proper discharge order before walking out of a hospital with your kid who has a heart condition.

You know what they call the guy who graduated last in medical school?  Doctor.  Has heart surgery been performed at Stanford? 

[Tennesseer]

You know what the call the guy who applied but didn't get into medical school? Mister.

[diplomat]

May 2, 2013 9:25:15 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

You know what the call the guy who applied but didn't get into medical school? Mister.

useless as usual.

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 9:13:31 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

...

Snowbird-do you believe the government should be involved in any way, shape or form in this latest incident with this couple:

...

Not addressed to me but I am going to answer anyway. I hate to do it because I despise my honest answer to it.

When the decision to withhold medical treatment comes from a long-standing religious belief, I think that the government needs to take a hands off approach. To do otherwise is a violation of the First Amendment.

[Deleted]

No comment! tenn

I will not discuss my fate in this board. It's me and my higher power and nobody need to know.
I don't need anybody's approval. I don't have to defend nor own explanation.

I saw it so much already since I joined this board  how everybody operates with different sumption. And hostility.
So let it be.... And frankly, I don't have a time for that.

 

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 9:22:32 GMT -5 diplomat said:

... Has heart surgery been performed at Stanford? 

Here is a link for you: Google.com

[diplomat]

May 2, 2013 9:32:14 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 2, 2013 9:22:32 GMT -5 diplomat said:

... Has heart surgery been performed at Stanford? 

Here is a link for you: Google.com

You were the one that made the claim that the heart surgery suggested by the doctor was necessary, back it up.

[Tennesseer]

May 2, 2013 9:31:05 GMT -5 @snowbird said:

No comment! tenn

I will not discuss my fate in this board. It's me and my higher power and nobody need to know.
I don't need anybody's approval. I don't have to defend nor own explanation.

I saw it so much already since I joined this board  how everybody operates with different sumption. And hostility.
So let it be.... And frankly, I don't have a time for that.

 

That tells me what I wanted to know snowbird. Thanks.

[mmhmm]

There was actually zero risk in moving the child since "observation" isn't critical care.

Sorry, paul, but your medical expertise doesn't measure up to making this call; particularly, with no more information than is contained in what we all read.  The doctor(s) at Kaiser could be wrong and the doctors at Sutter correct, or vice versa.  The Stanford doctors (who, like any other doctor, are far more qualified than you are) have yet to weigh in.**


** I take that back.  The doctors at Stanford Medical Center have weighed in.  The baby is scheduled for heart surgery within the next 48 hours.  Five month old babies don't undergo heart surgery for nothing. Something is seriously wrong and these parents are darned lucky.

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 9:33:49 GMT -5 diplomat said:

May 2, 2013 9:32:14 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Here is a link for you: Google.com

You were the one that made the claim that the heart surgery suggested by the doctor was necessary, back it up.

Thus the true problem with all of this. Medical information is not released. It has been indicated that surgery was discussed at hospital "A" and that surgery was scheduled to be performed at hospital "C". Good enough for me to be comfortable.

[mmhmm]

Funny thing is, if the parents were to say that the treatment was against their religious beliefs, no court would have ordered that kid anywhere.....

Don't count on it.

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 9:40:38 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

May 2, 2013 9:16:56 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

When doctors began discussing the possibility of heart surgery, the parents decided to leave without a proper discharge ... (from the OP)

Step one, get a proper discharge order before walking out of a hospital with your kid who has a heart condition.

So, in other words, we don't have the right to just walk out of a hospital, with our child, without permission, even to seek another opinion?
If parents start realizing that once they walk into a hospital, with their sick child, that the hospital has this kind of power, wouldn't that cause a parent to hesitate to even seek medical attention? 

As they should. Choose wisely when and where you take your child for care.

[diplomat]

May 2, 2013 9:45:37 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 2, 2013 9:33:49 GMT -5 diplomat said:

You were the one that made the claim that the heart surgery suggested by the doctor was necessary, back it up.

Thus the true problem with all of this. Medical information is not released. It has been indicated that surgery was discussed at hospital "A" and that surgery was scheduled to be performed at hospital "C". Good enough for me to be comfortable.

So it has no bearing that the child received improper medication at hospital "A"?  Broken clocks are correct twice a day too. 

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 9:54:38 GMT -5 diplomat said:

May 2, 2013 9:45:37 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Thus the true problem with all of this. Medical information is not released. It has been indicated that surgery was discussed at hospital "A" and that surgery was scheduled to be performed at hospital "C". Good enough for me to be comfortable.

So it has no bearing that the child received improper medication at hospital "A"?  Broken clocks are correct twice a day too. 

As I indicated before, I do not hold articles such as the one in the OP to be "truth". You have a report by a mother who has a child in the hospital with a heart condition doing the reporting. Is it accurate or not, I (and you) have no idea. And if you read that which you quoted, I said I am comfortable with the fact that "A" then "C" have suggested that the surgery is necessary.

[mmhmm]

We don't know the baby received "improper medication", and we won't know.  That's on the baby's medical records and those are protected.  All we have is a claim "a doctor" said the baby shouldn't have received a medication.  We do know doctors at Sutter said the baby needed heart surgery and doctors at Stanford have endorsed that decision and scheduled the surgery to be done within 48 hours.

[diplomat]

I love slippery slopes like this one.  How soon before CPS comes for the anti-vaxxers children? 

[swamp]

May 2, 2013 10:29:28 GMT -5 diplomat said:

I love slippery slopes like this one.  How soon before CPS comes for the anti-vaxxers children? 

tomorrow.

[Deleted]

May 2, 2013 9:31:05 GMT -5 @snowbird said:

No comment! tenn

I will not discuss my fate in this board. It's me and my higher power and nobody need to know.
I don't need anybody's approval. I don't have to defend nor own explanation.

I saw it so much already since I joined this board  how everybody operates with different sumption. And hostility.
So let it be.... And frankly, I don't have a time for that.

 

You really need to unbunch your knickers.  For the past two days I have seen you argue with posters about their beliefs.  You bring up your son, your beliefs, but when people make comments on it, and those comments do not match your beliefs, then you no longer want to discuss it and become hostile.  You can't have it both ways.  If you do not want people commenting on your posts or talking about things YOU brought up to begin with, then maybe you should reconsider posting personal beliefs. 

[Deleted]

May 2, 2013 11:09:39 GMT -5 imanangel said:

May 2, 2013 9:31:05 GMT -5 @snowbird said:

No comment! tenn

I will not discuss my fate in this board. It's me and my higher power and nobody need to know.
I don't need anybody's approval. I don't have to defend nor own explanation.

I saw it so much already since I joined this board  how everybody operates with different sumption. And hostility.
So let it be.... And frankly, I don't have a time for that.

 

You really need to unbunch your knickers.  For the past two days I have seen you argue with posters about their beliefs.  You bring up your son, your beliefs, but when people make comments on it, and those comments do not match your beliefs, then you no longer want to discuss it and become hostile.  You can't have it both ways.  If you do not want people commenting on your posts or talking about things YOU brought up to begin with, then maybe you should reconsider posting personal beliefs. 

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 10:29:28 GMT -5 diplomat said:

I love slippery slopes like this one.  How soon before CPS comes for the anti-vaxxers children? 

I disagree that this is a "slippery slope" issue in regards to this case. What we have here is a case involving actual individuals with very specific details. It is impossible to determine with 100% confidence if CPS acted properly or not in this particular case since we do not have all the facts necessary to make that determination. (Granted, if you wish to use this case to support a preset agenda, you can claim 100% confidence.) One can argue the appropriateness of actions in any particular case, but clearly government must retain the right to step in when a child is in danger from parental behavior.

Now I do agree that general issues like vaccinations create a problem that we need to deal with as a society.

[thyme4change]

May 2, 2013 9:54:38 GMT -5 diplomat said:

May 2, 2013 9:45:37 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Thus the true problem with all of this. Medical information is not released. It has been indicated that surgery was discussed at hospital "A" and that surgery was scheduled to be performed at hospital "C". Good enough for me to be comfortable.

So it has no bearing that the child received improper medication at hospital "A"?  Broken clocks are correct twice a day too. 

So basically, you are saying they were lucky that they just basically guessed that the kid needed heart surgery, meanwhile another expert actually agreed?  So Kaiser sending the kid home was wrong, or right?

I don't want to bag on nurses here, but when I was in the hospital there were a bunch of people running in and out of my room.  Every one of them was in sweats.  Some of them were nurse's assistants, and what not.  A handful of them were actually very knowledgeable about the medical situation.  But there were a bunch that were there to just sort of keep an eye on things.  And every shift, the faces changed.  It was difficult for me to figure out which one was there to make sure I had a glass or water, and which one was there to make sure I was given the right medication.  Is it possible, that maybe, the nurse that the mother spoke to wasn't really qualified to answer if the medical treatment being given was proper?  

[thyme4change]

It is impossible to determine with 100% confidence if CPS acted properly or not in this particular case since we do not have all the facts necessary to make that determination.

If mmmhmms source in post 41 is correct and a third hospital is going to do surgery in the next day or so, then it is highly likely that this child actually has a significant heart defect and needs treatment.  In which case, CPS did the right thing.

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 13:37:14 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

It is impossible to determine with 100% confidence if CPS acted properly or not in this particular case since we do not have all the facts necessary to make that determination.

If mmmhmms source in post 41 is correct and a third hospital is going to do surgery in the next day or so, then it is highly likely that this child actually has a significant heart defect and needs treatment.  In which case, CPS did the right thing.

I was speaking more to the specific tactics utilized by CPS in this case. It does seem like they were a little heavy-handed but that could have been necessary in the face of denial by the parents. I just think we are being unfair to harshly judge those that we ask to do a very difficult task.

[thyme4change]

It does seem like they were a little heavy-handed but that could have been necessary in the face of denial by the parents.

Unfortunately, we are only hearing the story from the side of the parents.  So, I take their version of events with a grain of salt.  Of course they are going to go onto the Today show and make it sound like an Elian Gonzalez type swat team broke down their door and searched the closet, holding the parents at gunpoint and ripping their child out of their arms.  I watched the home video they posted, it seemed fairly civil.  Police aren't always the warmest people, so they weren't speaking softly or anything.  

I maintain that if this child is actually getting the heart surgery, these parents are lucky as hell!  Otherwise, the kid would die in his crib, and that medical report from Kaiser giving him a clean bill of health would provide little comfort.

[EVT1]

And then they would sue Kaiser.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 1, 2013 11:10:04 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 1, 2013 10:02:55 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

... a seriously ill child was in state custody.  This isn't just wildly irresponsible, this is dangerous.

So "the parents decided to leave without a proper discharge" with "a seriously ill child" and CPS got involved? Good. It is comforting to know that the parents will not be able to again decide to take the child away from medical care at their whim.

Even if the parents have good reason to believe that the people denying the discharge are hacks?

But I suppose CPS didn't know that.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 2, 2013 16:04:42 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

And then they would sue Kaiser.

That's a good point. We're just assuming the parents would feel guilty for ignoring their gut and letting their kid die on the operating table. But after they'd sued the hospital: no guilt, no regret, plenty of cash. No harm done.

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 14:22:06 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

... that medical report from Kaiser giving him a clean bill of health ...

After the police saw that baby Sammy was fine and examined medical records that clearly stated that Sammy was clinically safe to go home, they left.

The attending doctor at Kaiser said, “I do not have concern for the safety of the child at home with his parents.” www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/cps-takes-baby-after-parents-seek-second-medical-opinion/

This is a little different than "clean bill of health". It could be a legitimate difference of opinion between, "lets keep him here between now and surgery next Tuesday" and "take him home, monitor closely, bring back at first sign of trouble or next Tuesday for surgery - whichever comes first".

[billisonboard]

May 2, 2013 16:18:23 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 1, 2013 11:10:04 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

So "the parents decided to leave without a proper discharge" with "a seriously ill child" and CPS got involved? Good. It is comforting to know that the parents will not be able to again decide to take the child away from medical care at their whim.

Even if the parents have good reason to believe that the people denying the discharge are hacks?

But I suppose CPS didn't know that.

Did you read someplace that a discharge order was denied? All I read was that they left without one.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 2, 2013 16:28:42 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 2, 2013 16:18:23 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Even if the parents have good reason to believe that the people denying the discharge are hacks?

But I suppose CPS didn't know that.

Did you read someplace that a discharge order was denied? All I read was that they left without one.

I don't know. I've found four articles on the story and all any of them says is "left without an official discharge". They don't say anything beyond that.

Every article makes it clear that the parents had good reason to believe the hospital was making screw-up after screw-up, and that they wanted a second medical opinion (which they got).