I'm wondering if I can sue the coroner or if there is any action I can take against her... my son died suddenly and unexpectedly while at home alone in his bathtub. His body was held by the coroner's office for autopsy for 10 days. This happened in Lucas County, Ohio. I was told that one reason for the length of time it took for his body to be released was that the coroner was backed up and had a lot of bodies to autopsy because she had been out of town.

When his body was released, I was told the autopsy was completed, and that he died from Sudden Unexplained Death Syndrome, but the report would not be ready for weeks, because they had to wait for toxicology. Believing what I was told, I had his body cremated after viewing at the funeral home. It was a very difficult decision for me to make, but I knew I had to keep moving forward. I had fears and suspicions because I noticed that there were no marks on his head, indicating to me that his brain had not been examined, even though he had a brain tumor. I pushed that fear away, telling myself that they probably did X-rays or MRI on his head for the autopsy instead of cutting it open. Almost 2 months later I went to the coroner's office to pick up his autopsy report only to find out that no autopsy was done and his death was ruled "natural". At that time I asked if I could make an appointment to ask the coroner questions about his death. I was told yes, I could ask for an appointment for any day after noon.

His partner wanted to come with me so I wanted to wait till she could come to make the appointment, because now that we both know that no autopsy was done, we both have questions. I called on Tues. to make an appointment on any day this week and was told I didn't need to talk to the coroner because no autopsy was done. I told the person on the phone that I was aware of that and was very upset about it and THAT is why I have a lot of questions for the coroner. I was put on hold, then was given an appointment for June 29th. I'm so upset.

My oldest son died in an accident at work on my birthday in 2001, and though the cause of his death was obvious, a complete autopsy was done anyway. In 1982 my husband committed suicide and the cause of his death was obvious, but a full autopsy was done on his body too. Now my second son died mysteriously and no autopsy was done. I'm so disturbed about this. Of course, if I would have known no autopsy was actually done on my second son, I would not have had his body cremated. Because I did, though, now I will never know what actually killed him. How can I know that he didn't slip and fall, hitting his head and died because of that, or if he had a heart attack, or drowned, or if his brain tumor had pressed on a part of his brain that regulates vital functions, or some other cause of death??

Is there a way to file a complaint against the coroner? Was it legal to skip an autopsy? Why was an autopsy done on my husband and oldest son when the causes of their deaths were obvious if an autopsy is optional? I know that no matter what an autopsy would have showed, it would not change the fact that my son is dead. However, at least I wouldn't feel so lost about what actually killed him. How can the coroner come to a conclusion that the death was "natural" when she did not do an autopsy? Do I have a case against her? Who would I complain to and can I or should I file a law suit against her?

You have noted several unacceptable irregularities in the handling of your son's case. You mention that the coroner advised on the cause of death. Step one in sorting through this is the Death Certificate. Cause of death (as listed thereon)? Who signed it?

I assume (please confirm) that a police report was filed. If not by a relative, perhaps by EMT unit. There is some reason that the coroners office took possession of your sons remains as death occurred in private residence. You will need to get a copy of the police report and/or record from any agency that responded to the scene and determine who pronounced. On scene or hospital.

You certainly have every reason to be upset and this matter should be fully investigated. Exactly where and to whom it is reported is dependent on the chain of custody, sequence of events. Whether the circumstances are actionable in a civil suit are dependent on circumstances not yet determined. However the fact that details of the postmortem examination (or lack thereof) were misrepresented to you point to professional negligence and indifference.

At the very least you deserve answers and I believe I can provide direction to that end.

NOTE: You mention "she" in relation to coroner. I'm showing JP as coroner in Lucas. Old records?

I appreciate and understand your pain. You can only sue for monetary damages - and I don't see any.

Can you write a letter and complain? Certainly. Can you ask for an explanation of the various stories you were given? Certainly.

If you feel his death was suspicious you can also notify the Police Department and ask that further invesigating be done.

It was "legal" to skip the autopsy if it was the opinion of the coroner that it was an accidental death or that the cause of death was apparent.

Who signed the permission slip for the autopsy? You? The girlfriend?

I had the opposite problem - my husband died after 3-1/2 weeks in the hospital, mostly in a coma. I saw no need for an autopsy and I refused to sign (which was his wish).

It appears you'll have your answers at the end of June. If you want to cover all bases, go with an Attorney.

Thanks JudyKT and DrBill. The coroner who signed the death certificate is a woman named Diane Barnett. She did the autopsy on my other son, and I was told she did the autopsy on my second son. No one signed for an autopsy because in certain circumstances an autopsy is mandatory and I was at my son's house after the police summonsed me there. When I got there, there were 2 squad cars and 2 police officers. They called the coroner's office and someone from there came to pick up his body because I was told, under the circumstances, he had to have an autopsy. I waited there with my son's body for about an hour before someone from the coroner's office showed up, at which time they loaded his body into a body bag, laid him out on the floor for me to say goodbye, then loaded him into the coroner's vehicle and left with him. I don't know if the police made a police report, as with my first son they refused to make a police report even though his death was suspicious. He fell off the roof at work, his coworkers removed his ID, fled the scene and called 911 from a remote location reporting an unidentified injured person in the driveway of the address he was at. I repeatedly went to the police asking them to make a police report and investigate, but they refused and nothing was done about it. I'll call the police and ask if a police report was made for this son's death. The death certificate is signed by Diane Barnett MD, Deputy Coroner with the manner of death: Natural.

With the knowledge of his brain tumor it is possible that she ruled the death as natural and didn't feel it necessary to increase the expenses for an autopsy. Many times deaths are ruled natural after medical records are received.

Again, I am so sorry for your loss.

Thanks J-9, that's probably it... though his doctor didn't think he was at risk of death from the tumor (from what I was told at one of his doctor appointments). I'll find out when I go to the appointment. We were confused about his brain tumor anyway, first we were told it was slow growing, then fast growing, then one doctor said he didn't have a brain tumor at all. I know his symptoms were getting worse, so maybe his medical records showed it was probably the tumor?

Hello this:

My condolences on your loss. No mother should have to bury her children...

Being the cynic that I am, I think you were SCREWED. In the very first instance, your son waited until she got done shopping on Rodeo Drive. That, all by itself, is outrageous. Then I find out that your county has an actual coroner, whose whereabouts are unexplained, while your son waited... I'd be curious about where he was.

Then to be flat out LIED to - it's unconscionable!

Given that I believe you have been greatly wronged, I believe you have the basis for a lawsuit. Even if the lawyer you hire doesn't think you do, he can for SURE, get you an appointment with these good for nothing bureaucrats, who are treating you like dirt putting you off that way.

I'd also call your local media. I'd make a stink so bad that these people are run out of town on a rail.

excon

There will be a record of some type. Police logs etc. units that responded. The contact sheet from the coroner's office will also contain the name of the contacting party.

Prior to contacting the coroner's office someone had to pronounce him dead.

Usually in the case of a sudden death the individual is taken to the nearest hospital and only then is a decision made to contact the coroner or release to a funeral home.

In determining the cause of death the coroner must have had access to reports from on-scene describing the surrounding circumstances. So reports exist. Only after he was pronounced and at the request of someone on scene did it become a coroners case. Police have that authority. The other alternative was to allow you to contact the funeral home. I understand, given the circumstances, why it was made a coroners case. Once so committed it's difficult to explain any ruling absent a PME including toxicology.

The brain tumor you mention, in relation to the finding, fails to clarify the issue and enhances the need for PME rather than negating it. The condition was not observable by external examination (step 1 in cause of death). Therefore there was no apparent cause. Depending on the location of the brain tumor it could have caused death, it could have caused unconsciouness, or it could have been non-contributory. There is no reason to assume that medical confirmation (via Hx) of such condition was the basis of the coroner's determination. Quite the contrary, if known, it should have led to not away from PME.

You're correct that the coroner does not require authorization for autopsy. Once they obtain jurisdiction they have independent authority, to act or, in all likelihood, not to act to that end. Failure to perform PME is very unusual given the circumstances. The delay raises more questions. PME should occur with 24 hours for the Tox to be relevant. The coroner has a concurrent professional and statutory duty to determine cause of death which doesn't allow for arbitrary (or best guess) decisions. They are obliged to document their findings and to provide that information to the immediate family upon request.

They are obliged to document their findings and to provide that information to the immediate family upon request.Hello Dr:

Their obligations notwithstanding, THIS bureaucracy FAILED in its duty, and continues to do so. When the OP called to question them, she was put off. I see no reason to believe they'll, all of a sudden, become cooperative should she call them back.

I think she needs the meanest, baddest lawyer in her town.

excon

Hello Dr:

Their obligations notwithstanding, THIS bureaucracy FAILED in its duty, and continues to do so. When the OP called to question them, she was put off. I see no reason to believe they'll, all of a sudden, become cooperative should she call them back.

I think she needs the meanest, baddest lawyer in her town.

excon

You are correct and the bureaucratic response, lackadaisy, indifference and incompetence is pervasive in coroners and ME offices across the country. But when you go after a government unit you want your ducks in a row. She can get information quickly, by pushing the right button, that would take months by subpoena. I share your anger.

Also, it is my experience that once placed on notice of suit pertinent records often mysteriously disappear or can't be found.

Thanks again DrBill. I have a piece of paper that (instead of being an autopsy report) states, as written:
Anatomic Diagnoses: NO AUTOPSY PREFORMED, EXTERNAL EXAMINATION ONLY.

Then below that is the
Summary of toxicology results:
Alcohol level: NONE DETECTED
Carbamazepine: 0.4 mg/L in Blood SUBCLAV
GC-MS SCREEN: None detected in Blood Subclavian

Then down below that it says
Opinion: It is my opinion that N.P. (initials) died of CHRONIC SEIZURE DISORDER. The following significat conditions were present: cLINICAL HISTORY OF REMOTE BRAIN TUMOR. Manner of death: Natural.

Oddly, he was a known pot smoker yet that doesn't seem to have been dectected in his blood tests

He was pronounced dead when the coroner's office got to the house. I was so upset during that time that I don't know what official from the coroner's office was there, just assumed it was a doctor though because that is the person who pronounce him dead, then he was taken to the coroner's office, not the hospital. I don't even think EMT was there because it was obvious that he was dead for hours before he was discovered. Even though, though, his time of death was listed as the time the lady from the coroner's office examined his body while he was still in the bathtub.

My son was in an unusal position in the tub also. His head was at the drain end and he was on his side and the water had all leaked out of the tub, but his hair was wet and there was a little water under him, no blood though. It just looked like he was sleeping, no apparent injury.

As far as drugs - I've seen drugs not mentioned in order to keep the Death Certificate "clean" for life insurance purposes. If drugs were not a factor that testing is not necessarily mentioned.

Again - I see no lawsuit here because I see no damages. Complaints, yes. As far as how quickly the Coroner gets there, well, that's something to argue about.

I realize you are very upset and grieving this recent, tragic loss; however, this is the legal board and my legal advice is that you NOT post this much info if you have any intention of taking any action in this matter.

You could very well be guilty of slander or defamation or whatever else the people you have named BY NAME care to call it. I'm not saying "they" would win. I'm saying they have legal resources which you, undoubtedly, do not have and if you harm their "professional reputation" - which will be the action - I see you having an uphill climb.

Again - purely legal advice. It is a mistake to try to get closure or specific advice (using names) or fingers pointed at people in charge.

You have a hearing date. I would hope that helps you find some peace. "Trying" this case on a public board is going to hurt you.

I do not mean to further upset you and (again) this is purely legal advice. I'm not saying it's correct or fair. I am saying I don't see your monetary damages and I might see "theirs."

Let me acquaint you with the response you are most apt to receive from the coroner:

PME was performed (technically true). We felt internal examination was unnecessary. We did perform toxicology.

The body position and physical circumstances are virtually identical to those in an Illinois case where death was attributed to drowning. That should have been considered in this case.

I'm still having a bit of a problem with how this evolved. Who first discovered the body. Who was called (police or ambulance). Who decided that he was beyond medical intervention. There are clear indications to a trained observer i.e. lividity and even to untrained, rigor mortis, but these decisions are seldom made on scene.

The time of death is procedurally correct. It is the time when a competent medical authority confirms it. That is yet another reason for removal to nearest hospital.

There should be a full toxicology report with the date and time of testing. But due to a process called Postmortem Redistribution (PMR) PM tox reports are always unreliable. When only one sample site is used (as noted above) they are meaningless.
Proper procedure requires three sample sites, usually urine, femoral blood and vitreous humor. Many times hair as well.
I am sure it will be their claim that since the sample was negative there was no need for additional testing. That is true in living subjects but not so in PME analysis. When I say proper procedure, it is no where mandated, rather agreed upon amongst forensic pathologists, and widely published.

The medical Hx is interesting, within the coroner's records it should be noted how obtained and when. You will need that information. I don't see how post facto it influenced the determination. (If I were reviewing this independently my first assumption would have been accidental death by drowning. I can't see how that was ruled out without internal examination of the heart and lungs.)

As Ex-con noted this, on the face of it, this looks like bureaucratic bungling. But courts reject opinion and accusation absent fact. I have been involved in many ME cases and you're confronting a government agency that will retrench, professional organizations that won't speak against their members (forensic pathologists) and their lawyers are free. So any information that you can obtain with a smile and expression of personal concern is to your benefit. Believe me all info ends at the mention of lawsuit.

NOTE: I just noticed that this is a legal board. When I use the term case it is in a medical sense. My background is in physiological psychology, a "fur piece" from the law. My involvement in medico-legal autopsies is with emphasis on the "medico-"

Thanks again DrBill, I'll try to be as nice as I can. My exhusband told me last night that the coroner in Lubbock TX was sent to prison for not doing his job right. I don't care if it's the government, to me that means they should be held to the highest standard, not the lowest.

My son was as white as the bathtub and as cold as the tub when he was found, and rigor mortis had set in. His girlfriend found him when she got home from work. He was just getting into the tub when she left for work, so we think he died soon after she left. She was at work for 8 hours. Long enough for the water to leak out of the drain, which it did have a slow leak.

She called 911, hysterical, and reported that my son was dead in the bathtub. They asked HER if she wanted the police to come out. Bizarre. Her response was YES, I'm not a doctor! The police called me as soon as they got there and told me to come to my son's house, that he had died. They were very kind but I don't remember them filling out any paperwork. I'll call them tomorrow and ask if they made a police report and if so if I can have a copy of it.

Thank you for all your thoughts on this.

Also, his brain tumor was on his pituitary gland

I'm sorry you don't like my advice; I'm sorry you are 100% they "won't get anything" from you.

This is a legal board. Maybe it's time to move it to a discussion or medical thread.

DrBill has provided very valuable advice. I will also add that maybe it was bungling, maybe it wasn't - but what are the damages here?

Again - that is what counts on the legal board. Perhaps this is a discussion for a medical thread.

Thanks again Judy, it isn't that I don't like your advice, not at all. I appreciate your views on this. It's more that I feel I don't care what they could do to me, I guess, after all, the worst possible thing has already happened. As far as damages goes, you are right, there is no monetary damages... I would have had to pay for a funeral no matter what. The damage is mental anguish. It is difficult to put this matter to rest in my mind when I don't even know what killed my son. Knowing that I will never know is unsettling, to say the least.

... Perhaps this is a discussion for a medical thread.

Frankly until your previous post I thought this was a medical board. Somehow I wandered from home and don't know how I got here. If it's agreeable with thisisit I would like to see it moved. Either that or call my parents and have them pick me up.

:) It doesn't matter to me where the question is put. I wasn't sure where to post it to begin with.

Hello again,

No matter WHERE it's posted, the conversation will be the same with the same participants. I'd leave it be. And, your expertise is welcome here, DrBill.

My friend, Judy, as always, makes a good point. She doesn't see actual damages... I don't either.. I'm hoping, however, that the actions of these jerkoff bureaucrats was soooo egregious, and that there are statutes requiring compliance with certain laws and if not complied with, there's a penalty, so that she can get compensated.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm hoping that a lawyer can reveal, that which I cannot. If he can't, and if he's mean enough, he can get the county to move. I can't believe their action here didn't massively violate their own rules and procedures. I'm NOT sure if punitive damages wouldn't be awarded. She might only need $10 in actual damages, yet be awarded hundreds of thousands of $$$'s in punitave damages...

Or, I could be whistling Dixie.

excon

Thanks again DrBill, I'll try to be as nice as I can. My exhusband told me last night that the coroner in Lubbock TX was sent to prison for not doing his job right.

The Inspector General for Texas reviewed the forensic laboratories across the state and in 2009 issued a public report calling them the "the last vestiges of junk science." Dr. Charles Harlan, Medical Examiner in Tennessee (http://abcnews.go.com/2020/doctors-botched-autopsies-blame-murder/story?id=9989554) was removed from office for incompetence. Amongs his acts was to allow his dog in the autopsy room while working. The pup consumed a man's liver. Oklahoma, Alabama, Florida, Illinois, New York and Georgia (just from my most recent sheet) all have or recently have had investigations of Coroners and/or Medical Examiners offices. Above I noted this is a "pervasive" problem, and indeed it is.

Not only are these governmental offices, they are staffed by medical professionals, forensic pathologists, toxicologists who are likewise responsible to licensing boards and professional organizations. They are operating under and defiling the banner of science. I find that abhorrent.

Chief Medical Examiner for Oklahoma (http://enidnews.com/state/x993483491/OSBI-investigation-sought-for-ex-medical-examiner)
Chief Medical Examiner, El Paso (http://www.elpasotimes.com/newupdated/ci_15109249) re: Ohio
Medical Examiner, Florida/Pennsylvania (http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/top_three/article_73d0c4f6-523c-11de-b656-001cc4c002e0.html) 2009
State Medical Examiner, Mississippi (http://truthinjustice.org/p-pmisconduct.htm)
Good review of ME misconduct, various states (http://reason.com/archives/2007/10/08/csi-mississippi)

That's terrible. We should be able to trust our Medical Examiners and Coroners. They are the last doctor who will ever see the person, and can provide facts and explanations to grieving family members; and important clues if a crime was committed. If for no other reason, compassion should compel them to do a complete and thorough job.

By the way "Sudden Unexplained Death Syndrome" is a new one for me. Is that in writing anywhere?

By the way "Sudden Unexplained Death Syndrome" is a new one for me. Is that in writing anywhere?

This is what I was told on the phone at the time his body was released. That is when I was also told the autopsy report would not be ready for weeks because to be final, they had to wait for toxicology. I was also assured at that time that they did not expect anything significant on the toxicology testing. That caused me to believe a complete autopsy was done, leading the coroner to believe that "Sudden Unexplained Death Syndrome" was a conclusion from the PME.

Didn't you say your son had epilepsy? Did he take any medication for it?


For reasons that are poorly understood, people with epilepsy have an increased risk of dying suddenly for no discernible reason. This condition, called sudden unexplained death, can occur in people without epilepsy, but epilepsy increases the risk about twofold.

Didn't you say your son had epilepsy? Did he take any medication for it?

He had a seizure disorder, I called it epilepsy. We thought related to his brain tumor, my son refused to believe his seizures were caused by epilepsy. Yes he took Tegretol/carbamazepine. On October 10th last year he almost died from a seizure. He was in a coma for 3 days. That's when I started getting really worried that he was going to die from his tumor and seizures.

You may want to read up on this.

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: eMedicine Neurology (http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1187111-overview)

It's the "syndrome" that's throwing me. I can understand sudden unexpected death as descriptive but not as a cause or as a set of similarities as inferred by syndrome. Help me out here.

I see that SUDEP does have standardized criteria for the syndrome

It is kind of a hard diagnosis to swallow without the benefit of an autopsy to rule out other causes.

It is kind of a hard diagnosis to swallow without the benefit of an autopsy to rule out other causes.

One of the criteria for SUDEP is that all other causes must be ruled out at autopsy. (see J_9 link)

It's the "syndrome" that's throwing me. I can understand sudden unexpected death as descriptive but not as a cause or as a set of similarities as inferred by syndrome. Help me out here.

I see that SUDEP does have standardized criteria for the syndrome

It's a rather new term I do believe.

Since a syndrome is the association of several clinically recognized signs/symptoms, I am believing that this is due to the diagnosis (Oh, how I wish I could type in medical terms :p) of epilepsy/seizure disorder in conjunction with the medication(s) and possibly the tumor.

I'm not finding very many updated scholarly papers on the subject, but to tell the truth, I haven't had much time to actually do the research.

I have no advice, I just wish to tell you I'm sorry for your loss and I hope that you find some peace somehow.

I also want to add that the people on this site are wonderful. If you need to talk about your loss, need help, need to vent, or just need a shoulder, we're here.

My thoughts are with you and I'm so very sorry for all the hardships you've had.

I overlooked something. How did the coroner's office find out about the seizures and brain tumor?

I overlooked something. How did the coroner's office find out about the seizures and brain tumor?

Don't they frequently order medical records?

The death occurred at home. Someone would have to advised them of at least the doctor's name.

I don't know who told them, possibly the police did. We showed the police his pill bottle and I don't know if the person from the coroner's office took his pill bottle or what. The name of his Neurologist was on his pill bottle. I was surprised that no one from the coroner's office called to ask me or his girlfriend any questions.

They should have contacted one or both. Perhaps the police took a statement from her. She was the last to see him alive.

Information gathered at the scene should have been provided to the coroner's office. Since they were on scene it may be that it was transmitted orally but then they (the coroner) should have made a report.

The pill bottle might answer the question but it would seem the neurologist will have contacted next of kin on receiving a third party request for patient information.

You may need to clarify these issues with his girlfriend.

I will do that, however I'm quite sure she has talked to no one from the coroner's office. I don't know what information she gave to the police before I got there.

I will do that, however I'm quite sure she has talked to no one from the coroner's office. I don't know what information she gave to the police before I got there.

Thanks. As Judy noted earlier this is a legal thread, I've wandered far from camp, it's getting dark, and I fear a band of marauding lawyers might try and attack. Looking to capture a medicine man for their tribe. So I'm knocking off for the evening.

In the next day or two I will put together a list of items you need to obtain and or contact. If you think of anything that might shed additional light please let me know.

You will need to know the information she gave to the police.

To keep others up to speed, here is thisisit's original link when her son died: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/bereavement/son-died-449616.html

I'd be angry too. My condolences again. This time empathy too.

In my case we should have had an autopsy, but didn't realize it until we contacted a lawyer and also read the hospital's reports. One doc failed to tell us that his resident senior punctured my father's lung. My mam and I got some closure after meeting with the administrators and others of two hospitals in the same health care system. Although the same hospital made the same mistake 10 years later when they gave mom food prior to a test. The hospital mow has Magnum? Nursing status.

I have found that in times of tragedy and/or shock people have no memory of what they said, who they talked to, how the conversation went. Many times a person will insist the Police are lying, they never said this or that - and then the witnesses have total recall and it did happen.

Not saying this is the case but until the hearing no one knows what anyone said or did 100%.

Hi JudyKT, That is so true. I'm just going on what I remember and I know I was extremely upset. I called 2 police departments this morning to find out if a written report was made that night. The first one told me I could find that information out from the coroner's office. So I called the Township Police, my son's house was right on the line for Sylvania Township. Toledo takes one side of the street and the Township takes the other side. They told me they were there that night and yes, they made a police report and I can come pick up a copy at no charge. So, that's a beginning.

They told me they were there that night and yes, they made a police report and I can come pick up a copy at no charge. So, that's a beginning.

That's good. If you can, from this point forward make brief notes of any contacts you make with date and time. Doesn't need to be extensive just name, subject, date and time. It helps piece everything together and prevents redundancy.

It helps piece everything together and prevents redundancy.Hello again, Dr:

It's also good stuff in court. Are you sure you're not a lawyer?

excon

Yes, I would keep notes of who, when, how. It may still boil down to your word against their word but it's - as DrBill verified - a start.

On a personal note - I have almost no recollection of the night my husband died. I drove home from the hospital and remember absolutely nothing of the trip. I think your mind shuts down as a defense mechanism. I still can't believe they allowed me to leave, alone, and drive home - some 45 minutes!

I wouldn't be surprised if everyone's memory is somewhat clouded - but you're working your way through that.

Its evident that procedures are quite different in the US then in Canada. If a person dies at home, say of a massive heart attack there is no autopsy done, but if a person dies on the street, in a store, or somewhere other then his residence, an autopsy is done. I have first hand seat in these situations, although I can't pronounce and have to assign a nurse, some of my clients have died over the years while I am in attendance; as they are assigned palliative to me.

I am not belitting your situation, this, just pointing this out. You obviously have a coroner who needs a heads up, or a wack upside the head. Something is definitely wrong in your situation.

I am so sorry for your situation, my heart goes out to you my dear.

Tick

I got the police report, once again they were very nice to me. The police report indicates that his girlfriend told the police that my son had a seizure disorder and brain tumor, and provided the name and phone number of his nuerologist. The police report also states that the coroner's investigator took possession his body for an autopsy and that his medicine bottles were also handed over to the transportation unit.

I'd like to talk to his doctor too, but can the doctor talk to me, would that violate HIPAA law?

would that violate HIPAA law?Hello again, this:

No. HIPAA applies to live persons.

excon

I'd like to talk to his doctor too, but can the doctor talk to me, would that violate HIPAA law?

I think it would probably be helpful from several standpoints to talk with his doctor. Please be careful not to mention your dissatisfaction with the coroner.

Does the police report mention details of the physical environment, location, bathroom, etc

HIPAA applies to live persons.

excon

This is an additive question... I read through part of HIPAA and it looks like it only applies to the electronic transfer of records. Are you up on that? I know confidentiality applies in the doctor/pt relationship regardless, so is HIPAA simply an electronic record extension?

so is HIPAA simply an electronic record extension?

No, HIPAA does not only apply to electronic record extensions. I'll give you an example:

Recently my father-in-law was in the hospital I work for. I was off duty at the time, so I called the hospital and was talking to a friend of mine who worked on his unit. I then asked about his condition and she reminded me that it was against HIPAA to discuss his condition as I was not his treating nurse.

So, HIPAA is verbal as well as electronic.

No, HIPAA does not only apply to electronic record extensions. I'll give you an example:


So, HIPAA is verbal as well as electronic.

Right you are. On review, "any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral" I must have been reading my fax machine instructions.

That must pose a few problems for residents and nurses in relation to friends and relatives?

Right you are. On review, "any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral" I must have been reading my fax machine instructions.

That must pose a few problems for residents and nurses in relation to friends and relatives?

You always make me laugh.

Yes, it can pose problems. I live in a VERY small community, and when someone has a baby it's big news. Well, I deliver babies, it gets tough when people ask me about my patients and their babies. They just don't understand that I'm not allowed to talk about it.

I think it would probably be helpful from several standpoints to talk with his doctor. Please be careful not to mention your dissatisfaction with the coroner.

Does the police report mention details of the physical environment, location, bathroom, etc

Good thinking! What I am mainly interested in finding out is, what information was shared with the coroner's office, and WHEN was it shared, And what was the latest status of my son's health. He saw the doctor the day before he died. Can you think of anything else I should ask the doctor?

Good thinking! What I am mainly interested in finding out is, what information was shared with the coroner's office, and WHEN was it shared, And what was the latest status of my son's health. He saw the doctor the day before he died. Can you think of anything else I should ask the doctor?

Your interest is in determining what happened to your son. The neurologist is the only person in the world that can even come close providing insight, at this point. Satisfy that need first.

I wouldn't mention autopsy at all. You can mention their finding "natural causes" or the "Sudden Unexpected Death" routine but explain that that doesn't answer your questions. Maybe he'll bring up autopsy and it's even possible that the neurologist could have told them there was no need for an autopsy, believing he was helping. But it could also be that they didn't contact him until days later.

As I recall you have a background in medicine so you'll probably benefit from what information he provides. My main thought is benefit to you at this point. The good Dr. will be of little use in dealing with the coroner except for the information you obtain at this meeting. There is extreme reluctance to testify (or provide adverse information) against other doctors and they are useless as forced "subpoenaed" witnesses.

Your interest is in determining what happened to your son. The neurologist is the only person in the world that can even come close providing insight, at this point. Satisfy that need first.

I wouldn't mention autopsy at all. You can mention their finding "natural causes" or the "Sudden Unexpected Death" routine but explain that that doesn't answer your questions. Maybe he'll bring up autopsy and it's even possible that the neurologist could have told them there was no need for an autopsy, believing he was helping. But it could also be that they didn't contact him until days later.

As I recall you have a background in medicine so you'll probably benefit from what information he provides. My main thought is benefit to you at this point. The good Dr. will be of little use in dealing with the coroner except for the information you obtain at this meeting. There is extreme reluctance to testify (or provide adverse information) against other doctors and they are useless as forced "subpoenaed" witnesses.


I remember learning about the code of silence as a student nurse.

I had gone to a handful of appointments with my son and I was pretty tough with the doctor when my son was newly diagnosed. I impressed upon him how important it was to me that my son's doctor seriously cared for him and that he knew what he was doing.

First off Im sorry for your loss. Id also like to state that in many places there are rules regarding autopsy. Mainly it has to do with the last doctors visit and a timeline. So it is possible that the coroner did skip something very important. For that you would have to know the rules of the local area. Being under a doctors care may release the autopsy from being done. But either way you are owed an explination.

@-->-----

I talked to my son's nuerologist today. He was shocked and saddened by my son's death. He told me that my son's seizure disorder was stable and he had not had another seizure since he was hospitalized in Oct. 09. I asked him if he spoke to the coroner and he said yes, he did and he told the coroner that it was his opinion that Nathan needed a full autopsy because his death was not expected and his health issue was stable. I'm so upset about this. His doctor was so nice to me. He was upset that a conclusion as to the cause of death was made without an autopsy.

That is indeed distressing news from the standpoint of understanding the circumstances surrounding your sons death. It also has direct implications in relation to the coroner's decision as they acted contrary to the advice of the attending physician whom had examined your son within one day of death. Procedurally, that is very unusual.

I don't want to talk to my lawyer until after I have my appointment with the coroner, because I don't want to prevent the coroner from saying anything to me. I did not have to bring up the autopsy with my son's doctor, he asked me what the autopsy showed. When I told him there was no autopsy, and I read what the piece of paper I have says, he was shocked. He was also very surprised that it took almost 2 months to get a none autopsy report. He repeated to me more than once that he told the coroner that it was his opinion that my son needed a full autopsy. He told me it is not unheard of that people with seizures have sudden unexplained death, but that usually is the case when seizures are not under control.

He's right, of course, that seizures can cause sudden death. That fails to tie together the physical environment (bathtub) and position of body, etc. But the preeminent problem is that you should not be left with guesswork and searching out the most likely assumption. The purpose of PMEs is to resolve these issues scientifically and conclusively.

I agree that it would be premature to contact an attorney and I don't feel you're yet prepared for a meeting with the coroner. But you will be. By all means do not initiate any contact with the coroner while you are angry and distraught.

I don't want to talk to my lawyer until after I have my appointment with the coroner, because I don't want to prevent the coroner from saying anything to me.Hello again, t:

That IS a concern. However, I don't think visiting a lawyer necessarily insures that outcome. He might very well agree that nothing should be said until after your meeting. Or, he might have a different strategy. If not, he'll certainly advise you HOW to conduct your interview with the coroner, and what pertinent questions to ask. I'd be wondering whether I could or SHOULD tape the session. It's certainly worth exploring.

I'm just saying, that if you're going to see a lawyer in any case, it would be my view, that sooner is better. Forewarned is forearmed.

excon

Thanks DrBill, I won't. At first I was upset that they put me off till the end of next month, but now I feel I need that time to compose myself and get my emotions under control so that I don't go in with guns a' blazing.

Hello again, t:

That IS a concern. However, I don't think visiting a lawyer necessarily insures that outcome. He might very well agree that nothing should be said until after your meeting. Or, he might have a different strategy. If not, he'll certainly advise you HOW to conduct your interview with the coroner, and what pertinent questions to ask. I'd be wondering whether I could or SHOULD tape the session. It's certainly worth exploring.

I'm just saying, that if you're going to see a lawyer in any case, it would be my view, that sooner is better. Forewarned is forearmed.

excon

Good point, however I know for sure I can only control myself. My sister has already suggested a tape recorder for the meeting, think I'll pick one up... preferably one that can be hidden.

Hello again, t:

That IS a concern. However, I don't think visiting a lawyer necessarily insures that outcome. He might very well agree that nothing should be said until after your meeting. Or, he might have a different strategy. If not, he'll certainly advise you HOW to conduct your interview with the coroner, and what pertinent questions to ask. I'd be wondering whether I could or SHOULD tape the session. It's certainly worth exploring.

I'm just saying, that if you're going to see a lawyer in any case, it would be my view, that sooner is better. Forewarned is forearmed.

excon

Thus far the culpable party is a governmental entity operating under the protection of sovereign immunity so long as they acted with proper discretion. However, there is another line of accountability available as the doctors are individually accountable to state licensure boards and professional membership groups. Complaints against licensed physicians will fall under administrative law procedures and most attorneys are reluctant to venture into that territory or even know how to handle it.

It may be that there is no productive cause of action for civil damages but that the doctors can be held accountable for their professional conduct through an administrative action(s). That would require an abuse of discretion. We don't know that yet.

Your advice is sound. I just don't think there's enough to present to an attorney at this point. It is just my thought that aggregating additional facts will direct her to the proper attorney and allow a more informed decision. Few that I know of will take thin cases on a contingency and fewer yet will enter an admin case except on hourly basis. But as a legal procedural matter you are probably right.

I don't want to talk to my lawyer until after I have my appointment with the coroner, because I don't want to prevent the coroner from saying anything to me. I did not have to bring up the autopsy with my son's doctor, he asked me what the autopsy showed. When I told him there was no autopsy, and I read what the piece of paper I have says, he was shocked. He was also very surprised that it took almost 2 months to get a none autopsy report. He repeated to me more than once that he told the coroner that it was his opinion that my son needed a full autopsy. He told me it is not unheard of that people with seizures have sudden unexplained death, but that usually is the case when seizures are not under control.

Im going to but in again. I did a little research and found out that where your son was living there is a laundry list of people that can proclaim caus of death besides the coroner. So until you get what you think is the big picture try to hold back and just listen. I know it's a tough time for you and you want answers. But the EMT in attendance could have came up with caus of death and there would have been no autopsy. Understand its prevailing law of that area.

My sister has already suggested a tape recorder for the meeting, think I'll pick one up... preferably one that can be hidden.Hello again, t:

As long as you know that taping WITHOUT permission is LEGAL in your state. It COULD be a felony. You don't want to complicate things... That's ONE of the reasons I suggested you get legal advice.

excon

Im going to but in again. I did alittle research and found out that where your son was living there is a laundry list of people that can proclaim caus of death besides the coroner. So until you get what you think is the big picture try to hold back and just listen. I know its a tough time for you and you want answers. But the EMT in attendence could have came up with caus of death and there would have been no autopsy. Understand its prevailing law of that area.

I learn something everyday. Please share with us the other persons that are empowered and qualified to determine cause of death, along with enabling statute if known. I've never heard of that.

Hello again, t:

As long as you know that taping WITHOUT permission is LEGAL in your state. It COULD be a felony. You don't want to complicate things... That's ONE of the reasons I suggested you get legal advice.

excon

Oh geez, yes I sure don't want to be the one committing a crime here! I think it is legal as long as one person knows the conversation is being taped. I'll have to find out for sure. If both people have to be aware, I'll simply put the tape recorder on the table and tell the coroner I'm taping so that I don't have to keep going back to her with questions.

Im going to but in again. I did alittle research and found out that where your son was living there is a laundry list of people that can proclaim caus of death besides the coroner. So until you get what you think is the big picture try to hold back and just listen. I know its a tough time for you and you want answers. But the EMT in attendence could have came up with caus of death and there would have been no autopsy. Understand its prevailing law of that area.

There was no EMT, it was 2 police officers and a woman acting as coroner investigator. The police told me and it is printed in the police report that the coroner investigator took possession of the body for autopsy.

Oh geez, yes I sure don't want to be the one committing a crime here! I think it is legal as long as one person knows the conversation is being taped. I'll have to find out for sure. If both people have to be aware, I'll simply put the tape recorder on the table and tell the coroner I'm taping so that I don't have to keep going back to her with questions.

Ref:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/ohio/ohio-recording-law

Ref:

Ohio Recording Law | Citizen Media Law Project (http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/ohio/ohio-recording-law)

Thank you! I found also that all the information the coroner has is considered public information, so I don't think there should be a problem recording my meeting. I will ask my lawyer though just to be safe.

Good point, however I know for sure I can only control myself. My sister has already suggested a tape recorder for the meeting, think I'll pick one up... preferably one that can be hidden.


This is a Federal crime in some States - I don't know where you are but you should look into this.

First, it's a dangerous practice. Second, it rises to a felony.

Do you know why I don't get on the medical boards and argue? Because I don't know squat about medicine.

Know why I post on the legal boards? Because that's my education, experience, knowledge.

I realize you think that no one can get a Judgment against you and also that as long as one person knows the conversation is being taped you are all right -

I'd check with an Attorney on both counts.

This is a Federal crime in some States - I don't know where you are but you should look into this.

First, it's a dangerous practice. Second, it rises to a felony.

Do you know why I don't get on the medical boards and argue? Because I don't know squat about medicine.

Know why I post on the legal boards? Because that's my education, experience, knowledge.

I realize you think that no one can get a Judgment against you and also that as long as one person knows the conversation is being taped you are all right -

I'd check with an Attorney on both counts.


Will do Judy, and thank you very much for your advice. I'm pretty sure, but a lawyer I am not! If a lawyer in my district tells me it is illegal, I will put a tape recorder on the table and tell the coroner I am taping our meeting so that I don't have to go back and ask her the same questions again.

I noticed that some of the names I included in a previous post have now been reduced to initials. I don't object, in fact it's a pretty good idea - but wonder how and why it occurred.

There just might be another reason an autopsy was not done - money. Most counties these days in Ohio (I live in Ohio as well) are dead broke and are laying off police officers left and right, are shuttering libraries and restricting their hours, etc. This woman just may have decided that it was an obvious natural death due to the tumor and decided not to have the autopsy performed. You had him cremated. I hate to say this but you should not have done that until you were satisfied about his death and the cause of it. Had he been buried he could have been exhumed and the mystery of his death solved. As long as an external examination was performed that ruled out any foul play I'm thinking the coroner just took the "cheap" way out for the county and did not have the autopsy performed.

Also, as JKT said you don't really have any monetary damages to sue the coroner for or the county either other than not properly performing her legal duty (in your mind) to your son, the county will not be able to be sued. Taking this kind of case on in Court and winning will be almost impossible as the evidence (your son's body) has been irretrievably destroyed and unable to be examined by an autopsy.

I'm thinking you need to let this matter go. He was not the victim of foul play but died a natural death in the bathroom in the tub. A tumor on the pituatary gland can cause a person's eyesight and balance to be affected. A co-worker friend of mine had a tumor on the pituatary gland and his eyesight was the first to go. He had to have an immediate operation as his tumor was life threatening. You had your son for many years living with this volitale condition and could have lost him at any time such as when he was in the coma for 3 days. Please stop feeling guilty about this as you are not to blame. If anyone is to blame - blame the county for running out of money.

He did not have this condition for many years! He was diagnosed after his baby was born. His doctor told me today that my son was stable. He saw my son the day before he died and everything looked good, he was stable AND when the coroner called him, he told her that it was his opinion that neither the tumor nor seizure disorder was the cause of death and he thought a full autopsy should be done. I was lead to believe an autopsy was done, that is why I had his body cremated.

My son's baby is 2 years old.

Hang tough. We'll work through this item by item. You need a little time to assimilate this latest info.

Thanks DrBill, I'd like to add that if money was the problem I would have been glad to pay for the autopsy, but I was never called by the coroner and neither was his girlfriend, nor was anyone else in the family.

I noticed that some of the names I included in a previous post have now been reduced to initials. I don't object, in fact it's a pretty good idea - but wonder how and why it occurred.


I requested that this change be made - read back and you'll see why I objected to proper names.

If I think you have mishandled a matter (or run me over with your car or whatever) I think it's inappropriate and actionable to put your name on the Internet for all to see. Maybe you're guilty, maybe you're not. It is also a mistake to "try" a case on the Internet, long before an Attorney has been consulted - but I've said that before. Attorneys and Courts are pulling up all sorts of info all the time. I wouldn't want to be cross examined on something I put on AMHD somewhere down the road.

If the coronor or assistant or whoever are guilty, fine, then let a newspaper report that. Until then it is a disservice to those very people.

I requested that this change be made - read back and you'll see why I objected to proper names...

If the coronor or assistant or whoever are guilty, fine, then let a newspaper report that. Until then it is a disservice to those very people.

I agree with your decision right up to the last paragraph. That people might be trolling for info is a concern because it could lead to disclosure of facts the OP wouldn't want disclosed at the present time.

As far as the coroner's office at large, they are a public agency responsible to the citizens and the proper subject of identification and open criticism. I, as a public citizen, need not prove the factual content of my complaint or accusation in order to express it publicly and I need not resort to a court of law each time I've dissatisfied with the conduct of public servants. I can assemble a group and march in front of their office with their names emblazoned on signs or I can assemble words and broadcast them in a public forum to the same extent. It is public opinion formed via individual expression that holds public agents and agencies accountable, to we the people. Not vice versa. There is nothing that office is doing, nor any action any agent of that office has undertaken, that is not in the public purview.

It is not a disservice to the public agents to be publicly identified with their conduct, good or bad. That's accountability, and it's the actions that ultimately accrue to the benefit or detriment of the identified party. If a citizen has a complaint they can express it openly and with particularity without fear of retribution.

Nonetheless, thank you for altering the names from the standpoint of benefit to the OP.

PS I hope this doesn't mean I can't come over and play with you guys and gals on the legal board anymore... I have some new toys... Ice cream

Hello again, Dr:

Law, as opposed to medicine, has a conflict built in. The idea is that GOOD law results when you have two ethical and competent attorneys arguing about what the same set of facts mean.

This wouldn't BE a legal board if we all agreed. Now, this isn't a courtroom, of course, but, good law still results from our legal wrangling. At least, that's the idea.

Besides, I think you argue guuud. So, come along and bring your toys. But, be prepared to be knocked around a little.

excon

This is a legal issue, not a moral issue, nothing for discussion. I'm an investigator. I'm telling you my experience and how it works.

You post that someone is incompetent or negligent, that person decides to take action and it will happen so fast that your head will spin. I'm not saying they will win - I'm saying YOU will pay to defend yourself.

And if you're wrong, if this entire thread can be explained away - I see problems.

I realize that you don't but this is what I do for a living.

Also like to point out that we can assist an OP to a point with some good advice, but we also have to be congnizant of how our opinions and answers effect AMHD on a whole, that is, as you know, goes without saying in lieu of what has happened before.

Tick

Also like to point out that we can assist an OP to a point with some good advice, but we also have to be congnizant of how our opinions and answers effect AMHD on a whole, that is, as you know, goes without saying in lieu of what has happened before.

tick

I can appreciate that from the standpoint of the site. As a commercial enterprise they have the right and even responsibility to limit liability.

What happened before? Must have been before my time.

- And keep in mind that I have no reason to give anyone a hard time. I'm here to answer legal questions to the best of my ability.

OP will hurt herself if she continues this thread - but I've said that before and it goes on.

Never try a case on the Internet!

And, yes, it was before your time.

And thank you, Tickle.

What happened before? Must have been before my time.Hello:

Wasn't before MY time, and I don't know what it was.

Exco

Also like to point out that we can assist an OP to a point with some good advice, but we also have to be congnizant of how our opinions and answers effect AMHD on a whole, that is, as you know, goes without saying in lieu of what has happened before.

tick

Procrastination rhymes with physiology but you got me moving. Thanks

- And keep in mind that I have no reason to give anyone a hard time. I'm here to answer legal questions to the best of my ability.

OP will hurt herself if she continues this thread - but I've said that before and it goes on.

Never try a case on the Internet!


Judy, Judy, Judy

I am very (or was, before retiring) competent in my field. However and concurrently, I am an internet nincompoop. You have convinced me of the wisdom of the above. You should be proud as you have simultaneously disproven the old addage that you can't teach old dogs new tricks.

Judy, Judy, Judy

I am very (or was, before retiring) competent in my field. However and concurrently, I am an internet nincompoop. You have convinced me of the wisdom of the above. You should be proud as you have simultaneously disproven the old addage that you can't teach old dogs new tricks.


Do you know Cary Grant never said Judy, Judy, Judy - although the quote has always been attributed to him?

Yes, I am always proud when I teach any age dog a new trick.

However, I am busy training a new husband right now and so you will have to rely on excon to set you straight.

Good luck - too bad I don't have time right now to set HIM straight!

I haven't posted anything that isn't true and verifiable by the facts of the situation. Point out to me where I have committed slander or liable or said someone is incompetent or negligent. Defamation is when someone says false statements made maliciously with intent to cause a negative image. I have not made any groundless criticism, nor have I made a public disclosure of private facts. The facts I have disclosed are a public concern.

I never asked how I could sue the Coroner for money. That isn't what I'm interested in. If I find the coroner did not follow the law, I would want everyone to know. And if I can sue them/her, I will, or file a complaint or whatever steps I can take. If I find out the coroner did not deviate from the law, I still want people to know what can happen if one of their loved ones dies suddenly, alone, and unexpectedly with their own doctor, upon questioning from the coroner, gives his opinion that a full autopsy would be needed to determine the cause of death because he does not believe their medical condition caused the death. The coroner tells the family that an autopsy is being done and will take a little longer because of being backed up with dead bodies. Then when the body is release, the family and funeral director are told the autopsy is done. But in reality there was no autopsy. There is something wrong with that picture no matter which way you look at it.

It's hard getting people to be honest. Seems like he ones that aren't get ahead. Those playing the game of politics make laws to protect themselves, unfortunately.

You need to hold people accountable.

I am with Judy here, from personal experience. IF this were to go to court, every person who has posted here will be called.

While you may see nothing wrong with posting your experience, the medical examiner and/or her attorneys may see differently.

I respectfully unsubscribe from this thread.

Ok, Judy, you might be relieved or you might not care but, I talked to my lawyer just now about this mess, including several 'experts' telling me that I was wrong to post this information. He advised that my discussion online is not a problem and that I can record my interview with the coroner, though he suggested I do it above board, but it would not be illegal to conceal it. He mentioned that it is difficult to sue and file complaints against a government employee, but not impossible, and it has been done before. He advised me to stay calm and not sound accusatory, just that I am looking for answers for closure. He told me to call him back after my meeting and we will go over all the evidence I have and decide where to go from there. I really don't appreciate your tone of accusations against me or others trying to offer their advice. The reason I was holding off with my attorney is that one time I lost a case, I told him not to appeal it, he appealed it anyway and won my case for me... but I did not want him preempting me on this.

I am with Judy here, from personal experience. IF this were to go to court, each and every person who has posted here will be called.

While you may see nothing wrong with posting your experience, the medical examiner and/or her attorneys may see differently.

I respectfully unsubscribe from this thread.


- And, upon advice, I am following you.

- And, upon advice, I am following you.

Yes, I will have to follow J_9 and JKT

tickle

Hello:

Where is everybody? Helloooooo.

excon

Hello:

Where is everybody? Helloooooo.

excon

Here trying to find the edge of the internet. There could be a wrong answer somewhere :)

I'm right here excon, haven't been arrested or charged with any crime yet ;)

Of course you know what they say, these things take time

Hello again, t:

Well, if they show up, just say, "You dirty coppers. I'm innocent, I tell ya." It always worked for me.

excon

Ok, and if that doesn't work I'll point to my twin and say she's the one who did it ;)

I'm right here excon, haven't been arrested or charged with any crime yet ;)

Of course you know what they say, these things take time


Maybe excon (who should know) or somebody else will come back and explain to you AGAIN the difference between civil and criminal law.

Do you know Cary Grant never said Judy, Judy, Judy - although the quote has always been attributed to him?



I wasn't thinking of Cary Grant. I had a neighbor, Bob, came home drunk every Saturday night. "Judy, Judy, Judy" he would announce as he entered the yard. "Judy, Judy, Judy. Let your daddy in." If his wife didn't respond immediately, he would continue until she did. Getting louder and louder.

Six months ago come Saturday his wife shot and killed him. Her name was Margaret.

And maybe I should explain again, I have the advice of my lawyer and according to him, I have done nothing criminal here. Besides, I thought you unsubscribed to this post.

I wasn't thinking of Cary Grant. I had a neighbor, Bob, came home drunk every Saturday night. "Judy, Judy, Judy" he would announce as he entered the yard. "Judy, Judy, Judy. Let your daddy in." If his wife didn't respond immediately, he would continue until she did. Getting louder and louder.

Six months ago come Saturday his wife shot and killed him. Her name was Margaret.

Omygosh, that's terrible!

And maybe I should explain again, I have the advice of my lawyer and according to him, I have done nothing criminal here. Besides, I thought you unsubscribed to this post.


Oh, I did but I can't resist when you are so far off the legal track and just don't understand.

Your Attorney told you that you did nothing CRIMINAL and, thus, could not be arrested (and I'm not aware anyone said you did anything criminal). I said that you could be SUED and that's CIVIL for defamation.

And then after your Attorney told you you did nothing criminal you signed on and said you hadn't been arrested yet. Let's see -

Civil equals lawsuit.

Criminal equals arrest.

I'm glad I'm not a bitter person.

My attorney has told me I have nothing to fear as far as ANY kind of lawsuit being brought against me, thus far. Sorry I did not make that distinction when I said he had told me I had done nothing criminal. However someone in the coroner's office may have done something criminal.

I was reluctant to call my attorney before I got some feedback because I didn't want him to make any moves without my go ahead... which had happened before.

You come off as a bitter woman with a chip on her shoulder. I mean no disrespect, just saying. It is difficult enough for me to deal with my grief and I don't appreciate the tone of your posts.

I had my meeting with the coroner yesterday. She convinced me that my son died from a seizure. And though there is law, protocol and procedure that says an autopsy is needed when someone dies at home alone with no apparent cause, she is allowed to use discretion... she said she had seen very many seizure bathtub deaths, and to her, it was obvious that is what killed my son. She went over the autopsy photos and external exam and toxicology report and explained everything to me.

However, she pointed the finger at his doctor and told me his doctor is not telling me the truth about his frantic attempt to get a hold of my son the day he died and the appointment he went to the day before he died. She told me he was uncooperative with her and refused to sign the death certificate AND that there is no way possible that his blood levels of anti seizure meds were stable and therapeutic the day before he died, because he only had trace amounts in his toxicology screen.

She suggested that I get my son's medical records from the doctor, including his lab work. I'll do that... I'm not trying to sue anyone, I just want to know what happened and why it happened.

I would greatly appreciate it if anyone who has negative comments would keep them to themselves.

Hi this, I am glad you got that far and could be on your way to closure. All the best my dear on your journey.

Tick

Thank you so much tickle! I feel I am getting closure on this sad event. I can't count the many times I warned my son not to miss his medications and cried while warning him to never take a bath while alone. No matter what the coroner did or didn't do and no matter what his doctor did or didn't do, it was up to my son to at least take his meds as prescribed, and on time.

I'm not trying to sue anyone, I just want to know what happened and why it happened. Hello again, this:

It looks like you are getting closer... I'm glad.

But, if you're trying to convince ME to help you because you DON'T want to sue anybody, you got the wrong guy. I think suing people is GOOD. Besides, if you're honest with yourself for a moment, you'll agree with me...

Come on now. If you determine that his doctor made HUGE mistakes that might have caused, or hurried along your sons death, don't tell me that you'll be satisfied by simply learning about it... Nope, you're going to want to sue his a$$ off, and you'd be right.

excon

I don't believe he made any mistakes, ex... I don't believe he was honest with me, but I think the mistake was with my son not taking his medicine.

The fact is, my son went to the doctor the day before he died to complain about the side effects of his seizure meds. He wanted to stop taking them, or at least, get it changed to something more tolerable. He had not had a seizure since Oct. 09 (that one nearly killed him), so, in that sense, he seemed more stable. But, my son wanted the meds changed and he was in denial about the seriousness of his condition. That is a fact.

His doctor told me the only reason he was calling him on that Saturday was to tell him that he would be willing to change his meds only IF my son would be willing to go into the hospital for the change. He said his blood levels were in the therapeutic range and that he was more stable than he'd ever seen him. I don't think that is the truth, if it was, he could have offered to do that when my son was at his appointment.

What I believe now is that the doctor was calling him on Saturday to warn him that his blood levels were way too low, but, by then it was too late. My guess is that he did not have the blood level results available at the time of the appointment. I am not sure why the doctor wouldn't be up front and honest about that, but I also don't know exactly what was said back and forth between the coroner and him. I only know that neither of them like the other.

Regardless, it was my son's responsibility to take his medication, and obviously he did not.

I am not sure why the doctor wouldn't be up front and honest about that, but I also don't know exactly what was said back and forth between the coroner and him. I only know that neither of them like the other.

Regardless, it was my son's responsibility to take his medication, and obviously he did not.Hello again, this:

Please forgive my cynical nature, but if the doctor is HIDING something, it might be because he did something REALLY wrong. Don't be so quick to blame your son.

So, we HAD a coroner who we thought was the bad guy, and we waited. Now we find out the coroner is cool, and his doctor is the bad guy. But, lo and behold, he says he's not. So you've interviewed everybody. The stories DON'T match up. There's nobody left to interview, you have NO answers, and you've run into a stonewall. Isn't it about time you hired a lawyer?

excon

I have a lawyer...

The coroner is not cool, I don't like her or her attitude. I still think she should have done an autopsy, and I'm not sure she is allowed to decide, based on her opinions, whether to do an autopsy or not.

I liked my son's doctor, though my son hated him, and so did/does the mother of his child. And yes, the doctor might be trying to hide something, or maybe not. Maybe he is just nervous that he didn't call my son till Saturday, when an earlier call could have saved him? I don't know those answers yet, but I might be able to find out with my son's medical records.

The thing is, the ultimate responsibility lies with my son. I was with my son on several occasions when the doctor was frantic, practically jumping up and down, to impress upon him how important it was to take every single pill prescribed. He was warned many times that not taking his medication could result in death... and I was with my son on countless occasions when he said he wanted to just stop taking the pills. So many times he was warned by me, and his doctor, yet his toxicology showed he stopped taking his medicine or missed at least several doses.

The thing is, the ultimate responsibility lies with my son. I was with my son on several ocassions when the doctor was frantic, practically jumping up and down, to impress upon him how important it was to take every single pill prescribed. He was warned many times that not taking his medication could result in death... and I was with my son on countless ocassions when he said he wanted to just stop taking the pills. So many times he was warned by me, and his doctor, yet his toxicology showed he stopped taking his medicine or missed at least several doses.

Hi this, just wondering, these anti seizure meds your son was on, did they create side effects that he just could not tolerate... sleeplessness, irritability? Or was it your son just did not want to be on any meds, no matter what they were ?

I feel so badly for you my dear. My son 27, is on anti seizure meds, living with it for years; busy guy, productive, the meds don't cause him any side effects where he can't function. He has nocturnal seizures, although less in the last few years, but there were a few times during the night I thought I would lose him. I was always blessed with being a light sleeper, listening all the time. That is what saved him.

I know beyond a shadow of a doubt what you went through.

Tick

He had terrible side effects, his gums swelled, he got painful acne all over his back, rashes, and swelling in his face, dullness, difficulty concentrating... seems he got most side effects from each drug he tried. I hope your son continues to do well with his meds.

Are you still planning on suing the coroner?

I'm glad you had satisfactory results from your meeting. I believe that the attitude and demeanor of the pathologist tells you a lot about how they conduct their business. It sounds as though this doctor at least took the time to address the issues in relation to cause of death. That's important to you and hopefully brings you some comfort.

However, I don't believe the toxicology results can be given much weight in the matter. As I recall, there was a single subclavian blood sample drawn at an unknown (to me) time. (If there were additional samples drawn, please let me know). Here let me refer to a couple of doctors far more experienced and internationally recognized specialists:


"There is substantial published evidence to show that for most drugs... there are important differences in their concentration in blood according to the time of specimen collection after death, choice of sampling site, method of sampling and volume of blood collected (Pounder and Jones 1990; Pounder 1993). It is common to observe tenfold differences in the concentration of certain drugs.... in post-mortem blood taken from different sites."

Clear your head of all ideas of in vivo toxicological analyses. Postmortem toxicology is completely different. Postmortem there is no even predictable distribution such as occurs through metabolism/circulation in life. Rather the processes of postmortem redistribution (PMR) take over and that is dependent on numerous factors, two of which are the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug and the elapsed time between sampling and time of death. The results obtained postmortem are not a snapshot of the condition/concentration of the drug at time of death.

The usual practice is to screen blood, urine and vitreous fluid concentrations along with selected tissue samples. There is a ratio and one corroborates the other. The preferred sample site for blood is the femoral vein.

If his private doctor had a laboratory blood analysis those results would be far more accurate than the PM toxicology report. If you are unable to obtain that then it is possible to research the specific drug in relation to PMR.

Please don't place reliance on the PM toxicology report without additional information.

Thanks Dr. Bill, obviously I've got further investigations to do... :(

There was only one source for the PM toxicology and the coroner argued with me about the unreliability of it.

Are you still planning on suing the coroner?

I was never PLANNING on suing the coroner, just wondering if there is a cause for a lawsuit or complaint against the coroner. Most likely no matter what I find out I won't end up suing anyone. I really don't like the idea of suing people for money, unless I am seriously injured purposely ~through no fault of my own (for instance). However, depending on everything I find out, I might file some kind of complaint against the coroner and the coroner's office.

Why are you asking?

Thanks Dr. Bill, obviously I've got further investigations to do.... :(

There was only one source for the PM toxicology and the coroner argued with me about the unreliability of it.

Every major professional journal in the fields of forensic pathology, pathology, chemistry etc. has addressed this issue in depth throughout the last 30 years. Every professional organization, in recommendations/guidelines, likewise lists the necessity of multiple-site sampling due to postmortem redistribution. (As ex. See Finkbeiner, etal (2009) (http://books.google.com/books?id=KiGOSz9eGeUC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=autopsy+subclavian+blood+sample&source=bl&ots=OjebV3cbhI&sig=m2h6wD1TCnFUwCEOeGQBbQe4deE&hl=en&ei=1o8rTJCpOMTflge1lN3LAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=autopsy%20subclavian%20blood%20sample&f=false) Autopsy Pathology p. 171)

When I mentioned that I had heard that there was a need for multiple-site samples for PM toxicology, she slammed her hand down on the table, rolled her eyes, and said that is completely false.

I was never PLANNING on suing the coroner, just wondering if there is a cause for a lawsuit or complaint against the coroner. Most likely no matter what I find out I won't end up suing anyone. I really don't like the idea of suing people for money, unless I am seriously injured purposely ~through no fault of my own (for instance). However, depending on everything I find out, I might file some kind of complaint against the coroner and the coroner's office.

Why are you asking?


You started your thread by stating, "I'm wondering if I can sue the coroner ..." so I thought you were considering suing.

I wondered, now that you appear to have some evidence, if that was still your plan.

I don't find my question to be unreasonable when a question involving "can I sue" is posted on a legal board.

That isn't what I said, I said exactly: " I'm wondering if I can sue the coroner or if there is any action I can take against her " You forgot "OR"

You are right, your question is not unreasonable, though it is curious since you had said you were unsubscribing to this post and I think you also mentioned that you would not continue to post here.

And you are right. I did say I was done here and I did come back.

Now I understand your attitude.

When a statement contains the word "or" it means you could do this OR you could do that. Your statement - and the conversation that ensued concerning monetary damages - was all about a lawsuit. If you never intended to sue I don't know why that word was even in your opening sentence.

But, again, you are right. 125 posts and still going around in circles.

I'm not the one who was talking about getting some kind of monetary award. I asked about suing or a complaint because I don't know correct procedure on things like this, where a complaint of SOME KIND might be warranted. I feel like I've got a lot of good information from this, not like I'm going in circles. You might understand my attitude, but I don't understand yours.