Posted on 04/07/2005 2:59:57 AM PDT by schmelvin
http://www.blogsforterri.com/docs/MagouirkOrderApril1%5B1%5D.pdf <-- Link cited above too
http://www.wghs.org/graphics/campusmap.gif <-- Across the street
Hospice counsel said that if intubation was to be done, Mae would have to be discharged from hospice. I.e., medical availability is not literally at the hospice.
IIRC, Ken's first press release was 72 hours or so after the order. Given the timing required to lose health (i.e., the loss can occur in the course of hours or days), I don't think his sense of urgency was untoward. He believed that "the system" of doctors, lawyers and judges was moving too slowly and deliberately, and he chose to attempt to engage public sentiment.
I think Ken and his attorney made a tactical judgement call, that the best way to get Mae out of hospice included having doctor's testimony. Given that a LaGrange doctor had certified Mae as terminal, they may have felt that rocking the boat too hard would result in a failed mission.
In a purely idealistic form of adversarial proceeding, they would concede nothing.
The statements you listed are hearsay supposedly made by a woman with dementia ...
Emphasis on "supposedly." Who made the allegation of dementia? When was the allegation made?
"While looking at the court documents I noticed"
Did you notice she was in a Hospice and shouldn't be moved upon her doctors advice?
"Kenneth acted the best way he knew how to get public attention on his aunt being starved to death.."
The guy running the hosital/Hospice says otherwise. Who's correct?
Yeah, it goes with the territory here at FR. Fortunately the mods here don't try and stop debate until it turns so ugly it has completely left the realm of civil discourse. Occassionally, someone on the thread orders the so-called disruptors off the thread, but that speaks more to their own self confidence than to anything the alleged disruptor has raised.
Funny how the ASAP part got left out of all the accusations?
Good catch. It got left off, because several here had justified Ken's actions on Wednesday to the failure of the doctors to adhere to the order. So it shouldn't come as any surprise that those few words were overlooked.
Obviously, not all of the doctor's agree on that point. She was moved.
Wonder if Mae's house is being watched? Wonder if grandchildren might attempt to take any valuables she may have...
Good graphic.
There's one guy apparently responsible for both....should have said in the hospital complex but it wasn't clear in the literature I was reading.
Thanks :-)
She'd been at the Hospice since March 22 as I recall from the court papers? On the one had the her doctors said leave her at the Hospice, don't move her and on the other this urgent need to move her.
In the graphic there are heart specialist virutally across the street. Wonder why the need to go to Alabama?
The hospital in GA certified Mae as terminal. No need to treat her, in their professional opinion.
She'd been at the Hospice since March 22 as I recall from the court papers? On the one had the her doctors said leave her at the Hospice, don't move her and on the other this urgent need to move her.
The doctors disagree on the best course of action. Some doctors felt the best course of action was to not treat the disscetion, and certified her as terminal for admission to hospice. Other doctors held that Mae's best interest involved medical treatment that was not available at hospice.
Emphasis on "supposedly." Who made the allegation of dementia? When was the allegation made?
Both parties to the court pottition mention inability to make decisions. Didn't check if any doctors atested to such.
"Obviously, not all of the doctor's agree on that point."
And upon whose advice all parties agreed to listen to...well two of three. :-)
Inability to make one's own decisions is a prerequisite to granting guardianship.
The only party that asserted dementia was, IIRC, Beth Gaddy. Also, IIRC, the first time the assertion was made was in her petition to the court for guardianship.
I haven't read the medical opinions of the three doctors named in the April 4 order. For all we know, all three agreed that Mae's condition was treatable, i.e., not terminal.
Well, what do you say? How would you have handled it? I mean the whole thing, not just the internet part.
Judge Boyd found Mae's dementia to be a fact of the case. It's in his April 1, 2005 ruling.
Dr. Jones examined the proposed ward on April 1, 2005, and prepared and filed his Evaluator's Report with the court wherein he opined that the proposed ward was incapacitated by reason of mental disability and was in need of a guardian of person and property.Mental disability has causes other than dementia. Further, the court in it's April 4 order merely repeated a doctor's opinion.
The April 1 ruling and order were made solely on the basis of the facts as presented by Gaddy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
