Posted on 07/07/2005 1:20:28 PM PDT by Pharmboy
Los Angeles (Reuters) A California woman is suing a hospital for wrongful death because her husband fainted and suffered a fatal injury after helping delivery room staff give her a pain-killing injection.
Jeanette Passalaqua, 32, filed the suit against Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Southern California Permanente Medical Group Inc. in San Bernardino County state court last week.
In June 2004, Passalaqua's husband, Steven Passalaqua, was asked by Kaiser staff to hold and steady his wife while an employee inserted an epidural needle into her back, court papers said.
The sight of the needle caused Steven Passalaqua, 33, to faint and he fell backward, striking his head on an aluminum cap molding at the base of the wall.
Jeanette Passalaqua delivered the couple's second child, a boy, later that day. Steven Passalaqua, however, suffered a brain hemorrhage as a result of his fall and died two days later, the lawsuit said.
The suit seeks unspecified damages related to Steven Passalaqua's death and to Jeanette Passalaqua's emotional distress at being widowed with two young children.
Because Passalaqua was solicited by Kaiser to assist in the epidural, the lawsuit said, the hospital "owed him a duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable injuries resulting from his participation."
A spokesman for Oakland, California-based Kaiser Permanente called the death "a tragic accident."
"Some of the allegations in the lawsuit are simply that -- allegations. The legal process is under way and we should respect that," said Kaiser spokesman Jim Anderson.
Good post.
I love you, man! (But not in the homo way.)
Seriously, thank you.
I am now off insulting people on a post I started, please come on over:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1438611/posts
Excuse me, but I'm not the one trying to cash in on his death. I have no sympathy for this woman once she hires a lawyer and tries to hold the hospital responsible for something that WASN'T THEIR FAULT. It is because of inconsiderate a$$holes like this woman that products and services cost so much.
kidding
Used to be....if you had Kaiser insurance..you really had something..!!
I know a PED's cardiologist that was told she could only "see" Pt's for 10 min. max.
That being said...this ain't no different than your auto mechanic asking you to hold the whatmacallit...while he turns the engine over..and it blows hot oil on you, you fall down, roll into the grease pit..and drown.
Point being.....the Anesthesiologist should have never asked the Pt's husband to do that.
Oh.....what do I know???
FWIW-
Well, there was a time when if a husband just had to be present at a birth, they did it at home with the help of a country doctor who made house calls. Then up until just a few short years ago, it wasn't the norm for husbands to be in the delivery room, nor was it absolutely necessary. I am sure this wasn't the first husband to faint at the sight of a birth, but he was probably one of the few to ever hit their head and die as a result of it. If this widow is awarded a huge settlement (which she probably will be), I can see that particular hospital's point if they do make the delivery room off limits to the daddys from then on. If someone visits my home, faints and hits their head on a table and is injured and then sues me for a million dollars for pain and suffering, I won't be likely to invite them back to my house any time soon (provided I didn't have to sell my house to pay off the lawsuit).
never mind, post pulled because it was a dupe.
"I am now off insulting people on a post I started, please come on over: "
Awwww, so this is a habit for you.
PLEASE show me in that article where it says the husband was asked to restrain or hold his wife down for the epidural placement...It says "hold and steady".
Could there have been a concern that SHE may pass out?
Maybe, since he was in the room, he was asked to do it to comfort her?
IMO its interpretation.
Or am I missing something?
I never said he was asked to "restrain" her. Never said it anywhere. Therefore, your question to me is inoperable.
I didnt say you said it...I asked if it was somewhere in the article :o)
Though you disagree, and legally you may be correct. I think participating in the procedure is a straw man argument. I believe someone is more likely to get lightheaded by standing by without some task to keep them busy than they are by doing some task - like holding the woman's hand.
Nor would it break my heart to keep non-medical personnel out of delivery rooms and C sections. But good luck making that happen.
the mind-set has become, "it's my labor and delivery and I (we) can do whatever we like." I can't tell you the number of very angry (and threatening to sue)family members I had because I limited the number of observers in the C section room to 1 rather than admitting the whole family.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
In both cases the parties fell and suffered unexpected head injuries caused by a foreign object. Absent the foreign object, neither of them would have sustained a fatal injury.
The "Million Dollar Baby" movie has a similar incident.
That's why we had home births. If the doctor gave us a hard time, we could tell him to leave and if anyone fainted, then we'd have to sue ourselves.
My first reaction to someone suing over his inability to handle a freaking needle is indeed, what the f.
If this were your son-in-law, and your daughter's husband were gone unexpectedly, leaving her with kids, and his earning power and everything else he provided gone, I'm betting you wouldn't be so cavalier. Would you say, Hey, sorry, Honey, it was a tragic accident, do your best?
I really hate to burst your bubble but this does happen. My mom was 33 years old when my dad died. He died of a heart attack. I was 10 years old -- she was left to pay a full house note, a car and my schooling. Perhaps my mother could have sued the hospital or the operating person or the cigarette companies that perhaps brought on the sudden heart attack from 2 packs a day?
But you know what, that wasn't my mom's first inclination. It was to continue working hard and be strong for her son. Not to sit around and whine about it and sue somebody. And no, there was no life insurance to help out, there was nothing. My dad was barely 43 years old.. people don't think about that sort of thing until their older (life insurance). Life does tragically come to an end and there are mothers and little boys left to look at a dead corpse on a slab and wonder -- what next? It happens.
My first reaction to people that are so freaking sue happy that can't just buckle down and persevere is indeed, what the f.
When the hospital initiated the action that led to his death?
Alright, now I know your kidding, right?
It is, and she'll win.
Oh, no doubt. This is a land of law suits and litigation.
Kaiser refuses to hire enough staff to assist with patients. Had there been a trained nurse there, this would not have happened.
You're kidding me right? Speaking anecdotally, but from experience nonetheless, I "steadied" my wife when she was given her epidural.
I see no reason other than that (by request) a staff person would have "steadied" her. His fear of needles NEVER showed up before this day, huh? I find this hard to believe also..
I may be the lone person here (I could really care less if I am) that thinks this is the bottom of the barrel of lawsuits. Like drinking Draino and dying and your family suing because the "Caution" wasn't in big enough print. Sorry folks -- out of control litigiousness.
You arent the lone person here!!
I totally agree with you.
My beef is that stupid lawsuits have ruined this country. I want my husband to be present at the births of any future children, and I don't want to be told no because some stupid a$$ never made the effort to buy life insurance.
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.