MY FATHER: WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM AND HOW HE WAS TREATED BY THE
OTTAWA HOSPITAL
My father arrived at the Hospital with broken bones, a stenosis of the
spine and some sub arachnoid bleeding that got resolved completely in
3-4 days after his arrival. He was talking, discussing issues with me,
signing documents, making rational decisions and was completely fine, in
complete control of his mental faculties for a good five months after he
got in the Hospital. While in the Hospital, from the start, he was
allowed to become very ill. He was given an E-Coli infection in his
lungs, he was allowed to develop blood clots in his legs, he was left
anemic for most of the duration of his stay, his kidneys and heart were
allowed to deteriorate due to the unattended anemia for the duration of
his stay, etc. He was moved relatively early on while he was with the
stenosis, namely while he was at high risk and this caused him to lose
movement in all his limbs, one at a time, over the period of
approximately one year, (three to four months after arrival he could
still move everything fine). He was intubated and ex-tubated several
times and in the process his vocal chords got seriously injured which
rendered him unable to make any sounds when trying to speak until
eventually he gave up trying.
His infections were not appropriately treated. In the beginning they got
treated but the antibiotics were interrupted when the signs indicated he
was getting better without checking to ensure that the bacteria got
completely destroyed. As it had not, the same infection kept recurring.
Because of this, the doctors did not even bother to treat it any longer,
not until my father almost died. They allowed him to get septic about 10
times. Due to the septicemia, he got heart attacks that were attended to
at the last minute only. Infections in his teeth were unattended to and
were allowed to turn into abscesses. All dental consults were denied.
His urea values were allowed to climb to such levels that he got into
uremic shocks and became comatose. He was fed sugar both parent-ally and
intravenously so they induced type 2 diabetes. By not changing his
catheter more than 90 days at a time, (when it should be changed at max.
after 30 days), bladder infections were induced. He was gravely
neglected. He was left anemic for most of the duration which affected
his heart and got him arrhythmia as well as kidney complications. It is
likely that at his age, the doctors do not treat people the same way
they treat a younger person. I was told numerous times that they
expected him to die. They did very little to help him live and in fact
by not doing what was required they were causing him to die. In doing
so, they prolonged what could have been only a two months stay in the
Hospital to a stay ten times as long and caused him a lot of pain in the
process.
My father was a fighter. He cherished life more than anything and more
than anyone I have ever known. He did not want to die. He would have put
up with anything in the hope that someday he would find someone to look
after him adequately, to treat him as any doctor should treat any
patient, treat him to get him better. Every time he was intubated or got
a tracheotomy, I asked him first if he agreed after I explained to him
why he needed it. As soon as he understood that his life would be at
risk if he didn't get the tracheotomy, he would agree to have it done.
He nodded and, at first, while he could still talk, he said "yes, I
agree" or "please let them do it", then he could only whisper "good" and
after that, when he could no longer make any sounds at all, he would nod
in approval because he wanted his life saved.
After he got damaged in so many ways while in the Hospital and after the
doctors realized that he would not die on his own (because he had too
strong a will to live), the doctors decided to "let him die"
deliberately. They caused him pain and tried to use that pain to force
me to sign his DNR. He needed suctioning because of the tracheotomy, but
the nurses were ordered not to suction him. This caused him to choke, to
gasp for air, and several times, it even caused him to get aspiration
pneumonia. I wanted to help him, I’d ring the alarm, but the nurses
would not show up when I rang the bell. Then, they told me they do not
suction him anymore and that this was good for him. Of course these
statements were absolutely not true and anyone could see how much this
was hurting him. Then, I was suctioning him myself, to relief his pain
and to enable him to breathe so that he would not asphyxiate and die.
They prohibited me from suctioning him (although many other family
members were allowed to do so for their loved ones) and placed a
security guard at his bedside to prevent me from doing anything to help
him.
This security guard was also instructed to sit next to me every time I
visited him and to take notes about everything we (my dad and I) did or
said during the visit. This lasted for the last 3 months of his stay in
the Hospital, roughly since the doctors decided to apply to the Board to
have my father’s life terminated. I assume it was because they did not
want me to save him. The three times when I arranged for, requested that
and tried to have him moved into another Hospital, I was denied
permission to do so even though I had Power of Attorney for him, given
by him, to me, for the sole purpose that I get to decide on his
treatments and not the doctors! As well, I was supposed to decide in
what Hospital he would get treated. Bottom-line, he was being held
hostage in the Ottawa Hospital.
In fact, the Hospital denied me any rights under the Power of Attorney
given to me by my father: they denied me all rights to access his
medical or any records for the first 14 months of his stay, and then
again, for the last 3 months of his stay in the Ottawa Hospital. These
medical records included the medication he was on, the consults and
treatments he got, etc. It was all kept secret from me as much as the
Hospital staff could get away with, and they did! Even now I can’t get
the access I was entitled to. Records that the Board should have been
provided with, records from the notes taken by the security guard posted
at my father’s bedside have never been disclosed but are of extreme
importance since they show clearly that my father was not vegetative.
Hiding the records was the Hospital’s MO from the start. The Hospital
probably feared that I would see the mistakes they made. In fact, the
very same doctor who asked that my father’s life be terminated, Dr. Van
Wallraven, in the first day he cared for my father, had ordered the
wrong antibiotic and it was I who asked that the wrong medication be
replaced with the correct medication. The doctor on call had to do this,
at my request.
When it became clear that my father was not going to die on his own no
matter what they did or didn't do to him, Dr. Van Wallraven applied to
the Board to have my father’s life terminated. I was in shock. I had
thought that with my Power of Attorney it would have been illegal or at
least impossible for the doctors to obtain permission to go over my head
in order to kill my father. However, they invoked a clause written in
his power of attorney document whereby my father stated that he wants
“me to carefully consider that if he was terminally ill, irreversibly
comatose, or if he was in a persistent vegetative state, he would not
want to be kept indefinitely on life support”. He had signed this under
pressure. It was a standard document drafted by a lawyer in Montreal
where he was living with my mom and my son who was attending McGill
University. The lawyer, when questioned by my dad, explained that I
would be the only one to make this decision and that no one else had a
right, given this document, to decide what to do if he was on life
support, no one other than me. (Quebec has no Consent and Capacity
Boards!).
My father wanted this clause removed or changed anyway, but it was late
in the day and I had come all the way from Ottawa to do this document at
the lawyer’s office and it was getting to be the time when traffic would
become very heavy, and I had two kids who were waiting for me in Ottawa,
so we agreed to change it on another visit to Montreal, but for now, on
a provisory basis, we would at least have one document in place. We did
not get a chance to change this document because a few weeks after
signing it, my dad fell and broke his hip and when he recovered he came
to visit me in Ottawa and had the car accident that landed him in the
Ottawa Hospital. I remember distinctly that the night before the
accident, when my father was visiting me at my house in Ottawa, he
reminded me that we have to return to the lawyer and adjust the document
so that the clause allowing the doctors to put him to death under any
conditions was removed. He asked me to call the lawyer on Monday at the
first hour in the morning.
The Board wanted to know nothing about how this document was signed or
where it was signed. It did not want to know about my dad's real wishes
or that he intended to have it modified. The Board did not want to know
about the change in circumstances which happened due to the fact that my
dad signed that document under Quebec law and there, my decision could
not be challenged (I'm still not sure it could be challenged here
anyway). The Board did not want to acknowledge the fact that the clause
they were referring to, started by saying that my father wants me,
“Diana Ford, (not the doctors, or the court, not the state,) to
carefully consider that in case of... it is his wish that...”. The Board
did not want to hear that I had carefully considered and that I knew
that this situation did not apply to his condition since he was neither
terminally ill, nor comatose, nor persistently vegetative.
Now that you understand the background against which this tragedy was
played, here comes the most revolting part: my father was definitely not
“terminally ill”, definitely not “irreversibly comatose”, and definitely
not “persistently vegetative”. I had no idea why the doctor took this
matter to the Board to start with. According to the doctor’s testimony
in the Board Hearing, on June 18, 2012, the diagnosis of “persistently
vegetative had not been made yet on April 19, when the doctor applied to
the Board to have my father’s life terminated. To this day, it is still
unclear why, on what grounds had the doctor applied to the Board to have
my father’s life terminated. Anyway. We, the doctor and I, were ordered
by the Board to make full disclosure to each other but in the written
decision, the Hospital was not ordered to make any disclosure to us what
so ever. I was the only party ordered to disclose, so they did not. In
conclusion I had no clue why, on what basis this application was made to
the Board. Furthermore, I did not understand why my Power of Attorney
would not be respected, on what basis or for what reason. As well, under
the Ontario Consent Act, I was supposed to be explained why the doctors
would change the treatment and what they were changing it to. If I did
not agree, they had no right to change it. They never told me what they
were proposing or why. I only found out after they had filed what the
proposed treatment plan was but not why they applied since they did not
specify the reason in any of the documents filed with the Board. In the
Hearing the doctor states quite clearly that he had never talked with me
since December of 2011. However, under the Consent Act of Ontario he has
an obligation to do so, to keep me fully informed and to give me all the
details in order for me to make an informed decision weather or not to
consent to his proposed change in the plan of treatment.
All documents that were related to this case were hidden by the Hospital
and kept as highly classified material between the time the doctor made
his application to the Board and the time the case was heard. Whenever I
was in the Hospital I was not allowed to see any part of my father’s
medical record. In the Board Hearing, after never having talked with me,
after never having informed me of any change in my father's condition
and after six months of completely no contact with any doctor at all,
(last meeting with a doctor at the Hospital has been January 5 and this
was June 18, the date of the Hearing) the doctor declared that my father
was vegetative. Not only was this condition never documented anywhere,
not in my father's chart, not in his consults, not ever discussed and I
had never been advised about this, but also, there were no medical tests
ordered by this doctor to properly assess my father’s condiction, tests
that could support this theory. There was a total void of evidence. No
MRI, no CT scan, no EEG, no neurological consult, no specialist
opinions, nothing that would represent scientific proof or hard evidence
he was really in a persistent vegetative state. In fact all the EEG, CT
scan and MRI of his brain, had they been brought into the hearing as
proof, they would have shown that these was an absence of scientific,
medical evidence that he was vegetative. According to the criteria set
in the article the doctor mentioned when questioned why he believes the
patient was vegetative, (when he stated that my father matched the
criteria described in that 1994 article), the clinical assessment had to
be supported by medical imagery of the brain and these tests were
supposed to show specific results that they did not show. As well, since
the clinical condition my father was in could match any number of
various diagnosis, there was no evidence brought in the hearing showing
that there was a differential diagnosis carried out and in that
particular differential diagnosis all the other numerous possibilities
of medical problems were considered but eliminated and that the only
plausible explanation for his condition was that he was vegetative. In
fact, he had been discontinued from testing and any lab work or imagery
for the six prior weeks period in which he was not given antibiotics
although he had a severe pneumonia. Hence, it is far more probable that
his lack of responsiveness was due to a generalized septicemia.
There had been no effort to assess or diagnose this patient at all. All
the doctor offered was his opinion, that was an opinion of a doctor who
was not specialized in this field and who did not consult a neurologist,
an opinion that my dad matched some criteria for a clinical diagnosis of
‘vegetative” described in a 1994 article that the doctor could not even
remember the name of in some medical journal but that the doctor had no
copies of when he gave his evidence or in cross-examination. It was an
unsupported, previously undisclosed, totally kept secret diagnosis,
presented in a surprise statement. When asked how he assessed the
alleged “persistent vegetative” state that my father was allegedly in,
the doctor said he just looked at my dad and because my dad did not
respond to him, in the ten minutes prior to the Hearing when he examined
him, it became clear to him that my father met the criteria for a
“persistent vegetative state”. The doctor also never specified what
those criteria, when asked to explain them in cross-examination, he
refused and he also refused to specify how those criteria matched my
father’s condition in particular.
According to his own testimony, this doctor is not a specialist in the
neurological field, he is not a diagnostician, he is not a neurologist.
In reality, he is not even a real doctor because his experience is in
the financial/accounting field, finding ways to save money for the
health care system, not in saving patients, not in saving lives, not in
saving the patient’s family members from worry and distress. On the
contrary, he never actually practiced medicine in order to actually heal
patients! My father represented a financial burden and any method was
considered a good method if it resulted in getting rid of the burden.
Furthermore, the Hospital probably feared that all the damages they
caused to my father’s health might become a liability if no steps were
taken to mitigate the damages. If the Board gave them the approval to
"let him die" (as they love to say “let die” as a euphemism for “kill”
patients), then all the damages they had caused him, they could argue
were caused because it was the patient's wish to be "let to die".
In reality, it is true that by the time of the Hearing, the patient, my
dad, had become less responsive (although not totally unresponsive). The
day before the Hearing, my children and I, went to visit him and we
spent a bit of time with him. It was father's day. We told him about it
and he smiled. He blinked and he smiled at us many times in response to
what we told or asked him but he was visibly tired and less responsive
than usually. What we did not know and had no way of knowing, because we
were never told, was that on May 7, the day of the first Hearing, when
we adjourned until June 18, in order to get an independent second
opinion, in order to have a doctor who was not affiliated with the
Hospital examine my father (although we did not know what he had to be
examined for, because we were never told it was "a persistent vegetative
state" that the doctors were going to claim), the doctors stopped all
regular blood tests, all X-Rays and all treatments. In other words, the
day the Board ordered and the day the doctors agreed to maintain my
father on the same level of care as before, to continue the same
treatment he was on, they stopped all tests, all diagnostic, preventive
or medical treatments of any kind.
On May 7th, my dad's WBCs, which had been constantly increasing for the
2-3 weeks prior to May 7, reached a peak at 15.3 (which is very high,
about 2x the normal). Also, his chest X-Ray showed he had pneumonia and
his cultures showed E-Coli growth in his lungs. This is precisely when
the doctors stopped treating him for his pneumonia. No wonder that on
June 18, 1.5 months later, he was irresponsive when the doctor went to
see him and talk with him. My father was getting comatose due to the
septicemia! Also, the independent doctor who came special from Montreal,
at great effort and expense, special to examine him, one week before the
Board Hearing, was not allowed by the Hospital doctor to examine my
father at all. He was not even allowed to see my father’s Medical Chart!
It is quite possible that the reason he was denied access to examine the
patient was so that he may have no access to the Patient’s Chart or we
would have discovered that the patient was no longer being treated and
that he was simply left to die for several weeks! Obviously there was a
deliberate cover-up: be it from fear that we would find out that they
had stopped treating my father completely or maybe they had made other
mistakes.
Now let's be clear about a few things: the doctors had an obligation to
tell me if they ever found that my dad was vegetative but they never
did. They were bound by my Power of Attorney and by my being the closest
and only relative of adult age in Ottawa. They had a signed document
from me telling them that my father had to be on level 1 care. They had
no right to change his level of care without my signing for it, no
matter what. But, in addition to that, the Board directed them
specifically to maintain my father on the same treatment as before. On
the very same day they were ordered to continue my father on the same
treatment, they unilaterally, without advising me and with great effort
to keep this whole action hidden from me, discontinued all treatments my
father had been receiving and administered no antibiotics when they knew
he was very ill (WBC at 15.3 and lungs drenched in water). They knew
that if left untreated, this illness would lead to his death. They
disallowed the independent medical consult, despite the direction of the
Board, despite having adjourned the Board Hearing specially for that
purpose.
They disallowed the independent doctor to even look at the patient’s
chart. A complete cover-up of their operation! On June 18, during the
Hearing, the doctor announced to me, for the first time ever, that my
father was in a "persistent vegetative state". The doctor never
considered that the word "persistent" before the words "vegetative
state" had a meaning and that it meant that the patient was completely
oblivious to his environment for 12-16 consecutive weeks, minimum, in
order to be able to be considered, let alone be declared, in a
"persistent vegetative state". But in the application to the Board, the
doctors described my father as tracking people with his eyes, hence, he
was aware of his surroundings and consequently, not vegetative when they
applied to the Board. So why did they apply, on what basis?
The Board could not be bothered with the law or with our Constitution
that guarantees us the "right to life, freedom and security" which my
father was completely denied and so was I, along with him, when they
dismissed my Power of Attorney on no grounds. The Board did not consider
that I had never been informed of what the doctors were going to say.
They did not hold that to be in breach of the law despite the fact that
it was. The Board did not see any problem with the doctors discontinuing
my father's treatment, despite the fact that the Board had ordered the
doctors to maintain my father on the same treatment and level of care as
he had been on until then so that they may hear the case first and make
a decision. The Board did not care that the expert doctor was denied
access to my father’s Chart and that contrary to their own direction to
the doctor, the doctor disallowed the examination of the patient. The
Board cut my submissions short while allowing the Hospital lawyer extra
time with theirs. The Board did not take my evidence but allowed all of
theirs. The Board did not consider that withholding treatment,
especially treatment for pneumonia in a 89 year old, can and is
reasonable to assume that it will, lead to death and that, according to
our Criminal Code, this is a criminal offense.
The Board ordered that I comply with the doctor's Proposed Plan of
Treatment and claimed that this plan of treatment did not involve ending
my father’s life. However, the plan included a “do not resuscitate”
step, a “stop all testing and all treatments” step and, "if the patient
got worse", a “withdraw the parental feeding tube” step in order to let
him starve to death. But that’s not even the worst part! The worst is
that he would have been left to dehydrate to death (which comes with
exploding veins and tremendous pain). However, the Hospital was
allegedly doing all this in the name of compassion! The “compassion to
cause somebody death, to cause a person’s organs to explode due to
starvation and to cause his veins and arteries to burst due to
dehydration. As well, it meant the compassion to get him into heart
failure due to dehydration and to cause him to asphyxiate due to the
lung failure induced by the heart failure”. How compassionate! All this,
after having denied him cardiological consults, neurological consults,
even dental consults that left him with decaying, infected teeth that
turned into gangrenes, etc. The “compassionate people” with their
“world-class care” sure give you the desire to put your life in their
hands, don’t they?
To further prove their “compassion”, I have pictures of my father’s legs
while in the Ottawa Hospital with bruises and cuts on his legs,
bleeding, although he could not move and he could not reach the legs, I
have pictures of his gangrenes in his mouth. I did not take pictures,
but it was charted in his medical records that his hands were wrapped so
he could not scratch when he had skin rash from not being cleaned
properly....When I found him dirty and when I asked the PCA to have him
cleaned, I was told that they would not do it because he would only make
himself dirty again. So they tied his hands instead, in order to prevent
him from scratching when his skin was irritated due to lack of cleaning.
Also, the “world-class care” provided included placing him in isolation
with patients who had MRSA, VRE, C-DIff and Hepatitis when he was not
infected with any of these. Frankly, the type of "world-class care" he
received from the “compassionate people" at the Ottawa Hospital is what
I would not wish on anyone! He had insurance for private Hospital room
provided by his previous employer but was denied his right and the
Hospital insisted in placing him in isolation in the same room with one
or more infected people when he was not infected or contagious in any
way.
Since I had an order to comply with the Plan of Treatment proposed by
his doctors by July 6th, 2012 (exactly two months after they had stopped
treating him and was left with an untreated fulminating pneumonia due to
the Hospital induced infection with E-Coli in his lungs and with
absolutely no antibiotics), since I knew my father did not want to die,
since I understood how horrible and unacceptable it would be if I
allowed for their "proposed plan of treatment" to be applied, I did all
I could to get my father out of the Ottawa Hospital. Miraculously, I
managed to get him transferred to Montreal on July 4th, two days before
the dead-line. Until then, the doctor was obliged to still treat him at
a level 1 care. In Montreal, I was informed that the Ottawa Hospital had
put him on a level 4 of care, (not even a 2 or 3) since May 7th. I was
also told by his admitting physician that Dr. Van Walraven had contacted
them and tried to apply his persuasion power on them not to treat my
father any differently, to DNR him, to not treat him for pneumonia and
basically, to just let him die.
Since my father had not been tested for anything and had no X-Rays in
two months, the Montreal Hospital had absolutely no idea what my father
needed or what he should be treated for. The papers that the Ottawa
Hospital put in the hands of the nurse who came in the ambulance from
Ottawa to Montreal with my father and I, were papers carefully sealed in
an envelope for the doctor in charge in Montreal and contained no test
results, no medical history, no medication lists but the decision of the
Board in Ontario asking that the patient be put to death. Once in
Montreal all the tests had to be taken and the cultures had to be grown,
the X-Rays done and interpreted, and by the time they were ready to
commence the required treatment (after they received all necessary lab
results showing that my father was suffering from a very bad case of
pneumonia gone septic because of the neglect he was treated with in the
Ottawa Hospital), by the time the doctors discussed with me how they
intended to treat him, he died. I was called in to discuss with the
doctor how he was planning to treat my father who had already been
placed on broad spectrum antibiotics right away, before the cultures
were back from the lab). In those 30 minutes I talked with the doctors,
my father died and when I returned to his room, he was cold.
This is the actual account of what happened. It is true he suffered but
he did not have to suffer! All his suffering was caused by the doctors
who did not want to treat him. All his illnesses were Hospital induced.
He would have been out of the Hospital in 2 months instead of 20, had he
received proper care.
SUMMARY:
• He was not treated from the start to the level of care that was
required
• He was given E-Coli in the lungs while he was unconscious in the
Hospital bed
• He was never treated to heal his E-Coli so he got repeat pneumonias
due to this bacteria
• He was left with unchanged catheters for longer than 90 days at a time
so he got UTI and left untreated, the UTI became bladder infections
• He was left anemic which affected his kidneys and his heart: the heart
became irregular and the kidney was not functioning the way it was
supposed but, since nothing was done about it, the heart turned
tachycardia and bradycardia while the kidney’s uremic values raised till
he got into uremic shock
• Also, he was left untreated for the pneumonias till he got septic and
because of this, he got strokes and heart attacks
• He was left with unattended broken teeth that got infected and again,
left untreated they became abscesses and gangrenes
• He was moved around with steno-sis until eventually, four months after
his hospitalization he started to gradually lose range of movement:
first in one leg, then in the other, then he became paraplegic, then one
arm and then the other till he became effectively quadriplegic
• He was intubated and extubated each time he was allowed to go into a
septic or into a uremic shock because he was losing oxygen
• The numerous intubations affected his vocal chords and eventually,
some five months after the Hospitalization, he could not make audible
sounds anymore but was still trying to talk by whispering
• After all the damages the Hospital inflicted on him he was no longer
deemed worthy of saving
• The monitors that were his only safety device at a time when he had
frequent and sudden drops in oxygen and blood pressure at levels that
were putting his life at risk were discontinued while left at his bed
side because they were attached to the bed anyway but not to him
• The antibiotics he needed for his pneumonias were no longer
administered till he was septic and in a close to death condition
• The tests necessary to monitor the heart and the lung condition were
less and less frequent although he was more and more ill
• The cycle was he got ill but not treated until he was almost dead at
which time there was a pro forma attempt to treat him which would yield
no results because he had been left to get too sick and then some older
nurse with lots of experience, lots of seniority and with a bit of
conscience left would call the RACE team who would react promptly and
efficiently, return him to ICU where they did save his life each time
because that is what they do and they are good at it.
• After such episodes he would become unconscious, suffer from a heart
attack or a stroke, get more ill than ever before and the situation
would be touch and go for a while
• As soon as he would be no longer comatose and at an imminent risk of
dying, he would be immediately taken out of ICU and put in a ward where
the cycle would repeat only, each time, with a team that cared less for
him than the previous one, because he was now more damaged and therefore
more of a liability with even less of a chance to make “a meaningful
recovery” (according to them).
• Eventually the doctors would absolutely not care for any symptoms or
any of his organs and state so without shame (I have documented evidence
of the statements and of the lack of care)
• In February all my access to any records was blocked by the Hospital.
After my bitter complaints, a letter from the Hospital lawyer and a
Patient’s Advocate direction was now allowing me a once a week access to
his records instead of a once a day. Of course that would not be helpful
if the wrong medication was administered. I would not be able to correct
the mistake.
• In March he was assigned a doctor who would not belong in any team of
doctors, was not rotating every 2 weeks like all the treating doctors
who were working in that unit and was not even a treating doctor but one
that handles administrative duties mostly related to saving money.
• In April, on a false premise and invoking libellous claims, the doctor
went and applied to have my father’s life terminated by stopping all
tests and treatments and by taking out the parental tube.
• They did not want to ever take out the tracheal tube from fear that he
might talk and say he did not wish to die.
• Every time I had tried to get my father moved to another Hospital or
requested to have him discharged, the doctor refused to do so or refused
to sign the forms that had been prepared for the discharge.
• On April 15TH the doctor received my father’s Power of Attorney
document and by April 19TH the Application to terminate my father’s life
was written, reviewed, edited, approved, signed and submitted to the
Board who had filed and advised the parties that such an application had
been filed and approved to be heard within a week. (who has the time to
find counsel, find the money, prepare a case, a defence of one’s life in
only one week? I guess the intent is that no one should be able to
defend themselves against the doctors or perhaps it is deemed as a
futile exercise!)
• The doctors did not specify the medical reason for which they applied
to the CCB.
• The doctors never talked to me about their proposed plan of treatment,
nor did they explain to me that there was a change in my father’s
medical condition, on the contrary, they kept telling me he was stable
and that nothing had changed in his medical condition
• To get their application in, given that I had Power of Attorney from
my father, there had to be a major problem with me, something I had done
totally wrong for them to be able to revoke my power of attorney (in
fact that had never been done before). The doctors made up a story that
was completely libellous in which they claimed that I was being
investigated for fraud by my father’s bank implying that I was some sort
of criminal.
• The doctors were told to make disclosure but they never did, never
told us what they were going to claim, why they made this application to
the Board and why they were questioning my acting in the patient’s best
interest.
• On May 7th, the first Hearing in the Consent and Capacity Board and
adjournment was granted to us for the purpose of an examination
conducted on my father by an independent doctor, unaffiliated with the
Ottawa Hospital
• The decision of the Board on May 7th, stipulated that an independent
doctor should be allowed to examine my father, that his complete medical
records should be made available to us and to that doctor, that my
father should be continued on the same level of care and medical
treatment as he was until now so that the Board would have time to
re-convene and hear this case.
• None of the above happened. The medical records were hidden from me.
Between May 7th and the end of my father’s stay in the Ottawa Hospital I
was never shown his records but I was told they were classified
information and that I was restricted from seeing them because they were
related to the Board Hearing (not that it made any sense, on the
contrary: we were supposed to get full disclosure & transparency
especially given the order and the access to information laws)
• The records were only sent up until May 7th but not past that date and
the records from the notes taken by the security guard were not included
in the pile of records we received.
• The independent medical examination was denied by the Hospital doctor
and my father’s medical records were prohibited to the independent
doctor for viewing when he asked for them and when he spent 5 hours
waiting outside the patient’s room in the hallway, less than 2 feet away
from the Chart that was not used by anyone but was just sitting there,
in front of us.
• The treatment changed from a level 1 to a level 4 according to the
Montreal doctors who informed me that there had been no tests, no lab
work, no pathology, no imagery and no X-rays conducted on the patient
starting May 7th, unlike the regular tests that had been conducted until
then. Also, it was known he had a pneumonia at that time but there was
no treatment given and no antibiotics for the infection although his WBC
levels were twice the normal.
• On June 18, in the Hearing the doctor claimed the patient was in a
persistent vegetative state.
• This doctor was no specialist, he had called no neurologist to examine
my dad, he allowed no independent doctor to examine my dad, he stated
that all doctors of the Hospital were of the same opinion but had no
documentation to prove it, he had not charted it himself, he had no
scientific tests that would indicate his diagnosis was correct and he
had not considered any other alternative causes to my father’s lack of
responsiveness, not even septicemia, although it was obvious since he
was left untreated for 6 weeks for a fulminating pneumonia and this is
how he usually reacted to septicemia.
• The Board ordered that I comply by July 6th, but I moved him to
Montreal on July 4th, believing that he had been treated to a level 1
until then.
• In Montreal I was told he had been treated at a level 4 (no testing,
no treatment) since May 7th, and they had no clue what was wrong with
him so they needed to start testing him completely.
• By the time the test results were back and the doctors there were
ready to treat him, his infection with E-Coli in the lungs was so
rampant that it killed him.
• I found him dead in his room after I was out with the doctors for 20
minutes to decide on a plan of treatment and the appropriate medication
for my dad. He had died asphyxiated, from pneumonia.
THE CANADIAN CRIMINAL CODE STATES THE FOLLOWING:
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
Marginal note:Criminal negligence
219. (1) Every one is criminally negligent who
o (a) in doing anything, or
o (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do,
shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other
persons.
Definition of “duty”
(2) For the purposes of this section, “duty” means a duty imposed by
law.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 202.
Marginal note:Causing death by criminal negligence
220. Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another
person is guilty of an indictable offense and liable
(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offense, to
imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a
term of four years; and
(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.
221. Every one who by criminal negligence causes bodily harm to another
person is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to imprisonment for
a term not exceeding ten
5) A person commits culpable homicide when he causes the death of a
human being,
o (a) by means of an unlawful act;
o (b) by criminal negligence;
o (c) by causing that human being, by threats or fear of violence or by
deception, to do anything that causes his death; or
o (d) by willfully frightening that human being, in the case of a child
or sick person.
Death that might have been prevented
224. Where a person, by an act or omission, does any thing that results
in the death of a human being, he causes the death of that human being
notwithstanding that death from that cause might have been prevented by
resorting to proper means.
Death from treatment of injury
225. Where a person causes to a human being a bodily injury that is of
itself of a dangerous nature and from which death results, he causes the
death of that human being notwithstanding that the immediate cause of
death is proper or improper treatment that is applied in good faith.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 208.
Marginal note:Acceleration of death
226. Where a person causes to a human being a bodily injury that results
in death, he causes the death of that human being notwithstanding that
the effect of the bodily injury is only to accelerate his death from a
disease or disorder arising from some other cause.
MURDER, MANSLAUGHTER AND INFANTICIDE
Marginal note:Murder
229. Culpable homicide is murder
(a) where the person who causes the death of a human being
o (i) means to cause his death, or
o (ii) means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause
his death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not;
(b) where a person, meaning to cause death to a human being or meaning
to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and
being reckless whether death ensues or not, by accident or mistake
causes death to another human being, notwithstanding that he does not
mean to cause death or bodily harm to that human being; or
(c) where a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that he knows
or ought to know is likely to cause death, and thereby causes death to a
human being, notwithstanding that he desires to effect his object
without causing death or bodily harm to any human being.
Classification of murder
231. (1) Murder is first degree murder or second degree murder.
Marginal note:Planned and deliberate murder
(2) Murder is first degree murder when it is planned and deliberate
Contracted murder
(3) Without limiting the generality of subsection (2), murder is planned
and deliberate when it is committed pursuant to an arrangement under
which money or anything of value passes or is intended to pass from one
person to another, or is promised by one person to another, as
consideration for that other’s causing or assisting in causing the death
of anyone or counseling another person to do any act causing or
assisting in causing that death.
5) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the
part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person
when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting
to commit an offense under one of the following sections:
o (e) section 279 (kidnapping and forcible confinement); or
o (f) section 279.1 (hostage taking).
Murder reduced to manslaughter
232. (1) Culpable homicide that otherwise would be murder may be reduced
to manslaughter if the person who committed it did so in the heat of
passion caused by sudden provocation.
Marginal note:What is provocation
(2) A wrongful act or an insult that is of such a nature as to be
sufficient to deprive an ordinary person of the power of self-control is
provocation for the purposes of this section if the accused acted on it
on the sudden and before there was time for his passion to cool.
Marginal note:Questions of fact
(3) For the purposes of this section, the questions
o (a) whether a particular wrongful act or insult amounted to
provocation, and
o (b) whether the accused was deprived of the power of self-control by
the provocation that he alleges he received,
are questions of fact, but no one shall be deemed to have given
provocation to another by doing anything that he had a legal right to
do, or by doing anything that the accused incited him to do in order to
provide the accused with an excuse for causing death or bodily harm to
any human being.
235. (1) Every one who commits first degree murder or second degree
murder is guilty of an indictable offense and shall be sentenced to
imprisonment for life.
YOU BE THE JUDGE OF HOW THE LAW IS APPLIED AND WHY IT IS THAT OUR
CONSTITUTION GRANTS US EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW BUT OUR POLITICIANS AND
OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM DISREGARD THE LAW WHEN APPLIED BY THE MADICAL
COMMUNITY TO DELIBERATELY DESTROY THE LIFE OF PATIENTS. I DON'T SEE
ANYWHERE IN THE CRIMINAL CODE SAYING THAT THE CRIMINAL CODE OF CANADA
APPLIES TO ALL CITIZENS EQUALLY EXCEPT FOR DOCTORS AND THAT BOARDS AND
COURTS ARE DIRECTED TO LOOK THE OTHER WAY WHEN THE DOCTORS EXPRESS
INTENT TO KILL! IF THIS IS THE LAW THEN AT LEAST I EXPECT THE PROPER
GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRODUCING OUR ACTS TO STATE IT
CLEARLY FOR ALL TO SEE AN KNOW.
OUR CANADIAN COURTS (AND ESPECIALLY IN ONTARIO WHERE WE HAVE A CONTROL
AND CAPACITY BOARD UNLIKE ANY OTHER PROVINCE) GRANT TO DOCTORS
PERMISSION TO KILL WITH IMPUNITY, PERMISSION THAT IS SANCTIONED BY OUR
GOVERNMENT VIA JUDGES ON BOARDS AND COURTS APPOINTED TO THEIR POSTS BY
CORRUPT POLITICIANS WHO USE THE DOCTORS' CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE
DOCTORS' INFLUENCE TO HELP THEM GET ELECTED. AND THE MEDIA KEEPS QUIET
BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID OF LAWSUITS! WHAT A SYSTEM!
I am attaching a
that I
would appreciate if you could print, sign and scan back
to email to me at df1333@hotmail.com.
Out of respect and/or love for my father or for me,
please sign this Petition and help change a system
that, if not changed, will some day, most likely, kill
you or one of your loved ones too. Please distribute
this petition to anyone you can think of that might sign
it. Please follow me on twitter at DianaFord@Snowsplendour
|