2 ms·
So, this looks awful. I would expect for the Mayo clinic to come out with a response sometime soon. In the meantime, I'm just trying to remind myself that new
by rossdavidh 8y ago
So, this looks awful. I would expect for the Mayo clinic to come out with a response sometime soon. In the meantime, I'm just trying to remind myself that news stories that stoke outrage often turn out to be telling the story in the way best tuned to get forwarded and clicked on, not always the most accurate way. But, really, this looks awful.
- jessaustin 8y agoThe fact that this happened a couple of years ago seems to make the "outrage of the week" angle a bit less likely? Since the patient has recovered, attended high school for another year to great success, and enrolled in college, it's pretty clear that she is competent to make health care decisions. She wanted a second opinion. Decision-makers (perhaps no longer?) at Mayo didn't want her to get that. (A bit rich, considering Mayo's reputation for second-guessing diagnoses across the Midwest...) When she got a second opinion, it was for a different and more successful course of treatment. If this report were false, threats from Mayo's lawyers would have prevented its publication. There's little in this report to indicate that there is any sort of "culture" of false imprisonment at Mayo, and it seems likely that they're supervising the social workers a bit more closely now, so it's probably a fine hospital at which to receive health care...
- rossdavidh 8y agoYeah, probably not Mayo clinic policy to imprison 18-year olds and take over guardianship, and the results afterwards make it clear their diagnosis was wrong. But, although the events were a couple years ago, the news article itself is pretty new, so I would be happy to see some comment from the Mayo clinic as to what they think went on here, and whether it was (or is) against their policy.
- jessaustin 8y agoIf actual events were largely as depicted in TFA, Mayo's interests would be best served by not addressing them at all. The publicity of the former board member's letter to a VP (but not his first name!) is a bit of a PR disaster...