Posted on 07/04/2007 7:11:32 PM PDT by monomaniac
New Orleans, LA (LifeNews.com) -- Two nurses accused of euthanizing patients in the wake of Hurricane Katrina have seen the charges against them dropped by the district attorney in the case. Nurses Lori Budo and Cheri Landry were arrested along with physician Anna Pou on charges that they killed four patients. All three worked at New Orleans' Memorial Medical Center at the time of the hurricane.
The three were accused of killing as many as nine patients so they could relinquish their responsibility for patients and flee the hospital as conditions there deteriorated.
John DiGiulio, Landry's attorney, said he was pleased the charges were dropped and told the Associated Press, "We thought this was how it would end."
"We're cautiously optimistic that, when it's all over, no one will be charged -- including Dr. Pou," he added.
Budo and Landry were required to testify before a grand jury last month under an agreement that made sure their testimony would not be used against them.
Assistant District Attorney Michael Morales had indicated he would drop the charges against the nurses once they testified. Budo's charges were refused Friday and Landry's were refused in late June. They were charged with second-degree murder.
Rick Simmons, Pou's attorney, told AP he thinks Pou will be found innocent.
"All along, Dr. Pou and the nurses have contended that there was no criminal wrongdoing in connection with their conduct at Memorial Hospital," he said. "We are glad that the charges against the nurses have been dismissed and look forward to a similar result with regard to Dr. Pou."
Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti launched an investigation into the deaths of 34 patients at the hospital during and after the hurricane. More than 70 witnesses were subpoenaed to testify in the probe.
Foti told CNN the investigation found that four patients were given a lethal dose of morphine and other drugs to hasten their death.
After Foti's investigation, he turned the case over to Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie Jordan who let a grand jury determine whether any charges should be sought.
Kris Wartelle, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Charles Foti said the state's top attorney general didn't consider the deaths euthanasia but homicides.
National Public Radio, in February 2006, published papers from the investigation that indicated that staff members had a discussion about long-term care patients on the seventh floor and what to do about them.
Three staff members told the attorney general that the plan was to leave no living patients behind and "a lethal dose would be administered" for patients deemed unable to be saved.
One doctor, Bryant King, told CNN in October that he overheard other conversations.
King refused to identify the people involved in the discussions and later said he never heard them talk about euthanasia, only "ending suffering." Yet the tenor of their discussion led him to believe they were planning to end the lives of patients they deemed beyond hope.
"It appeared they were proceeding with that plan," said Dr. King.
But, Dr. Pou had told Baton Rouge television station WBRZ in November that "There were some patients there who were critically ill who, regardless of the storm, had the orders of do not resuscitate. In other words, if they died, to allow them to die naturally, and to not use heroic methods to resuscitate them."
"We all did everything in our power to give the best treatment that we could to the patients in the hospital to make them comfortable," Pou said then.
Meanwhile, Angela McManus told AP that her 70 year-old mother was in the hospital at the time recovering from a blood infection and appeared in fine condition when relatives were told to leave the hospital. She died later that day.
I respect your opinion.
On the seventh floor? They weren't going to drown.
I take no position here on the merits of the case. But I have to object strongly to this sentiment. Daily, people "who weren't there" judge others. It's called a jury.
http://www.pursuingholiness.com/2006/07/19/post-katrina-euthanasia-roundup/
Explains a bit about the setup there.
(Has a reply from MMC to CNN re: food/water, could be PDA)
I think the case is grey only because of the evidence, physical and otherwise. Euthanasia by a physician is not an issue, as it is a felony under LA law and if proven the doc should pay for it.
The SEAL analogy was based on the fact that they knew someone was coming just not when, it could have been minutes or days. The docs and nurses lives were not at risk, just miserable.
The medical staff at Baptist before it was sold to Tenet was excellent. Tenet is an issue regardless of location as their management team is awful. I know that I will raise the ire of some on this forum, but even as much as I believe in capitalism I prefer that a hospital that I have to go into as a patient be run as a not for profit. Having to answer to stockholders is not conducive to good medicine. Before anyone attacks, I know that all hospitals have to make a profit to survive. It’s just who they put first the patient or the dollar.
I take no position here on the merits of the case. But I have to object strongly to this sentiment. Daily, people “who weren’t there” judge others. It’s called a jury.
Yes: I saw how that works with OJ and Scooter Libby.
I agree that the jury system is hosed, due to ignorance of the citizenry and voir dire, but I reject the corollary that if someone didn't witness the crime, he cannot or should not form a judgment.
It all comes down to whether the doctor intended to cause the immediate death of the patients that she could keep alive (but would not) or whether she intended to comfort patients that she could not keep alive.
This is the "lifeboat scenario" where you are in a lifeboat with twenty other people. You don't know how long it's going to take you to be rescued but you know you have enough food and water for everyone for one day, maybe two. What do you do? If you think it's going to take weeks for a rescue how do you decide to split the provisions and who lives or dies as a result? What if the rescuers arrive in three weeks to find five people alive and through the course of investigation find that over the course of the three weeks, there were decisions made and some of the weaker elements were tossed overboard to ensure the survival of the others - Should the five survivors be charged with murder for doing what it took to ensure that at least some of them survived?
We are judged by how we treat our most vulnerable, whether newborns, disabled, elderly.
In any herd, the weakest fall first whether to the lions, the elements, or in some cases the herd itself. It's harsh, but that's life and without that reality the human species would long ago have ceased to exist.
The bottom line is the question of whether it's more humane to allow someone who's dying of starvation and dehydration to do so in days or moments.
If the nurses and doctors who risked their lives to stay behind had simply walked away and let nature take it's course would it be okay to charge them with murder? Do you honestly believe that a doctor or nurse has a responsibility to give their life for a patient? Do you, or does anyone, believe they have the authority to demand that someone else give their life for someone?
Frankly I think that in situations where a person can't be evacuated for fear of killing them a family member should be required to either stay with them or sign off on attempting to move them. That puts the ball in the family member's court and whatever happens, they can't later blame the doctors or nurses for not "doing all they could."
Col Sanders
Looks to me that we’re both seeing this the same way. The gray area’s are not really gray and your statement “The docs and nurses lives were not at risk, just miserable” I totally agree with.
The only gray area is what really happened. Most likely we will never know all the facts as the conditions inside the hospitals during Katrina have taken on an air of myth. People have taken sides and the truth is the victim. I think this situation fits the definition of a tragedy. Regardless of the truth I am afraid that peoples faith and trust in physicians as protectors has been severely damaged. This case will be causing moral and ethical fall-out for many years to come. I ultimately hope that it is good.
There was no trial.
No jury.
Comdemnation without isnt a good idea either.
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.