Escape from Mayo Clinic

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Maybe their lawyers advised them otherwise. I’m sure there’s going to be litigation of some sort.

More flimsy excuses. Mayo folded when they got their bluff called. Mayo was never really going to interview. That whole sign the waiver thing was a bluff. They never thought it would be signed so they could blame not interviewing on someone else.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

So, NYC, about that Child Protective Order. There were not criminal charges or known history at the time of this incident with MAYO???
The mother might be one horrible awful person.
But, that still does not give MAYO the obligation or right to hold anyone against their will.
If they were SO concerned about what they witnessed with the mother.. Document and contact authorities.
Request an immediate restraining order.

If I have a family member or neighbor, or whomever, who is abusive to a child, that does not give me the right to take custody and control of that child.... That isn't how it works.... No matter how awful MAYO might make it sound in order to justify their actions.

I still do not know if I am seeing/hearing anything at all that gives MAYO the right or obligation to overstep their rights.

They are obviously now running a smear campaign. The girl was an adult. And Mayo had been allowing her to make her own medical decisions. So obviously they thought she was competent when it suited them.

 

[NHdisneylover]

I am normally on the side of hospitals and doctors in similar cases.
Heck, all you have to do is look at the anti-vax movement and the resultant spate of measles outbreaks to know that parents can and will ignore excellent and sound medical advice for entirely illogical reasons, placing their own children at risk in the process. Add in the stress of a in progress serious medical issue and all sorts of insanity is bound to ensue at least some of the time.

HOWEVER, as was pointed out previously in this thread, a very large number of experts, privy to details as well as legal and medical knowledge beyond what we know all agree that the Mayo Clinic overstepped in this case and was in the wrong. Add in the "no comment, well, except we will say the family is likely abusive and mother mentally unstable, but really, no comment" passive aggressive stuff the hospital is putting out as statements now and it becomes very hard to give Mayo and the staff involved in this incident the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

So, NYC, about that Child Protective Order. There were not criminal charges or known history at the time of this incident with MAYO???
The mother might be one horrible awful person.
But, that still does not give MAYO the obligation or right to hold anyone against their will.
If they were SO concerned about what they witnessed with the mother.. Document and contact authorities.
Request an immediate restraining order.

If I have a family member or neighbor, or whomever, who is abusive to a child, that does not give me the right to take custody and control of that child.... That isn't how it works.... No matter how awful MAYO might make it sound in order to justify their actions.

I still do not know if I am seeing/hearing anything at all that gives MAYO the right or obligation to overstep their rights.

The hospital did not try to get custody of the child (who was, at 18, a legal adult anyway).

If the patient cannot make decisions for herself, which would be determined by a psychiatric team, then she needs to have someone to make decisions for her. In this case it seems that the person next in line to make decisions for her (mother) was also deemed unable to make decisions because of suspected abuse of the patient and her actions in the hospital, as listed below. We also don't know much about the biological father and why he couldn't make decisions for he, either. (Perhaps that information will come out at some point.) The hospital then sought assistance from the legal system in "identifying a decision-maker" for her, which they felt to be in her best interest, knowing a lot of complex details that we don't know. This is how it works in this type of situation.

From what I've read, part of the reason for the delay is because there were different counties involved.

In the links I posted above the hospital has said it did not deny a request by the family for transfer of the patient to another facility, as listed below.

This is what the hospital has said if above links weren't viewed:

Below is the list of what Mayo cites as inaccuracies in CNN's reporting:

• 
  
  • The role of the biological father in making care decisions for his daughter during her hospital stay when the mother was unavailable.
  • Allegations of the mother’s abuse of the patient.
  • Mayo reported suspected abuse of the patient, a vulnerable adult, to the County as part of our statutory reporting requirement; and reported again when the patient was removed from the hospital without a safe discharge plan.
  • Mayo never sought to be appointed as a guardian or make decisions for the patient; instead, Mayo notified the County of the patient’s vulnerable adult status and asked for assistance in identifying a decision-maker.
  • Mayo never denied a request from the family to transfer the patient to a different facility.
  • Mayo did not arbitrarily remove the mother from the hospital; instead she was removed after she exhibited escalating disruptive and aggressive behavior that interfered with the care of her daughter and resulted in multiple staff members reporting fear for their safety. A team of Mayo staff members also met with the mother and stepfather to explain why she was removed and they expressed understanding.
  • Our care team provided appropriate pain management according to the pain needs of the patient and was concerned when the mother requested opioids for her daughter so that the mother could get some sleep.

Mayo said the "egregious errors" in the story left the clinic with no choice but to share additional information about the circumstances. "This is a decision we do not take lightly, and it is highly unusual for us," a news release said.

Edit: bolding

 

[cruiser21]

More flimsy excuses. Mayo folded when they got their bluff called. Mayo was never really going to interview. That whole sign the waiver thing was a bluff. They never thought it would be signed so they could blame not interviewing on someone else.

I don’t know enough about the case to even have much an opinion. Nor is it something that really concerns me. You seem be very emotionally invested in it. Hopefully you get the answers you’re llooking for.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

They are obviously now running a smear campaign. The girl was an adult. And Mayo had been allowing her to make her own medical decisions. So obviously they thought she was competent when it suited them.

Hardly a smear campaign when people were asking to know what decisions prompted their actions. Sometimes the truth isn't pretty. This is why hospitals don't usually give out this type of information.

I had not seen anywhere that she'd been making her own decisions. Could you share a link for that, please?

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

I don’t know enough about the case to even have much an opinion. Nor is it something that really concerns me. You seem be very emotionally invested in it. Hopefully you get the answers you’re llooking for.

For someone that doesn't know enough about the case to have much of an opinion, you seem to be posting yours all over the thread including that you are 100% on Mayo's side.
As for answers, thank you for your concern. But there is no need for you to hope. I did my research and got them. And I did it before I posted.

And as for investing, yes, I have the respect for those reading to invest a bit of my time to do my research before I post and post when I have something to say.
All too often, people don't have respect for those reading, don't do their homework, don't even have a grasp of basic facts, and post because they want to say something.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I am normally on the side of hospitals and doctors in similar cases.
Heck, all you have to do is look at the anti-vax movement and the resultant spate of measles outbreaks to know that parents can and will ignore excellent and sound medical advice for entirely illogical reasons, placing their own children at risk in the process. Add in the stress of a in progress serious medical issue and all sorts of insanity is bound to ensue at least some of the time.

HOWEVER, as was pointed out previously in this thread, a very large number of experts, privy to details as well as legal and medical knowledge beyond what we know all agree that the Mayo Clinic overstepped in this case and was in the wrong. Add in the "no comment, well, except we will say the family is likely abusive and mother mentally unstable, but really, no comment" passive aggressive stuff the hospital is putting out as statements now and it becomes very hard to give Mayo and the staff involved in this incident the benefit of the doubt.

It's so unfortunate that the story was presented the way it was, imo. From what I've read, hospital representatives sat down with the two reporters for at least four hours and talked to them about the details of the case and also let them read hospital notes and documents - in addition to the other public information they were already privy to - yet they chose to leave many important details out of the story that those of us who work with these types of situations knew had to be there. Had the story been presented fairly in the first place, those who commented initially may have felt differently. We can only hope the whole story comes out eventually, but it might not. In the Pelletier case, Boston's Children's Hospital chose to say very little.

I'm not saying that every health system is infallible. Far from it. But having worked for many years in one I see everyday how hard professionals work to do the right thing by patients. If I thought for one minute that something wasn't right, I'd be the first to speak up, though I'd have plenty of company, for sure. A patient who was there for a couple of months had dozens of caregivers, most (if not all) of whom strive for the same standards of care that I do; that we all do collectively. Being rated the top health system in the country, especially one who specializes in very complex cases, is nothing to sneeze at. That happens for a reason, i.e. they have lots of layers and systems in place for the utmost of excellent care of patients. I'd have no hesitations of going there for care or bringing my family members there, personally. I'm glad they defended themselves (and I bet they've shared the bare minimum), but I have a feeling for some, this will change their view of Mayo, and perhaps other hospitals, forever, which is a shame. When you think of the number of cases that hospitals serve, something like this happening is pretty uncommon, thankfully.

 

[cruiser21]

For someone that doesn't know enough about the case to have much of an opinion, you seem to be posting yours all over the thread including that you are 100% on Mayo's side.
As for answers, thank you for your concern. But there is no need for you to hope. I did my research and got them. And I did it before I posted.

And as for investing, yes, I have the respect for those reading to invest a bit of my time to do my research before I post and post when I have something to say.
All too often, people don't have respect for those reading, don't do their homework, don't even have a grasp of basic facts, and post because they want to say something.

At least I don’t go out of way to insult people.Geez. This thread should get locked soon. LOL. You make it difficult to have a civil discourse when your always ready to attack anyone that disagrees with you. I leave you to it. You seem to be very passionate about the topic.

 

[gotomu212]

The hospital did not try to get custody of the child (who was, at 18, a legal adult anyway).

If the patient cannot make decisions for herself, which would be determined by a psychiatric team, then she needs to have someone to make decisions for her. In this case it seems that the person next in line to make decisions for her (mother) was also deemed unable to make decisions because of suspected abuse of the patient and her actions in the hospital, as listed below. We also don't know much about the biological father and why he couldn't make decisions for he, either. (Perhaps that information will come out at some point.) The hospital then sought assistance from the legal system in "identifying a decision-maker" for her, which they felt to be in her best interest, knowing a lot of complex details that we don't know. This is how it works in this type of situation.

From what I've read, part of the reason for the delay is because there were different counties involved.

In the links I posted above the hospital has said it did not deny a request by the family for transfer of the patient to another facility, as listed below.

This is what the hospital has said if above links weren't viewed:

Below is the list of what Mayo cites as inaccuracies in CNN's reporting:

• 
  
  • The role of the biological father in making care decisions for his daughter during her hospital stay when the mother was unavailable.
  • Allegations of the mother’s abuse of the patient.
  • Mayo reported suspected abuse of the patient, a vulnerable adult, to the County as part of our statutory reporting requirement; and reported again when the patient was removed from the hospital without a safe discharge plan.
  • Mayo never sought to be appointed as a guardian or make decisions for the patient; instead, Mayo notified the County of the patient’s vulnerable adult status and asked for assistance in identifying a decision-maker.
  • Mayo never denied a request from the family to transfer the patient to a different facility.
  • Mayo did not arbitrarily remove the mother from the hospital; instead she was removed after she exhibited escalating disruptive and aggressive behavior that interfered with the care of her daughter and resulted in multiple staff members reporting fear for their safety. A team of Mayo staff members also met with the mother and stepfather to explain why she was removed and they expressed understanding.
  • Our care team provided appropriate pain management according to the pain needs of the patient and was concerned when the mother requested opioids for her daughter so that the mother could get some sleep.

Mayo said the "egregious errors" in the story left the clinic with no choice but to share additional information about the circumstances. "This is a decision we do not take lightly, and it is highly unusual for us," a news release said.

Edit: bolding

I really do respect that there are a lot of shades of gray to this, but one thing that keeps tripping me up is why the police report taken and shared didn’t indicate a listing of the observed abuse? And why did that same police report indicate that Mayo kept saying she was medically unsafe for release but a secondary hospital did clear her for release?

The police were in the position to receive both full sides of the story and their initial on-the-scene reporting and their later interviews all sided against Mayo to the point of repeatedly telling them a crime was not committed. I woul think at the time Mayo would have shown every documented abuse to the police but instead the social worker talked about the mom being unbalanced and interrupting a meeting....it just doesn’t jive.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I really do respect that there are a lot of shades of gray to this, but one thing that keeps tripping me up is why the police report taken and shared didn’t indicate a listing of the observed abuse? And why did that same police report indicate that Mayo kept saying she was medically unsafe for release but a secondary hospital did clear her for release?

The police were in the position to receive both full sides of the story and their initial on-the-scene reporting and their later interviews all sided against Mayo to the point of repeatedly telling them a crime was not committed. I woul think at the time Mayo would have shown every documented abuse to the police but instead the social worker talked about the mom being unbalanced and interrupting a meeting....it just doesn’t jive.

Great questions and ones I’ve pondered, too. Unfortunately I’m out and won’t be able to respond for a while, but I will, unless someone else here wants to step in.

 

[sunshinehighway]

I really do respect that there are a lot of shades of gray to this, but one thing that keeps tripping me up is why the police report taken and shared didn’t indicate a listing of the observed abuse? And why did that same police report indicate that Mayo kept saying she was medically unsafe for release but a secondary hospital did clear her for release?

The police were in the position to receive both full sides of the story and their initial on-the-scene reporting and their later interviews all sided against Mayo to the point of repeatedly telling them a crime was not committed. I woul think at the time Mayo would have shown every documented abuse to the police but instead the social worker talked about the mom being unbalanced and interrupting a meeting....it just doesn’t jive.

Right. Mayo can say whatever they want now but it doesn't exactly fit with what they said at the time. The thing is, the reporters didn't just take the family's story and report it at face value. They talked to other people, looked at the documents (police reports, court filings, medical records).
https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/08/13/health/mayo-clinic-escape-3-eprise/index.html

 

[gotomu212]

Great questions and ones I’ve pondered, too. Unfortunately I’m out and won’t be able to respond for a while, but I will, unless someone else here wants to step in.

No worries. I really like your insight on these. It’s a really interesting situation to discuss because it does seem so abnormal on 50 different fronts.

 

[penn19]

I have a (Facebook) friend who works at Mayo. She posted something today defending the hospital and truthfully I hadn’t heard about this until I came on the Dis. So I just sort of skimmed what she wrote. Will have to go back and check it out more in depth.

 

[mnrose]

Based on the fact that the remaining children in that home have now been removed from the mother's care, I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that Mayo's concerns about the fitness of the mother are probably not too far wrong. Sorry. Children don't get removed from their home without a pretty damn valid reason, especially in Minnesota. And note that this happened BEFORE this story was published. Oddly, the CNN story omits any mention of this. Ain't that odd. Not.

Also above, someone noted that two counties were involved in this. Martin County is where the family is from so that makes sense. And Olmstead County (someone erroneously said Rochester County, which confused me as there is no such county in Minnesota) which is where the Mayo clinic is located.

And unfortunately that area of Minnesota is known for meth production (Martin County). It happens quite a bit in all our more rural counties where it's easier to escape the prying eyes of law enforcement.

 

[Wishing on a star]

True mnrose...
However, I never follow the assumption that the ends justify the means.
The doctors and he hospital WAY over-reached and did not follow required protocols.
They acted independently and inappropriately. No legal basis was found at that time.
They just felt that they could take this patient more or less prisoner, and then afterwards file for 'custodial' guardianship.

Hindsight might be 20/20... but that does not change the facts.
This is a very very slippery slope,

 

[Wishing on a star]

And, I will just say, personally, that I have witnessed several times where the hospital and/or doctor WAS in the wrong... and innocent patients suffered very serious and life threatening harm.

Mayo clinic or not, I would NEVER automatically give any institution the benefit of the doubt.
Never...

 

[PaulaSB12]

The Mayo clinic has just contradicted themselves on 17th August their press release said this

• Mayo Clinic did not attempt to take custody of the patient or become her guardian. Instead, Mayo sought judicial guidance to help identify the best person to make decisions for the patient.

On 16 they said this
Occasionally, Mayo seeks guardianship for a patient, it said. In this case, officials first were working with the patient's father, Harper said. However, after he backed out, Mayo sought an emergency guardianship in county court. To date this year, Olmsted County said it has seen 25 such requests of which 13 were granted.



So how come with 24 hou*rs they said they did try to get guardianship then say they didn’t

 

[PaulaSB12]

Based on the fact that the remaining children in that home have now been removed from the mother's care, I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that Mayo's concerns about the fitness of the mother are probably not too far wrong. Sorry. Children don't get removed from their home without a pretty damn valid reason, especially in Minnesota. And note that this happened BEFORE this story was published. Oddly, the CNN story omits any mention of this. Ain't that odd. Not.

Also above, someone noted that two counties were involved in this. Martin County is where the family is from so that makes sense. And Olmstead County (someone erroneously said Rochester County, which confused me as there is no such county in Minnesota) which is where the Mayo clinic is located.

And unfortunately that area of Minnesota is known for meth production (Martin County). It happens quite a bit in all our more rural counties where it's easier to escape the prying eyes of law enforcement.

Not quite true as the judgeship overturned the torture of children when it turned out the only reason to remove them was there adoptability

http://medicalkidnap.com/2017/11/21...llegally-only-reason-was-child-was-adoptable/

 

[mnrose]

Not quite true as the judgeship overturned the torture of children when it turned out the only reason to remove them was there adoptability

http://medicalkidnap.com/2017/11/21...llegally-only-reason-was-child-was-adoptable/

Ok. My statement was that in Minnesota, it's very hard to have a child removed from parental custody and you cite a case in Arizona. Thanks for that. This case does not concern, at all, Arizona.