It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SCI/TECH: British Girl eats again after seven years: US Hospital Solves Mystery

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 12:44 AM
link   
For seven years a young British girl was unable to eat solid food. The reason was believed to be a rare disease called Bulbar Palsy which made it impossible for her to swallow food. Tilly instead received nutrition through a tube in her stomach. Following a community drive to raise money, Tilly and her mother went to Lucile Packard Children's Hospital in Stanford, California. There the doctors discovered a much simpler explanation for Tilly's problems: swollen tonsils. Tilly is now eating normally and the tube now lies un-used waiting to be removed. Tilly is due to fly home next week.

 



news.bbc.co.uk
A young girl has eaten solid food for the first time in her life after treatment in the US.
Tilly Merrell, seven, from Warndon, Worcs, has been fed nutritious liquid via a stomach tube almost since birth.

She was thought to have a condition, Bulbar Palsy, which prevents her swallowing solid food.

Wellwishers raised £10,000 to send her to California. But after tests, US doctors believe she only had swollen tonsils and say she now eats normally.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I love happy ending and sometimes in the ICU here at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital we do not get one. This was a simple case as it turned out. It highlights the need for parents to always get a second opinion when confronted with something like this.

[edit on 3/1/05 by FredT]




posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Holy Cow, Fred! There's a happy ending here, but the poor child has suffered for seven years with a feeding tube because no one diagnosed her swollen tonsils? This is a horror story. It's like being buried alive and being dug up just in time to save your life. The happy ending doesn't tell the whole story here.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   
She is a cute little girl. I was up putting in a IV in anotehr kid in her unit the other day and she is a doll. Yeah healthcare is a mindfield and you have to be assertive all the time!



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:20 AM
link   
I didn't know the child was on your ward. How did it happen that this condition was so long in being diagnosed? To me this sounds almost as bad as having a leg amputated for an ingrown toenail.

[edit on 05/3/1 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I didn't know the child was on your ward. How did it happen that this condition was so long in being diagnosed. To me this sounds almost as bad as having a leg amputated for an ingrown toenail.


Actually she was in the general care area The transport specialist are often called up there for IV starts or emergencies etc. It is as bad as you describe and I cannot imagine that only one doctor looked at her for this and missed something so blatently obvious. Part of my job requirement is to perform indotracheal intubation in children with respiratory distress (put in a breathing tube) you get a great view of the tonsils as you scope them. How nobody saw this is beyond me :shk: Id get a good lawyer when I got back home!



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:58 AM
link   
dont mean to sound insensitive, but it is much better that this whole 7 year issue started when she was born and lasted until now, her being 7. I only say this because i would imagine something like that kind of disorder would be hard for someone to go through in Middle School and High School, and that would just add stress to finding a guy for her. So, thank god it happened to her in her first 7 years rather than somewhere in the middle of her life, if that is possible. This is just My oppinion and better late than never



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:02 AM
link   
law suit maybe for the parents against the doctors that fisrt examined her ?



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 06:25 AM
link   
Yeah.... That will make everything all OK again! Let's sue

SOMEBODY! ANYBODY!!!!


[edit on 1-3-2005 by sigung86]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 06:45 AM
link   
I would typically agree with you sigung, however this child suffered for 7 years over something that could be fixed with a minor surgical operation.

I think a little compensation is in order, especially after so many years of doctor bills. At least pay them.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 06:46 AM
link   
The payday mentality has to go, but where there are damages there definitely should be legal recourse. It took years of treatment with this feeding tube and 10,000 dollars to go to California to get this solved just because the original doc was incompetent!

For the most part though I dont think financial punishments are best. Perhaps the penalty should be 10 minutes in a locked and windowless room with the child's father? More realistically, docs mistakes should be tracked and recorded. Nobody is going to be right 100% of the time, but if somebody develops a record of incompetence they need to go. Its scarry what docs get away with sometimes.

My mother tells me a horror story about a doctor named Gupta (not the famous one) who has a HORRIBLE record in dealing with some certain heart condition. He favored some inappropriate medication or something like that. Something like 80% of his surgical patients were having the same complications after surgery because of his orders on this medication, and they were ending up in ICU under my moms care. Finally my mom (an RN) realizes that she keeps getting patients with the same problem from the same doctor and looks into it. The result was pretty much a career deathmatch with that doctor- she almost lost her job over it, but finally she and other staff members prevailed. They didn't fire the doctor though, because that might have been an admission of guilt for several deaths. Instead they arranged other employment for him to get him out of their hospital so they wouldn't be responsible for his mistakes anymore.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Hi Gal, and Vagabond.

I don't have a problem with compensation for medical stupidity. After all, someone, somewhere, has an appointment today with the worst doctor in the world.

However, let's fix other things too. The incompetent fool of a doctor (using the term in a free way) ... Why isn't he simply punished commenserate with the crime? Make that a punitive adjunct to his paying for his incompetence? And, further, for something that has gone on this long ... I am certain that more than one doctor was involved. Why don't we take the rest of those involved to task as well...

Why didn't the parents get a second opinion? If her parents are looking for more than a pay day, then let the blood lettings begin. A trial to bring the responsible people to task. Something more than just putting a label on the cup that says "This coffee is hot".

Sorry for ranting... See my post elsewhere about lawsuits and their frivolity. We yell about higher prices, people being put out of work, Bush's solution and then jump on the "Sue 'em for a bazillion bucks" bandwagons.




posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:12 AM
link   
The article mentions the girl is british, Was the seven years she spent with a feedng tube stuck in her spent in britain?



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:13 AM
link   
i agree with the medical bills and pain and suffering but to a point. America has changed much in the last 100 years. With medical advances people feel that doctors are miracle workers. I am not saying that it happened in this case and that the girls family is money hungry, but many are. Vioxx and Celebrex users sue the drug company for a drug that hurts people in extremely high doses who smoked for over 15 yrs and the drug got FDA approval. Who is to blame there? Where does the responsiblity fall? Where the lawyers can get it easier. I apologize up front to those who mistake me for being anti-sue in this case of swollen glands.

Also who said that the girls parents wanted to sue? I know that is what we all would have done but maybe the parents look past their anger and are happy just to know that their girl is going to be ok. Why does it always have to be about who we can sue? Why can't we be happy that medicine rarely has cases like this and that it's a lot better than the days of amputation for a simple infection or Thalidomide for morning sickness*. Cases such as this are rare, can't we be happy about that?


*For those who do not know: In the late 50's, early 60's a drug called Thalidomide was used by first trimester pregnant women to combat the effects of morning sickness by lowering the mothers blood pressure. The result was a wonderous drug that relieved the symptoms experienced. The horror came 6 months later. Due to the lack of oxygen during the critical stages of appendage devolopement, babies with malformed or no arms/legs/ears were born. These babies slithered around on the floor because science wanted to make the mother a little more comfortable. WHERE DOES IT STOP? We need to be able to count our blessings and be grateful that things like that do not happen anymore.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
The article mentions the girl is british, Was the seven years she spent with a feedng tube stuck in her spent in britain?


Yes, the tube was in there for that time frame. they held a fund raiser to get her over to the states. I have no idea how she ended up at our facility.

To clear it up though the tube was not through her nose, but rather a small outlet that is surgically implaneted in her belly. She will have to have that taken out which is no big deal.

Its is great to have someone come in with a horrendous problem, find a simply cure, and send her home



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:59 AM
link   
And people wonder what I have against socialsed healthcare.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Bravo! Just one of the many problems with assigning your health to Big Government. Not the least of it, if the Government has to pay for your health, they naturally have a vested interest in it-which means they're justified in running yet another aspect of your life.

to paraphrase Mr. Franklin :"Those who sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security"...is applied not only to physical security and protection, but also to financial security and healh security. If you want to make it the Government's job to handle your retirement, your health care, etc-then it becomes their responsibility to manage it, and reduce risks, by controlling you.

Government, in America was not designed to be anyone's safety net. not for retirement, not for welfare, not for health. To insist on having government secure these, means giving up the freedom to choose anything that may affect them. You want socialized, taxpayer funded, government run medicien, then be ready to have your eating contriolled, smoking banned, unsafe activities curtailed, and "alternative" lifestyle risks made illegal.

Just like living with your parents. Whoever foots the bill gets the decisions. The Founding Fathers knew the danger of the Nanny Government path, but their foresight is lost. Look only at the perpetually bankrupt state of California for proof.



Originally posted by mwm1331
And people wonder what I have against socialsed healthcare.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join