so many thoughts!! let me see if i can sort them!
yesterday i went to the inquest to discover the cause of my mother's death. the goal of the inquest is to discover if the death was a suicide, accidental, natural causes, homicide or undetermined.
loren carrera, from the coroner's office presented the case to the jury, based on the facts in the medical records and then i was sworn in and spoke to the jury.
in a nutshell, mom was admitted to the hospital on oct. 10, 2004. at that time, i was asked what meds she was on so there wouldn't be a lapse in her receiving them. i told them and then called back and told a nurse on her unit what the exact dosage was. they were drugs for congestive heart failure. somebody dropped the ball and mom didn't get any of her meds for 3 weeks. at the end of that 3 week period, mom was having trouble breathing and was swollen with edema, the very symptoms that fuorosemide and potassium were meant to prevent! AFTER her problems, she suddenly was put on those very drugs!! mom was admitted to the telemetry unit once her problems escalated, without my being notified and she fell out of bed, trying to go to the bathroom. in the fall she fractured her hip. 16 days later she died, the cause being listed by the doctor as "pulmonary embolism, due to hip fracture". she must have been very confused! she had just been treated for depression and the hospital didn't call me when she was admitted from the behavioral health unit to telemetry, therefore i couldn't explain things to her, nor did they bother to elicit the assistance of an interpreter, since she is deaf.
the jurors were not impressed with the manner in which this was handled and came to the conclusion that the death cause was "undetermined" and issued a recommendation that the hospital be investigated to see what role they played in mom's death.
here's something i was thinking about on my way to work this a.m. somebody called in to open line in our paper, the beacon news. the comments ascribed to them that were published a few days ago gave me pause, and this morning i was ruminating as usual.
aurora has 5 mayoral candidates. as a matter of fact, i'm going to a forum tonight to listen to their platform presentations, etc.
the jist of what was published was that richard irvin, a former prosecutor, was a really wonderful guy--basically the same wonderful guy he was in high school 10 years ago. and even though he drives a lexus, it hasn't changed him.
i was rather amused by that comment. as though the only reason one would buy a lexus--is the status attained by that purchase. that somehow, that purchase would segregate one from a common man--that somehow one might become"snooty"!
i'm interested to find out more about richard irvin. my interest was piqued when i learned he drives a lexus. what a practical man. he must have great common sense to have purchased such a well made car. he obviously desires quality and perhaps he understands value! i hope he, like i, purchased a lexus because he recognized it might be the least expensive vehicle he ever purchased---in the long run, of course! and perhaps he appreciates the beautiful lines the lexus parades. my favorite is the ls 400. it's been replaced by the ls430. i'm not so keen on the suvs, but they still sport the same quality!!
since quality is high on my list of priorities, i am interested to know if this man's interest in quality, if his pragmatic approach to purchases would transcend into affairs of the city! if so, that's a great thing!! perhaps he is a "big picture thinker"!!
there's certainly more to consider than a person's skill at making purchases--so it will be interesting to analyze these 5 guys tonight!
may your day be wondrous! i'm back to work!
