Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Oliviaforever; All

“Any violations of protocols would be the fault of the hospital and not the CDC.”

The Liability Lawsuit dance for this is just beginning.

Jesse already wants his part of any potential payday for the Duncan family, and if she lives, the Pham girl will never have to work again.

We saw over the weekend the Harvard clinic isolate a potential Ebola case OUTSIDE of the clinic, rather than bring him back in, and hold him there until he was transferred to another facility.

How long until insurers start telling the hospitals that they aren’t covering liability for Ebola?

When that happens, things will get REALLY BAD, REALLY FAST. Most hospitals won’t dare to touch them for liability fears. As long as they sick and die OUTSIDE the Hospital, they aren’t on the hook for it.

That likely explains why they came out today, wanting to establish an Ebola-Only hospital in each state. They SAY it is so the protocols will be easier to follow. IMHO, it is to prevent a liability-induced healthcare meltdown.


47 posted on 10/14/2014 10:05:59 PM PDT by tcrlaf (They told me it could never happen in America. And then it did....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: tcrlaf

Very interesting take on this.


48 posted on 10/14/2014 10:10:38 PM PDT by sheikdetailfeather (Ignorance can be deadly. Especially in emergencies...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: tcrlaf

The Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital will have a line of people wanting to sue, and if it is established the hospital did not follow CDC protocols or any guidelines as the nurses claim, many of those people will win big settlements.

At this point all the CDC and the Feds can do is create Ebola treatment protocols, but they cannot force the hospitals to follow the protocols.


50 posted on 10/14/2014 10:12:43 PM PDT by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: tcrlaf
That likely explains why they came out today, wanting to establish an Ebola-Only hospital in each state. They SAY it is so the protocols will be easier to follow. IMHO, it is to prevent a liability-induced healthcare meltdown.

It is an attempt to keep U.S. hospitals "clean" so to speak, and prevent further infection of staff and other patients. The problem is that suspected cases will still go to their local ERs, so they will have to set up a pre-triage screening and isolation outside the building.

65 posted on 10/14/2014 10:44:18 PM PDT by daisy12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: tcrlaf
I agree that is likely, but consider transporting a patient for a minimum of 5 hours by road from the most distant areas in some states (in some even longer) by ground transport, or flying them (1 hour), and risking aircraft and crew...

In many states, EMS is mostly to completely volunteer.

Who ya gonna call?

Private vehicles? (stop here, I gotta... I wanna... I'm hungry/thirsty...) Too much infection potential.

If you are in the city with the center... you might get treatment. If not, the further away you are, the less likely you will be treated. (IOW, you're on your own if you get infected.)

92 posted on 10/15/2014 1:44:05 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: tcrlaf

Some medical professionals have been advocating separate, state-level Ebola facilities for some time—saying that regular facilities wouldn’t be able to stop contamination within.


101 posted on 10/15/2014 3:28:34 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson