Our Motive
We know there are no certainties in life, but we have reason to believe Michaela would be alive today if our doctor had done his job properly. We have talked to three different consultants who treated Michaela in various hospitals, that say she would probably have survived if our doctor had examined her properly on the 5th May 2001. A mistake can be forgiven but to continually lie about what really happened cannot be forgiven.
The Facts
Monday 7th May 2001. The condition Michaela was in when she was finally admitted into hospital.
a) She could not breathe properly – her breathing was very shallow and rapid.
b) She could talk a little, but it exhausted and made her pant.
c) She could stand but not very steady and not for long.
d) She could walk with assistance, but it exhausted and made her pant.
e) The x-ray showed her lungs as shadows.
f) Her lung walls had hardened.
g) She would have died that night if she had not been admitted into hospital.
h) Her lungs were full of abscesses.
h) She was admitted with severe pneumonia.
When Michaela arrived at hospital not only did her lungs show up as shadows on the x-rays, but her lung walls had hardened and were full of abscesses. This cannot happen in just two days, so Michaela must have had problems with her breathing when the doctor examined her on Saturday 5th May 2001.
Saturday 5th May 2001. Only 48 hours before Michaela was admitted into hospital nearly dead.
a) The doctor said he gave Michaela a thorough examination.
b) The doctor said Michaela was only suffering from a mild fever and a sore throat.
c) The doctor denies Michaela had any difficulty breathing.
d) The doctor denies Michaela had any difficulty taking.
e) The doctor denies Michaela had any difficulty walking.
f) The doctor denies I told him about her symptoms or gave him this list.
g) The doctor and receptionist denies I requested a home visit because Michaela could hardly walk.
h) The doctor says the symptoms must have developed on the day she was admitted into hospital.
The facts about Michaela's condition when she arrived at hospital, should firmly prove that nearly everything the doctor has said is a untrue.
Simple Conclusion
It does not really matter who anyone wants to believe. This case should really be simple to conclude and can be done in 4 simple stages.
1. Ask the witnesses to see if they agree with the condition I said she was in or the doctor.
2. Talk to the survivors and see when their symptoms developed.
3. Talk to the experts who have had experience with the illness.
4. Contact the experts to see if the lungs can deteriorate so fast and if there would be any indication of this happening 48 hours earlier.
5. Simply consider the facts about her condition when she arrived at the hospital and ask the experts what they think. Could the symptoms as advanced as they were have developed in just 2 days?
It seems so easy to prove who is telling the truth, so why haven't they done so.
We spent a year with the complaints procedure who contacted no experts and no witnesses, in fact the independent doctor they assigned disqualified himself to become our GP because he believed us.
We spent nearly a year with the Health ombudsman's investigation and they also contacted no experts even though the promised they would, even though they admit they have had no experience on the illness. The only witness they contacted was the doctors receptionist, hardly unbiased. They dismissed what the independent doctor said to them, saying it was only his opinion, even though their report was based solely on their inexperienced opinions.
They have all totally ignored the facts and just taken the doctors word for everything and tried to discredit what we have said. It states at various places in the ombudsman’s report, "a lot of the symptoms of the illness are similar to those of glandular fever". What is not mentioned however, is the remaining symptoms indicate something much more serious, something more like severe pneumonia and worse.
We can only assume that they know we are telling the truth but they don't want to admit the doctor is wrong and are covering up for him. How are we to put a closure on our daughters death with this kind of justice?
All we ask is that someone qualified will read the facts and tell the truth.
Then we can let our daughter rest in piece and have some closure.
Other Facts
a) We have witnesses that can confirm the symptoms were present even before the doctor examined Michaela. Why were they not contacted?
b) There are a lot of survivors of this illness – If the symptoms only appear the day you are going to die how did any of them survive? Why have none of them been contacted to confirm this simple fact?
c) There are a lot of experts who have had dealings with this illness who can confirm when the symptoms appear and in fact what symptoms appear? In fact these experts are quoted all over the internet. Why were none of them contacted or their findings considered?
