[ad_1]
This time we are talking to Algis’s father, Mindaugas (his real name and surname are known to the editorial board – aut. Past.), Who told him about the long road to finding answers.
He addressed the commission
According to the man, immediately after the loss of the mother, he and a lawyer approached the Patient Health Injury Commission, which should explain whether the patient was injured.
“First we had to present documents, but certificates and other documents were still missing. They have a scoring system that calculates the harm caused to the patient. I am not going to name exactly all the points, but according to age, they go down a score, they also get a score because they smoked, etc. ”, says Mindaugas.
According to the man’s lawyer, Igor Smirnov, this commission is a pre-trial institution; Only after clarification, if either party disagrees with the assessment, is it possible to go to court.
He walked and talked until the last day
As the lawyer representing the son of the deceased observes, it is difficult to understand why the paramedics did not take the disabled woman to the hospital for the first time because the woman was active, walking and talking until then, but could not get out of bed and leave. to speak.
“There has already been a meeting, we have provided urgent call sheets. About a week before the incident, the woman was discharged from a nursing hospital. She stayed there for several months. And it turned out that she was discharged from the nursing hospital while Yes, she walked hard, but she could help herself.
And our logic in this hearing was that if a person walks yesterday and the next day is lying and cannot speak, simply stalking, then for any doctor it has to be a red light that must do something, “says the lawyer.
Could paramedics lie when giving testimony?
According to Mindaugas, during the presentation of the material at the commission meeting, it was mentioned that when giving testimony, the paramedic stated that when the patient came to the call for the first time, the patient’s grandson asked to take his grandmother to the hospital because he supposedly needed to travel to work. However, it was at that time that Algis was not working and had a work certificate to prove it. The family suspects that the ambulance doctor may have lied while giving testimony.
As attorney I. Smirnov observes, the late grandson, who called the ambulance, provided the commission with a certificate from his workplace indicating that the guy was down at the time.
“The paramedic claims that when they do [greitoji] arrived, the patient’s grandson demanded that she be taken to the hospital because she supposedly needed to rush to work. But the guy was inactive and not even working because of the coronavirus at the time, so we presented a work certificate to the commission that accredits it, ”says I. Smirnov.
Waiting for conclusions
According to lawyer I. Smirnov, the commission has provided the material available to specialists who will conduct a medical examination.
“The experts will tell you if the patient could have been saved if they had taken him to the hospital in time, or if he had still died and had not suffered any harm,” said the lawyer.
The news portal tv3.lt recalls that in May we wrote about the story when a disabled woman was taken to the hospital for the second time.
According to the late grandson Algis, the ambulance doctor refused to transfer the patient to the hospital for the first time because she was under pressure and there was no need to transfer her to the hospital.
Do not question the explanations of GMP staff
Danas Bortkevičius, director of Varėna PSPC, says that while the commission’s investigation is ongoing, he does not question the explanations of GMP employees.
“The patient’s health data may be provided to third parties only in accordance with the procedure established by legal acts. Since your request does not meet the legal requirements for the provision of personal health data, but in line with the position of the institution: to communicate with the public and disseminators of information, we can provide general information without specifying personal data.
We would like to inform you that the Patient Health Injury Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) is currently examining the statement of the applicant’s GP regarding, in the applicant’s opinion, the personal health care services provided in the Varėna Primary Health Care Center (hereinafter Varėna PSPC). hereinafter “GMP”). Varėna PSPC has provided the Commission with all relevant statements, medical records and explanations from the GMP staff who provided the service.
The Commission’s task is to objectively evaluate the claims of persons entitled to compensation for material and / or moral damage caused by the damage caused to the patient’s health and to make decisions on the compensation of persons entitled to compensation. In the present case, in the absence of a Commission decision on the poor provision of personal medical care in the GMP unit of Varėna PSPC to the person named by the applicant, the Varėna PSPC administration has no reason to doubt the explanations of the two GMP health professionals, especially since the Varėna PSPC administration has received no complaints or complaints ”, writes D. Bortkevičius in his reply.
[ad_2]
