• brygphilomena@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Failing to save someone’s life, implies they made decisions in an attempt to save the life. That they tried, and were unsuccessful.

    But in this case, they made decisions which directly prevented Micah from receiving the tests that would have given them the opportunity to save his life.

    The decision, and action, to dissuade Micah’s mother from seeking further medical care directly lead to his death. The decision, and action, to discharge him without adequate testing directly lead to his death.

    The ER team on the third visit sounds to have tried and failed to save his life, even the decision to wait for blood thinners until more thorough testing was likely correct since they were most likely unaware of the risk of the formation of blood clots in the child.

    The primary care doctor and the first ER team negligently made a series of decisions and actions that allowed a child to have an illness go undetected until it became fatal. They had the training and knowledge to know how serious the symptoms reported were and that the child’s recovery was not in line with the illness they had initially diagnosed him. They may have had procedures they didn’t follow which if they had would have prevented Micah death. If those are identified, then yes, I would say they caused his death through inaction.

    Does it rise to criminality? No. But it’s likely malpractice.

    • Steve
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      It certainly is malpractice. They fucked up, and should be held accountable for those mistakes.

      But if a person doesn’t stop something, they had no part in starting, it doesn’t make sense to say they “caused” the result.

      It’s really just that simple.