Christine O'Donnell's Schiavo Case: 'Life For Lauren' (Inquiring minds want to know...)

TPM ^ | September 24, 2010, 8:44AM | Rachel Slajda

[DelaWhere]

You know that Christine O'Donnell is pro-life. But one episode that hasn't gotten much attention is her work on an end-of-life case, reminiscent of Terry Schiavo's, in 2008.

O'Donnell, the new Republican Senate candidate from Delaware, cites her pro bono public relations work on the case as the reason she was in dire financial straits during her Senate campaign against Joe Biden that year. Her straits were so dire, in fact, she sold her home...

[trisham]

In doing a little online research, it does appear that hospitals are more forthcoming about volunteer programs than hospices here in MA. I’m not sure whether that translates into more red tape, but it may.

It really is too bad.

[BykrBayb]

I stole it from a liberal, and got it hosted elsewhere.

[DoughtyOne]

Another point is that if rules were relaxed so that volunteers could help care for the needy in hospitals - trained of course - to take care of more mundane tasks, this would reduce costs.

While I see some problems with the overall goal being realized in this manner, something like that might actually be somewhat of a help on some patients.  I need to qualify that limited approval though.  Keeping the patient comforted, attended, and supplied with water, ice, whatever... could be helpful.  I am not comfortable with it taking place in a hospital setting.  If it were an extended care facility, perhaps so.  There are problems with it.  Family members and friends, I'm on board.  Others?  I'm not a big fan.

Sadly, you really to have to fear your 'angel of death' situation, where an unknown unlicensed person comes in and gains one on one access to the patient while others are going about their work elseswhere.  There's a reason why only approved staff members can touch patients even in hospitals.  Those that can have been vetted, trained, licensed, and have a lot to lose if they don't conduct themselves in a reasoned mannor.  And hospitals being the deep pockets of choice when something goes wrong, I don't think your idea holds up well on these issues.  It doesn't end there though, and I think other issues might make more sense than this to you.  Lets see.

There is so much freaking legal redtape about everything that it makes costs skyrocket. 

I agree with this and it must be reduced.  Still, if it's your mom and something goes wrong, you want a paper trail that is long, broad, and deep.  If it's somebody else's mom, not so much.  This isn't a dig.  It's human nature.  It's just the way it is.  Still, quite a bit of what takes place today inhibits nursing time/attention to/with the actual patient.  Hospitals are continually trying to address this problem.  Here's your biggest hospital payroll asset related to hands on care, and they spend a big chunk of their time on charting and other matters away from their patients.  (see: "physician note" later down)

I bet all kind of volunteers woulds be thrilled to help care for the sick and helpless.

There are very robust volunteer programs at most hospitals.  Those volunteers are used for porter, delivery, and other non-hands on patient tasks.  They also serve in gift shops and thrift shops connected to the facility.  They provide thousands perhaps tens of thousands of hours in their respective hospitals.  They aren't facilitating eating and drinking by the patients.  They aren't changing bandages or caring for wounds.  They don't touch patients or even come into contact with them as a general rule, unless it's in association with a dog-therapy program.

I bet groups would even form just for the purpose.

Actually, the volunteer directors for hospitals across this nation have robust programs with a core group of dedicated service to others oriented people.  These are salt of the earth people.  Even so, they are limited as to what they can actually do inside a hospital.

What you are trying to facilitate, is reducing the cost of keeping comatose patients alive.  The real costs aren't something that volunteers are going to be able to impact, at least to my way of thinking.

Costs are related to services rendered, and they probably fall under some specific Diagnostic Related Groups (DRGs.  A term that may no longer be in vogue for what I am addressing.  Something has taken it's place if that is the case.)  Insurers and the government have a whole list of services they cover.  These are diagnostic related services.  If a person is in the hospital for anything from maternity to open heart surgery, the government and the insurance companies have a specific list of things that will be covered, and what fees will be advanced to pay for them.

For a comatose patient, here are some of the things they might need.

1. A bed, the cost of housing the patient (as accute as is required) and the nursing time associated with the type of patient
2. Lab work to make sure nutrition and blood level targets are being hit
3. A nutrionist to evaluate the patient and make recommendations
4. The actual nutritional supplements to keep the patient healthy
5. Medication that would be needed to keep this patient stablized
6. A physical therapist
7. A wound care specialist
8. An I. V. specialist
9. Life sign monitering
10. Clinical Pharmacist
11. Central supply services
12. Housekeeping
13. A few other things I may have left out...

(Physician note: You'll note I left out the physician, but they are generally a separate fee not associated with the hospital.)

These are the things that cost big sums of money.  Anything else is incidental.  Anything else is probably taken care of by volunteers already, if possible.

And these costly things above not being able to be impacted by a volunteer, it seems to me the idea that voluneers could make more of an impact on costs than they do, sort of evaporates.  It's a reasoned idea, and some of it is already taking place.  I'm not convinced more could have the impact both you and I would like to see.

One thing that might help, is some sort of a national facility that would take any case like this that came up.  With every person (extended time frame of course) on life-support in the nation in one place, it would seem the latest in state of the art care could be given, hands on observations could be made on a larger body of patients, and better ways to manage these patients could probably become evident.

You see one person like this each day, you can't note similarities or differences in success rates with other patients.  If you see a body of twenty or more patients like this per day, the comparisons alone begin to provide clues to what works best and worst.

A center like this could become a good focal point for folks who like to donate for specific causes, reducing the burden on families, the insurance industry, and the government.

Just some thoughts on it.  Thanks for the note.

[trisham]

Thanks for the info, DoughtyOne. It makes sense.

[little jeremiah]

I see your points. Much more knowledgeable than me. Sigh.

I live in a different time, in my head and heart, I think.

I was thinking also of non-comatose patients. Sitting with them, reading, etc.

Maybe nuns and other religious orders could do it, they’re usually well-vetted.

[DoughtyOne]

When the generation before mine delivered their children, wives stayed in the hospital for seven days.

In my generation that had dropped to three days.

Today it is one.

You would be shocked at how fast people go home these days. There’s a whole industry out there servicing people at home that used to be in hospitals far longer away from what these people are at home.

This helped cut costs related to patient days in hospitals. The government drive this more than anyone else. They started compensating less and less for patient stays, 7, 5, 3, 2 days over time.

Nursing, supply, therapy costs, all plummeted. It’s just what the government and the insurance companies wanted. And then they came up with the brain-storm of the century...

The home health care industry is killing us. Yep, you can’t make this stuff up. The industry that grew up to help facilitate short patient stays, had gotten too big and the government was angry about it.

The point being, anyone in a hospital today doesn’t want someone fussing over them. It’s bad enough all the relatives and friends that bombard them with well-meaning visits.

I have a problem with clotting. I’ve been under therapy for just short of twenty years. Two times in my live I had major problems. On one of them, I was placed in a room with a room-mate. I was under intense pain. At one point it was so bad that it seemed like my nerves went off the bed, down onto the floor, and out into the hall.

When people walked by in the hall, it hurt. My well-meaning family members would visit. They’d walk right up to the bed and put their hand on the foot of the bed. My wife would have to ask them not to.

Before I was moved to a private room, my room-mate’s wife and family wouldn’t leave him alone. This guy was deathly ill. His family members would come in and stand around for long periods of time. He was ill enough where he needed to sleep, and they were just clueless. They were wearing this guy out.

His wife was told to leave and come back. She would sneak into the room, and into bed with him. And I’m telling you, this guy was in no condition to do anything other than allow it. He was out.

By the time folks are well enough for the kind of attention you are mentioning these days, they’re home. I’m not trying to give you a hard time. It’s just pretty much the truth.

[trisham]

I’ve thought of becoming a nun. I’m not sure how Mr. trisham would feel about it, though.

[DelaWhere]

>>>Very curious.<<<

Hmmmm, Castle ran ad after ad that she didn’t know how to manage money - In doing so, he spent 32 times as much money as Christine did - yet she won with 53% to his 47% -

Curious how she made her dollars go so much further?

Does this indicate that Castle had Big Government Mentality for spending? Sure sounds like it to me...

Bottom line: Sounds like the frugality we need representing us in the Senate! To me it sure does...

Oh, that’s right - makes sense, so let’s switch the focus to that lawsuit. Maybe you ought to read what the attorney that filed it for her has to say on the matter before bashing... I have - it’s out there. THEN make a statement.

[BuckeyeTexan]

I wasn’t bashing! I support Christine O’Donnell. Go to this TPM article to read the comments. I defended her over there (and here) on this. I just have a question or two.

[little jeremiah]

Heheh. Well, aren’t there sort of lay orders or associate orders where you can still be married?

[truthfreedom]

Although this particular examination of the month by month bank balances might be interesting to some, I think it’s safe to say that by not getting a paying job after she fell behind, and choosing to do the right thing, to save Lauren’s life, she lost her house.

It might not have caused the problem. It did make it difficult or impossible to solve the problem.

[Sun]

Thank you so much for posting this, DelaWhere.

We should all support Christine O’Donnell as strongly as we can. She is pro-LIFE! for the born, and well as the unborn, and walks the walk.

[DelaWhere]

>>>I wasn’t bashing!<<<

Sorry, not the word I really meant...

LOL, I just might - ummmm, make that do - get too defensive at times...

I really think the important part is that Christine’s positions are the same as 2006, the same as 2008, as well as today. I really like those positions and think we need more who stand on principles rather than swaying in the political breeze.

Again, sorry for the pounce...

[trisham]

Troublemaker. :)

[wagglebee]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

[cyn]

Thanks so much for posting this... BUMP.