Monday, September 3, 2012

New Zealand Naturopath allowed cancerous growth to eat through her patient’s skull!

A New Zealand naturopath who treated a woman for 18 months while an invasive cancer ate through her skull has been heavily criticised for not deferring to doctors.

Why not charge her criminally or suspended her practice as would happen to a proper medical practitioner?

Te Horo iridologist Ruth Nelson may face Human Rights Tribunal action over her treatment of Yvonne Maine, who sought treatment for what she believed was a cyst on her head in 2008.

Surely The Human Rights Tribunal is not the place we should be reviewing, what most Kiwi's would consider to be, a case of gross negligence resulting in death?  

Mrs Nelson carried out a variety of natural health treatments over the next 18 months, as the invasive carcinoma grew to 10cm by 11cm in size.

So clearly Nelson could see vividly her treatments were ineffective.  

By the time Mrs Maine went to see a doctor in late 2009, the cancer had eaten into her skull and exposed her brain.

Un-fucking-believable both the patient and Nelson let it get to this stage.

She received major surgery - having a part of her skull replaced with bone taken from her ribs - but died a year later.

Shortly before her death, she wrote to the Health and Disability Commissioner complaining about Mrs Nelson's treatment and communication.

She accused Mrs Nelson of repeatedly discouraging her away from seeking conventional medical treatment.

When a chemist became concerned about the amount of painkillers she was taking in August 2008 and recommended she see a doctor, she said Mrs Nelson advised against it and told her she would "probably get a bug or swine flu" if she went to hospital.

Boy oh boy more fuel to the fire. Repeat:if this is true then Nelson should be facing far harsher sanctions and consequences for her actions or lack of them.

Deputy commissioner Tania Thomas this morning released a finding into the case,
showing Mrs Nelson had failed in her duty to do no harm.

No mention of the fact Iridology is incapable of treating anyone with any illness at all, let alone one of this severity.

The report doesn't name the pair, instead referring to Ruth Nelson as Mrs C and and Yvonne Main, Mrs A.

However both had spoken publicly about Mrs Main's condition, most recently to 60 Minutes in 2010.

Ms Thomas said Mrs Nelson knew Mrs Maine's lesion was likely to be cancerous but did not inform her about the severity of her condition.

"The provider knew that she had exceeded the limits of her expertise and that the woman required advice from another practitioner, but she did not appropriately communicate this or discontinue her treatment of the woman, and she gave the woman information which accentuated the woman's fear of conventional treatment."

Ms Thomas said Mrs Nelson had also crossed professional boundaries by becoming close with Ms Maine - even going on holiday with her at one point during the treatment.

What the fuck? They both sound neurotic.

Mrs Nelson told the commissioner she knew curing the illness was beyond her expertise.

However, she blamed Mrs Maine for placing pressure on her to treat the lesion without the assistance of doctors.

She told 60 Minutes she regretted taking the case on.

So do the relatives of Ms Maine.

"I do feel a sense of responsibility in the sense that I should have I wiped my hands from it, but you have to be involved to know the emotional politics of the whole thing to realise that if you care about a person ... then you try to do your best for them even if it turns out to be the wrong thing."

You silly bint you are treating a person with a cancerous growth not someone suffering a bout of depression.

Ms Thomas said Mrs Nelson had breached her patient's right to be fully informed, to give informed consent for her treatment and to receive appropriate care.

Understatement of the century.

She referred to the case to the director of proceedings for look at further action in the Human Rights Tribunal.

The director has decided to launch follow up action over the case.

Hopefully at the same-time also checking-out the current bedding arrangements at Arohata. 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

It's probably a bit difficult to figure out what to ping her with. She can't be suspended from a professional body because she's not a member of one. She apparently received her "qualification" from a natural health product company, although she conveniently couldn't produce evidence of even that because it was destroyed in a flood. Can't sic ACC on to her for treatment injury/medical misadventure, because she's not a registered medical professional. Perhaps there's a possibility of culpable homicide - causing the victim by way of deception to do an act which causes their death. And if they can't prove intentional deception, surely they can prove she's too much of a nutter to be let loose.

I think the book should be thrown at her - it sounds to me that she would do it all again and thinks herself blameless.

What is very discouraging is that the daughter of the victim is a science teacher with a degree in biology and yet was also sucked in for the first few months.