Woman taking up to 800 laxatives a day

[davidc4430]

Woman taking up to 800 laxatives a day discharged from Adelaide hospital despite skeletal appearance

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-28/rah-discharged-woman-days-before-her-death-from-laxative-abuse...

Her husband must be a complete idiot.

[chameleon54]

---

@janeababe wrote:

---

@chameleon54 wrote:

---

@not_for_sale2017 wrote:

I must have read a different article. She abused all those laxatives and the husband is an idiot? It states, "Mrs La Bella suffered from the factitious disorder Munchausen syndrome where a person repeatedly acts as if they have an illness when they are not really sick" and "The doctor had serious concerns and strongly advised against it but ultimately he sees no reason to detain her under the powers he can implement using an inpatient treatment order" .

Surely the husband and friends were sincere when they thought her frail state was due to cancer. And what was the doctor supposed to do, break the law? This is sad and tragic, but is an example of what can happen when a person has a condition such as Munchausens. I very much feel for the family and friends. They will forever be plagued with the "what if" thoughts, and will probably feel partly responsible.

---

The article states the woman's weight was at a critical level and she was near the point of death. What the doctor should have done was section the woman under the mental health act and begin physical treatment and psychological assessment and counselling.  Actually, the assessment happens BEFORE being sectioned under the mental health act.

Chameleons response - Obviously an initial assesment will be made before the woman is sectioned, but once that has been done the patient will undergo a much more vigourous and thourough assesment over several days to ascertain what underlying conditions the patient may have. This process may continue for an extended period of time, even after the patient has been discharged from hospital, under the guidance of local community based health proffesionals. The same applies to councilling and treatment. These sorts of conditions cant be fixed in a two week sectioned hospital stay. They require months or years of ongoing councilling and support from community based proffesionals.

The criteria around Sectioning someone under the Mental Health Act were changed/updated about 12mths ago, and Its actually harder to section someone now. (it was being abused by family members, getting their troublesome family member locked away for a week or two, while they toddled off on holidays).

This is what the laws around sectioning are for and would have saved her life. It would have also allowed the family to be made aware of the womans true conditions as it appears they either didnt see, or didnt want to see the real problems. .The woman said she had terminal cancer. She attended hospital for *treatments* and was losing weight. WHAT REAL PROBLEM DIDN'T THEY SEE ? They arent bleeding mind readers,

chameleons response - Maybe the scan showing a stomach full of pills would have been a bit of a give away !!!!     or maybe the adult weighing a life threatening 35 kg and medical records showing no cancer treatment might have been a bit of a hint !!!!  

professional doctors or mental health professionals! 
If she gave them no reason to doubt her in the past, why would they doubt her now?
I think you are being very unfair on the family and relatives of this woman.

chameleons response -  ......REALLY !!!...........  The only mention I made of the family and relatives of this woman where that " had she been sectioned, it would have allowed the family to be made aware of her true condition".  VERY UNFAIR ?????    Give me a break !!!!

Please read my post again ..... " pedantic over-reaction " are a couple of words that immediatly come to mind !!!

In my view the doctor was negligent in not sectioning the woman.

---

---

[go-tazz]

This woman would've been very convincing and would've been able to convince doctors that what was "wrong"

with her was under control and there is nothing they could've done about it.

She would've convinced them that she was going to die from the cancer and everything she told them was

pointing towards that and that there was nothing the doctors could do for her.

So in effect it was HER decision to leave.

Most people can think back to a lie that they were told that they fully believed as that person was very

convincing and it sounded like the truth,(she was better than that as she was able to convince her husband

who spent a lot of time with her and didn't question anything).

He was that convinced that he would've backed up her story to anyone,(so there would've been two people

telling the same convincing story)

She was very good at her story and at convincing others and ultimately SHE is the one to blame,(not others).

She chose that path and it's final ending and nothing was going to stop her achieving it.

Yes there may seem to be flaws in the system but if you have two people telling the exact same story it is going

to sound like the truth and why would you then question it?

The doctors would've assumed that the husband went to appointment's with her because he told the same

story as her.

Obviously there will have to be changes made to TRY and prevent a similar occurrence but this is an instance

that sounds like it hasn't happened before so there was nothing to go on from previous experience,(there

is now and lessons should be learned from it but blaming others is not the way to go),

[janeababe]

I did read your post. I am also, not a bleeding mind reader!

YOU WROTE:

chameleons response -  ......REALLY !!!...........  The only mention I made of the family and relatives of this woman where that " had she been sectioned, it would have allowed the family to be made aware of her true condition".  VERY UNFAIR ?????    Give me a break !!!!

Please read my post again ..... " pedantic over-reaction " are a couple of words that immediatly come to mind !!!

BUT IN FACT, YOU ACTUALLY WROTE:

This is what the laws around sectioning are for and would have saved her life. It would have also allowed the family to be made aware of the womans true conditions as it appears they either didnt see, or didnt want to see the real problems.

Jane's response:

So I stand by my initial pedantic over-reaction that you are being very unfair on the family and relatives of this woman!

[janeababe]

---

@davidc4430 wrote:

The world is full of morons, David! 

So true, but lets hope those dishing out drugs arnt morons?

lets hope our doctors arnt morons too.

too bad this case seems to be saying "YES" they are morons.

---

Hahahahah....I hope you jest!

Anyone here who thinks that Pharmacists are the ones who fill webster paks (you know those pre-packed medication packs where each dose is in a bubble and set out on a sheet to the value of 7 days) needs to sit down when reading this!

Untrained chemist assistants fill the webster-paks. The customer service person who comes up to you in a chemist and says *can I help you* are the ones who complete the webster-paks.

Pharmacists only fill the scripts that come in on a day to day basis, over the counter.

Its a bloody joke. I couldnt tell you the amount of times I have taken Webster-Paks back to the Chemist of distribution, and complained about the incorrect medication in them!
The major issue i have with Webster-Paks is that they are a requirement in nursing homes and those living at home in receipt of a home care package, AND untrained carers are dishing out the pills to their clients from them. They may hold a medication competency to assist with client medication, but they do not have the training needed to know when a packing error has been made.

Its a death sentence waiting to happen!  And medication errors are high, due to chemist mistakes. MORONS, David... Morons!

[chameleon54]

---

@janeababe wrote:

I did read your post. I am also, not a bleeding mind reader!

YOU WROTE:

chameleons response -  ......REALLY !!!...........  The only mention I made of the family and relatives of this woman where that " had she been sectioned, it would have allowed the family to be made aware of her true condition".  VERY UNFAIR ?????    Give me a break !!!!

Please read my post again ..... " pedantic over-reaction " are a couple of words that immediatly come to mind !!!

BUT IN FACT, YOU ACTUALLY WROTE:

This is what the laws around sectioning are for and would have saved her life. It would have also allowed the family to be made aware of the womans true conditions as it appears they either didnt see, or didnt want to see the real problems.

Jane's response:

So I stand by my initial pedantic over-reaction that you are being very unfair on the family and relatives of this woman!

---

Whatever ..... We all have bad days. Things go on behind the scenes and we take it out on others, unrelated to the real problem. Maybe thats whats going on here ?  I know you mean well and I find most of your posts constructive, so  I,ll just pass on this one.  

[springyzone]

I think her husband was misled. His wife didn't take him to the medical sessions, but got him to pick her up at the hospital several times, so he believed her stories. People like this can be very convincing.

To me, there were 2 main problem areas. Firstly the hospital where staff saw so many undigested tablets in her system but did not flag this as a possible suicide attempt. Well, I think actually they had their suspicions & concerns because they had her sign special release forms. But on the other hand, had they detained her against her will or committed her to a psychiatric institution & it turned out they were wrong & she had just been a poor cancer patient, how exactly would that have gone down in the media?

She didn't stay long enough for them to do a proper series of tests.

Second was the chemist shop. It sounds like a big shop of some sort & both the wife & husband bought regular supplies. I even wonder if the same person served them or knew they were related. Probably not. These were not prescription tablets & were not even behind the counter, by the sounds of things. But all the same, you would think if someone noticed a customer buying large quantities regularly, they would wonder about it.  But I would think you'd be talking about a shop assistant, not the chemist. The chemist isn't going to notice because he/she is not making up a prescription & usually doesn't serve behind the counter or at the till.

The husband. He was paying out $500 a week for laxatives and never even thought to ring the hospital or visit his own GP to ask about what help was out there? I can tell you now hospitals are often very poor at helping patients know what benefits & support services are available, you have to ask. I think a GP would have told him laxatives didn't sound like conventional treatment & that may have rung a few alarm bells. Plus there is google & despite what some people think, it is excellent for giving a run down on medical conditions/treatments.

So there has been some indifferent treatment at various points along the line but ultimately the woman caused her own death. Even if the hospital had forced her to undergo pyschiatric treatment, anorexia is notoriously hard to treat. Combined with munchausen syndrome, she had a lot of problems. I think she would eventually have died later on anyway.