Sinai Hospital Article

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Dr. Kermit

Senior Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2001
Messages
652
Reaction score
1
My boyfriend sent me this article from the NY Times today. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/12/nyregion/12HOSP.html" target="_blank">Sinai Hospital</a>

I found it interesting since I'm still waiting to hear from them and they're probably the only school I would attend over Einstein.

Members don't see this ad.
 
damn..it's all screwY!

Can you post the article...b/c I can't access it b/c I am not a member of the NYTimes or something.

Pretty please? :)
 
•••quote:•••Originally posted by reesie0726:
•I agree jmejia. I did not know about the verdict but I am a little disappointed. There was documented evidence that she suffered from mental and emotional problems. I truly don't think that anyone benefits by this tragedy to put her in prison or death row when she needs severe help.•••••interesting idea that punishment has to benefit someone. I dont really see that being the point of any form of punishment - unless to say that the benefit of taking a serial killer off the street is that they wont be killing anymore. By that logic - as long as she's taken off the street, the specifics dont matter, just so long as she is no longer a threat.
Personally I dont find the argument that ipso facto she killed her children she must be crazy. As I see it, it took deliberation and intent to decide on and carry out the murder of her 5 children - she belongs in prison, or on death row. Punishing a crime is as much about punishing the criminal as it is about assuaging the sensibilities of society at large.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
March 12, 2002
Hospital Faces Fine in Death of Liver Donor
By DENISE GRADY
ount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan will be fined and subjected to other enforcement action by the state for its treatment of a patient who died on Jan. 13, three days after donating part of his liver to his brother, the State Health Department said yesterday.

The state health commissioner, Dr. Antonia C. Novello, is scheduled to announce the findings from a two- month investigation of the death at a news conference today. But a person who had already seen the 10-page report on the investigation said it blamed the death not on the surgery itself, but on deficient postoperative care by doctors at Mount Sinai.

The patient who died was Mike Hurewitz, 57, a reporter for The Albany Times Union and a former reporter for The New York Post. His brother, who recovered, is Adam Hurewitz, 54, a physician from Long Island.

Mount Sinai, a world leader in using healthy people as live donors for adults who need liver transplants, halted the operations after Mr. Hurewitz's death and said it would not resume them until its own investigation and the state's were finished. Although no adult-to-adult procedures have been performed since then, the hospital has continued to hold informational meetings for prospective donors and recipients. And it has continued to perform less risky operations in which adults donate parts of their livers to children.

Mr. Hurewitz was the first liver donor to die at Mount Sinai, which performs about 35 adult-to-adult living donor operations a year and has done about 100 since 1998, under the leadership of Dr. Charles Miller, a highly regarded transplant surgeon and one of Mr. Hurewitz's doctors.

Mr. Hurewitz's death is the second reported in a liver donor in the United States; the first occurred in North Carolina in 1999. Several others have been reported from Europe. Surgeons estimate the risk of death at 0.5 to 1 percent.

Live donor liver transplants are increasing because of the growing need for transplants and the shortage of organs from cadavers. In adult-to-adult operations, surgeon remove the right lobe of the donor's liver, 60 to 70 percent of the organ. Most donors are siblings, adult children, spouses or friends of the recipient. If all goes well, the pieces in both the donor and recipient grow to full- size organs in about a month. When the recipient is a child, surgeons take all or part of the donor's left lobe, about 30 percent of the liver. Possible complications from the operation include infections, bleeding and leaks from the bile ducts, which may require additional surgery to repair.

Live donor operations have been controversial, because they subject a healthy person to all the risks of surgery for someone else's benefit. But many donors say they benefit, too, by saving a loved one's life. And surgeons say they would not perform the operations if they had any other means of saving their patients.

But many doctors also acknowledge that live donors, desperate to help a dying relative, may not fully understand what they are getting into. Dr. Jay Hoofnagle, director of the division of digestive diseases and nutrition at the National Institutes of Health, said that when the risks are explained, "it's clear they're not listening, they've made the decision to donate and they don't hear anything after that about side effects."

The amount of the fine was not released yesterday. Details of the report will be discussed at a news conference today at 11:00 a.m. at the Health Department's offices at 5 Penn Plaza.
 
have you guys read some of the news reports though?!?

there was a doctor who testified that though Andrea Yates may have been insane while she was drowning her kids, she KNEW that it was wrong.

by TX law (which i agree with) that is enough to be found guilty. period. she knew what she was doing was wrong.
 
oops, i don't know why this post got posted here...?
 
This thread was messed up with jmejia1's thread about Andrea Yates. When I clicked on one, I got the other.
 
Andrea Yates now faces capital punishment or a 40-year term in maximum security prison, when what she likely needs is to be committed to a mental institution. Of course it's wrong to kill people, but it's as well unjust to deny people mental help when they need it. My $0.02.
 
The results of the comissioners report showed that the care given by Sinai was woefully inadequate - in part because there was only one first year resident assigned to the entire care unit(check today's times for details) At any rate think this may give some hope to changes in residency rules, overwork etc?
 
The results of the comissioners report showed that the care given by Sinai was woefully inadequate - in part because there was only one first year resident assigned to the entire care unit(check today's times for details) At any rate think this may give some hope to changes in residency rules, overwork etc?
 
Wow this thread is a mess. I don't know if i'm coming or going (amongst other things :wink: ) --Trek
 
While I think that it is terribly unfortunate what happened at Sinai, but I don't think it is a reflection on their MD program
 
Top