87 Year Old Woman Dead After Nurses Refuses to Stop Praying

[General Mung Beans]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/91620 ... aying.html

Woman died after Muslim nurse refused to help as he was praying
An elderly woman was left on the floor at a care home for up to ten minutes because a nurse was praying, an inquest heard.
Woman died after Muslim nurse refused to help as he was praying

7:32AM GMT 23 Mar 2012

Alzheimer's sufferer Dorothy Griffiths, 87, was found sitting down after staff heard a bang and a carer went to the office for help to lift her.

But agency nurse Abdul Bhutto, who was in charge, said they would have to wait.

Carer Zoe Shaw told the Sheffield hearing: "It took between five and ten minutes because he was praying upstairs in the office on his prayer mat. A staff member told me we had to wait for him to finish."

An ambulance was not called for nearly four hours after Mrs Griffiths fell from bed and cut her head and suffered a gash to her hip at the privately-run Valley Park Nursing Home in Wombwell, near Barnsley.

She died later in hospital. Mr Bhutto failed to appear at the inquest and a summons had to be issued for him to attend the resumed hearing later in the year.


Assistant deputy coroner Donald Coutts-Wood said he had contacted him during a recess and he denied being the duty nurse that night and said he had been there on a course.

Mrs Griffiths, the widow of former Barnsley footballer Steve Griffiths, who used to live in Wombwell, had been a resident at the home since 2009 and died last November.

She was put to bed at 9.45pm on October 24 and checked checked every two hours, according to Zoe Shaw.

The old lady was using the toilet at 4am and Mrs Shaw went to an office to fill in paperwork.

She said Mrs Griffiths was not prone to falls and was not considered "at risk".

She and another carer found her on the floor and Mrs Shaw went to get help from Mr Bhutto. He was the most senior nurse on night duty at the home, run by the Mimosa Healthcare Group, because the senior carer was unable to work havning been on duty for six of the previous seven nights.

When Mr Bhutto arrived he checked the pensioner's limbs, took her blood presssure and pulse while she was still on the floor and told the carers to put her back into bed.

But instead Mrs Shaw, worried that she might fall again, washed the old lady, dressed her and took her to the office while she carried on filling forms.

At about 5.45am she took her to the lounge and said she was "talking fine" and walking around.

But at breakfast-time when the residents were being offered a cup of tea Mrs Griffiths was found unresponsive and an ambulance was called at about 7.30am.

Mrs Shaw, who broke down and wept in the witness box, said she would have called an ambulance immediately after the fall but had only since discovered that staff could override a nurses' decision.

Speaking after the inquest was adjourned Dorothy's daughter Jean David, 61, said: "We are quite upset that Mr Bhutto hadn't appeared and we are having to come here again particularly as my brother is having to come up from Staffordshire. We would like it to have been done and dusted but we can't leave it without his evidence."

Disgusting, Mr. Bhutto has no business being a nurse.

[loomer]

Doesn't Islam also prohibit this kind of conduct, or is that just Judaism?

[Korto]

Headline's deceptive to the point of being perjurious. Yes, she died after he (apparently) refused to come in the few minutes while he was praying. She also died after being checked over, washed, dressed, taken to the office and observed, and nearly two hours later taken to the lounge "talking and walking fine". I suppose we could also say she also died after Christmas, but that seems about as relevant to her death as his praying.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have stopped what he was doing and come straight away, I'll leave that to the trained medical staff here to judge the seriousness apparent at the time.

From what I heard, Loomer, Mohammed filled all his "You MUST do this" strictures with exemptions and loopholes for illness and infirmity and helping others. I don't doubt that there's something there for rendering aid during prayer.

[Zaune]

A number of pertinent details leap out at me. First, Mr Bhutto was not the one to tell the carer to wait until he'd finished praying, and the Telegraph is silent on whether or not he'd forbade the rest of the staff to interrupt him. I daresay he asked not to be interrupted unless it was urgent, which might have been a little too ambiguous, but that leads me to my second point. Was there any reason to believe the late Mrs Griffiths had done herself serious harm? She wasn't found unconscious or anything, just with a couple of apparently fairly minor cuts. It was four in the morning; the odds of getting a doctor out before 9AM were pretty slim, so his only recourse would have been to telephone an ambulance and make the poor woman sit in some noisy and crowded ER for however long it took her to be seen. What exactly was he supposed to do? At worst you might fault him for not ordering that she be kept under observation for a bit just to be on the safe side, but again, what reason did he have to think she'd been seriously injured?

Lastly, this whole situation rather begs the question of why there there was only one person capable of taking basic vital signs on duty in the entire building.

[mr friendly guy]

What an awesome headline. I love how the headline says one thing and the article another.

1. No where is Mr Bhutto accused of actually saying don't disturb me when I pray. The account is second hand from a staffer. For all we know he could say don't disturb me unless its serious.

2. If it took almost 4 hours to call an ambulance, then the 10 minute delay from praying (assuming its true he refused to be disturbed for that time) wouldn't have mattered. The several hours delay where they assessed her and concluded it was non serious (most probably erroneously) would have been the error that led to the current predicament.

But saying 87 year old woman dead after nurse makes an incorrect assessment doesn't sound quite as sensational as 87 year old woman dead after nurse refuses to stop praying. But hey, the Western MediaTM is free from bad gubbimit so its ok.

3. Its hard to say what contributed more without a cause of death. There was an assistant coroner, so perhaps a post mortem was done. But pure speculation on my part - here goes.
The lady hit her head, and while it appears a superficial injury, its possible it caused a subdural haemorrhage or bleeding in the brain. It usually isn't always obvious right away, which is why some guidelines suggest observation for up to several hours either in hospital or in the company of an adult, as well as some cardinal signs to watch out for, eg severe headache not improving with paracetamol, bleeding from the ears etc.

Like a lot of people in this age group, her injury could have been compounded by common drugs prescribed, things like antiplatelets eg aspirin could worsen bleeding, but the drug I am mainly thinking of is warfarin (trade names - coumadin or marevan etc).

4. What is bad form is Mr Bhutto not turning up at the inquest (which would have given him a chance to air his side of things) is incredibly bad form and he deserves to be rapped for that.

People who know my posting history knows I am quite happy to mock religious stupidity and complain when it affects job duties and lives etc, but methinks the telegraph was desperate to find a headline and got one.

[HMS Conqueror]

Headline's deceptive to the point of being perjurious.

I certainly hope headlines aren't written under oath!

But hey, the Western MediaTM is free from bad gubbimit so its ok.

If only we had friendly Eastern state-controlled media.



I'm amazed people are defending this, especially on a pretty hard-atheist forum. Regardless of whether the nurse's behaviour was causal in the death, his first duty was to his patient, not to personal matters.

[Dalton]

Headline's deceptive to the point of being perjurious.

I certainly hope headlines aren't written under oath!

Newspapers and other news outlets should - SHOULD - maintain journalistic integrity.

I'm amazed people are defending this, especially on a pretty hard-atheist forum. Regardless of whether the nurse's behaviour was causal in the death, his first duty was to his patient, not to personal matters.

Why would you be amazed at our members calling out bullshit? There may be a lot of atheists on this board, but that doesn't mean we're all "rah rah fuck the religious!"

There are several good counterarguments in this post which quite duly pick apart the claims and hold them up to scrutiny. We're also a board of skeptics. And the fact of the matter is that Judaism and Islam make plenty of exemptions for health reasons - e.g. an orthodox Jew can bypass Kosher requirements for health reasons.

This thread title is misleading.

[Aaron MkII]

Mr. Friendly Guy is a doc right?

If he doesn't take issue with this, why the hell should I?

[mr friendly guy]

If only we had friendly Eastern state-controlled media.

If only I said that you might have a point. But since your high school obviously failed to teach things like media studies or you fell asleep during that,or you dropped out of high school, let me explain. Just because a media outlet is free from government interference doesn't mean a) its news are accurate b) it doesn't have its own agenda. This article is a case in point since the title it chooses does not appear to match what is written in the very article. But hey, they most probably expected people like you who actually just skimmed the title and not actually read the article, AM I RITE?

I'm amazed people are defending this, especially on a pretty hard-atheist forum. Regardless of whether the nurse's behaviour was causal in the death, his first duty was to his patient, not to personal matters.

I know this is a hard concept for you, so let me explain slowly. Three hours fifty minutes (ie the time it took to call the ambulance after he assessed her) is much longer period than 10 minutes praying. Its 23 times longer. Therefore the three hours fifty minute delay it took to call the ambulance would be a bigger factor than the 10 minutes he took up praying. Because this is the bigger factor, I conclude the title is deceptive. Along with the fact the claim that he refuse to budge from praying was also third hand from the carer, who in turn got it second hand from a staffer.

But the media never puts out sensational headlines which are grossly inaccurate (it just turns out the article contradicts its own title, so we don't have to look deeper to become suspicious). No sensational headlines which are grossly inaccurate are the province of Eastern state control media.

Mr. Friendly Guy is a doc right?

If he doesn't take issue with this, why the hell should I?

We do have clinical suspicions based on a history given, without me personally without examining the patient, for example another doctor will tell me over the phone history and exam, tests run etc and I would say do this and that and I will come and see the patient when able. That being said I do this over the phone because a) I myself or a team member will come and assess, and the b) the information given is by another doctor or at least a health professional, NOT from a sensationalist news article, ie its more trustworthy.

However, if assuming the timeline given is true, its suspicious for a bleed in the brain. I could be wrong which is why I said its speculation on my part. I would need things like a CT of the brain or a post mortem to be sure of my suspicions.

The other thing to note is, the delay it took to call the ambulance is much longer than the delay from praying. Which is why I think its a bigger factor (even assuming the praying story was true). My bullshit meter started going off when I got to the part when it said it took 4 hours to call an ambulance after she fell, when the article had already mentioned it took 5-10 minutes praying. What happened in the other 3 hours 50 minutes, and what caused the 3 hour 50 minute delay would play a bigger factor than the 10 minutes praying. I suspect this presumably incorrect assessment by Mr Bhutto, ie to put her into bed instead of sending her to be assessed in the ED would be the bigger factor than the alleged 10 minutes praying. So its possible he made the a clinical mistake. The praying headline strikes me as sensationalist media at its best.

[HMS Conqueror]

I'm amazed people are defending this, especially on a pretty hard-atheist forum. Regardless of whether the nurse's behaviour was causal in the death, his first duty was to his patient, not to personal matters.

Why would you be amazed at our members calling out bullshit? There may be a lot of atheists on this board, but that doesn't mean we're all "rah rah fuck the religious!"

There are several good counterarguments in this post which quite duly pick apart the claims and hold them up to scrutiny. We're also a board of skeptics. And the fact of the matter is that Judaism and Islam make plenty of exemptions for health reasons - e.g. an orthodox Jew can bypass Kosher requirements for health reasons.

This thread title is misleading.

Sorry to break it to you, but this site is one of the internet centres for "rah rah fuck the religious!". Or maybe just "rah rah fuck the christians"?

Now sure it may be this guy was not obliged by the religion to the do what he did, but that doesn't excuse his conduct. Nor does it really excuse the religion as a whole - how many Christians would say that fundies are misinterpreting the scripture? I know a lot, but that's 'No True Scotsman' territory.

[Nova Andromeda]

I'm amazed people are defending this, especially on a pretty hard-atheist forum. Regardless of whether the nurse's behaviour was causal in the death, his first duty was to his patient, not to personal matters.

Why would you be amazed at our members calling out bullshit? There may be a lot of atheists on this board, but that doesn't mean we're all "rah rah fuck the religious!"

There are several good counterarguments in this post which quite duly pick apart the claims and hold them up to scrutiny. We're also a board of skeptics. And the fact of the matter is that Judaism and Islam make plenty of exemptions for health reasons - e.g. an orthodox Jew can bypass Kosher requirements for health reasons.

This thread title is misleading.

Sorry to break it to you, but this site is one of the internet centres for "rah rah fuck the religious!". Or maybe just "rah rah fuck the christians"?

Now sure it may be this guy was not obliged by the religion to the do what he did, but that doesn't excuse his conduct. Nor does it really excuse the religion as a whole - how many Christians would say that fundies are misinterpreting the scripture? I know a lot, but that's 'No True Scotsman' territory.

Hey look it's a moron trolling for the irrational theist brigade! There is a HUGE difference between "rah rah fuck the religious!" / "rah rah fuck the Christians" and what you will find here which is fuck x, y, or z irrational person, argument, or policy (which includes you, btw).

[Dalton]

Sorry to break it to you, but this site is one of the internet centres for "rah rah fuck the religious!". Or maybe just "rah rah fuck the christians"?

Oh, that's rich. You, a triple-digit poster, is trying to tell me, second in command to the fucking owner himself, what this board is all about.

Now sure it may be this guy was not obliged by the religion to the do what he did, but that doesn't excuse his conduct. Nor does it really excuse the religion as a whole - how many Christians would say that fundies are misinterpreting the scripture? I know a lot, but that's 'No True Scotsman' territory.

I'm not trying to excuse the person or the religion, so knock off the strawmen. I'm more concerned with the misleading thread title that fails to tell the whole story.

[PainRack]

Standard of care,which the staffotd inquest reinforced requires the immediate family to be notified and a MEDICAL examination be done. So unleas the nurse was an APN in which that would be an insituitional policy bit, thats two potential breach in care.

However,I'm more curious at the I wasn't the charge nurse bit.... which seems to be more prevalent to the issue than NYTHING else raised here. If he wasn't on duty,the instution is at fault here since they failed to provide care. He sid Ttend to the lady after his prayers,something thatbecomes justifiable if HE WASN'T on duty as part of his ethical duties as a nurse. The failing then became why a medical examination wasn't done and "maybe" failure to inform
. Something that might had bren done but wasn't disxussed in the article.

[loomer]

I'm amazed people are defending this, especially on a pretty hard-atheist forum. Regardless of whether the nurse's behaviour was causal in the death, his first duty was to his patient, not to personal matters.

Why would you be amazed at our members calling out bullshit? There may be a lot of atheists on this board, but that doesn't mean we're all "rah rah fuck the religious!"

There are several good counterarguments in this post which quite duly pick apart the claims and hold them up to scrutiny. We're also a board of skeptics. And the fact of the matter is that Judaism and Islam make plenty of exemptions for health reasons - e.g. an orthodox Jew can bypass Kosher requirements for health reasons.

This thread title is misleading.

Sorry to break it to you, but this site is one of the internet centres for "rah rah fuck the religious!". Or maybe just "rah rah fuck the christians"?

Now sure it may be this guy was not obliged by the religion to the do what he did, but that doesn't excuse his conduct. Nor does it really excuse the religion as a whole - how many Christians would say that fundies are misinterpreting the scripture? I know a lot, but that's 'No True Scotsman' territory.

Let's see. Unclear facts, a doctor's opinion based on what we do, and no clear evidence the supposed ten minutes 'fuck off, praying' took place. Clearly we should be calling for him to die, or something - or blaming religion as the cause of death, not the brain trauma Friendly suspects.

Fuck off, you twat. When it comes to Islam, if it does in fact share Judaism's clauses that allow any rule to be ignored if it means saving a life, then you won't see us angry about that element, because it's an acceptable concession to logic hard-coded into an inherently illogical belief system. If that is the case, it actually does shove the blame right back on Mr. Bhutto if the story is true.

[PainRack]

The words agency nurse also leaps out at me. Assuming journalistic rigour,that term here means a temporary nurse hired to meet the roster demand or private nurse caring for a patient. This would suggest that he had little knowledge of the instution policies.... but then again,you don't see such nurses being trained by the hiring company. so...waiting for more details.

[Zaune]

The words agency nurse also leaps out at me. Assuming journalistic rigour,that term here means a temporary nurse hired to meet the roster demand or private nurse caring for a patient. This would suggest that he had little knowledge of the instution policies.... but then again,you don't see such nurses being trained by the hiring company. so...waiting for more details.

Probably the former. Assuming he actually is a nurse, in the sense of getting his degree and paying a membership fee to the Royal College of Nursing, and not an ex-hospital porter with a decades-old first-aid certificate; care homes for the elderly in this country are run like pretty much every other British business seems to be these days, ie a desperate, cutthroat and never-ending struggle to do everything as cheaply as possible and quality and workplace morale can go hang.

[PainRack]

The words agency nurse also leaps out at me. Assuming journalistic rigour,that term here means a temporary nurse hired to meet the roster demand or private nurse caring for a patient. This would suggest that he had little knowledge of the instution policies.... but then again,you don't see such nurses being trained by the hiring company. so...waiting for more details.

Probably the former. Assuming he actually is a nurse, in the sense of getting his degree and paying a membership fee to the Royal College of Nursing, and not an ex-hospital porter with a decades-old first-aid certificate; care homes for the elderly in this country are run like pretty much every other British business seems to be these days, ie a desperate, cutthroat and never-ending struggle to do everything as cheaply as possible and quality and workplace morale can go hang.

He probably is since the staff approached him. its the same everywhere. Actual registered nurses in the nursing homes are always kept on a minium staffing. It saves cost and help concentrates manpower where they're needed.


He's stll a twit for not turning up at the inquest though.

[HMS Conqueror]

Hey look it's a moron trolling for the irrational theist brigade! There is a HUGE difference between "rah rah fuck the religious!" / "rah rah fuck the Christians" and what you will find here which is fuck x, y, or z irrational person, argument, or policy (which includes you, btw).

The site owner is actually pretty clear he hates christians primarily (I am not one, although I don't think they are the worst religion out there by any means); I just assumed that there would be more consistency. Generally pro-religious person stance on this issue seems to be strongly correlated to it involving one of those oriental religions that didn't support evil Bushitler.

Oh, that's rich. You, a triple-digit poster, is trying to tell me, second in command to the fucking owner himself, what this board is all about.

How it is perceived by outsiders. Congrats wasting your life accruing 20,000 posts however; that totally couldn't have been put to better use. Think how many pulp romance novels you could have flogged on Amazon for the same word count...

Let's see. Unclear facts, a doctor's opinion based on what we do, and no clear evidence the supposed ten minutes 'fuck off, praying' took place. Clearly we should be calling for him to die, or something - or blaming religion as the cause of death, not the brain trauma Friendly suspects.

Fuck off, you twat. When it comes to Islam, if it does in fact share Judaism's clauses that allow any rule to be ignored if it means saving a life, then you won't see us angry about that element, because it's an acceptable concession to logic hard-coded into an inherently illogical belief system. If that is the case, it actually does shove the blame right back on Mr. Bhutto if the story is true.

There is indeed no true Muslim.

[Panzersharkcat]

Hey look it's a moron trolling for the irrational theist brigade! There is a HUGE difference between "rah rah fuck the religious!" / "rah rah fuck the Christians" and what you will find here which is fuck x, y, or z irrational person, argument, or policy (which includes you, btw).

The site owner is actually pretty clear he hates christians primarily (I am not one, although I don't think they are the worst religion out there by any means); I just assumed that there would be more consistency. Generally pro-religious person stance on this issue seems to be strongly correlated to it involving one of those oriental religions that didn't support evil Bushitler.

Yes, he has such a fervent hatred of Christians that there are a few Christian moderators and a Christian private user group within the board.
(Hmm. That sentence doesn't really roll off the tongue well. Oh, well.)

[Dalton]

The site owner is actually pretty clear he hates christians primarily

More lies from a useless shitposter who clearly does not know Mike not even a tiny little bit.

How it is perceived by outsiders.

...is meaningless nonsense that does nothing to corroborate your claim.

Congrats wasting your life accruing 20,000 posts however; that totally couldn't have been put to better use. Think how many pulp romance novels you could have flogged on Amazon for the same word count...

Oh wow, the shitposter is trying to make me feel bad about my postcount. Is it Taunt the Admin day?

[PainRack]

Dude,you obviously have a huge reading problem. The reason why everyone is rebutting the article is because the facts DON'T show his praying was wrong.

One. He was off duty.. Which means he was on break. Not on
duty. Nobody here is Nazi enough to insist that you can't pray during break.

Two. The article doesn't show that he refused to attend the patient while he was praying. Its a third hand account.

Seriously. How the fuck do you fault someone for praying in his private time,choosing to attend to a patient need while off duty?

Fault him for his negligence per say. Not for his religious observations which has no bearing whatsoever.

[mr friendly guy]

Bit of a google search reveals

Depending on your source, she died 9-10 days later in hospital.
linky

And we have reports on the cause of death, although unconfirmed.
linky

It is understood Mrs Griffiths died from a brain haemorrhage and pneumonia even though this has however to be confirmed.

Firstly, the pneumonia was possibly hospital acquired, especially if she was lying unresponsive for several days.

While the article hasn't confirmed yet the cause of death, but it does match my suspicion she bled into the brain from the fall. As I said, sometimes its not obvious at first in the sense that severe symptoms don't manifest right away. In fact 1 hour 45 minutes after the fall she was "talking fine and walking around". Which is why we advise observation for several hours after the fall. The question becomes should Bhutto do anything different? Should he have known that brain haemorrhage is still a possibility even though she appeared ok more than one hour later post fall?

Should he send her to hospital? A lot of nursing homes do send people to hospital after a fall to be assess by doctors with access to tests, scans etc if required. A case could be made that he was negligent in this regard, that he may have taken upon himself to do the job reserved for a doctor, ie to decide whether the patient was "safe." Again that relates to his assessment of the patient and nothing to do with his alleged "do not disturb me while I am praying" action.

He could also ask to do "neuro observations" on the patient, but I doubt a nursing home has that staffing capability, which leads back to option one.

Now he could have been off duty as he claimed, which arguably gives him some leeway. If my patient is sick I have personally stayed back to help (if required) even though I am off duty, because thats the right thing to do. However again, a delay of 10 minutes until he went back on duty wouldn't have made the difference. It was his decision to "put her back into bed" which caused most of the delay until she reached the hospital.

Now the next part is a bit dicey, especially given the limited information I have to work with. We have to ask ourselves even if Bhutto responded right away, would it have made a difference? If the brain haemorrhage was that severe, the options in a younger person would be neuro surgery. How many neuro surgeons though are gung ho enough to operate in an elderly nursing home woman, on the grounds that she is an anaesthetic risk and will likely die on the table? If no one is willing to operate, conservative management would be to cease any medications which could worsen bleeding, eg aspirin, warfarin (not a problem if she is already unresponsive anyway), try and reverse some of the medications (warfarin can be reversed with prothrombinex or FFP or Vitamin K), and perhaps mannitol. Ultimately though it still may not work, and certainly I can't find any article which suggest they attempted neuro surgery on her. Doesn't excuse any negligence though, but it does suggest best medical care may not be sufficient anyway.

[mr friendly guy]

When it comes to Islam, if it does in fact share Judaism's clauses that allow any rule to be ignored if it means saving a life, then you won't see us angry about that element, because it's an acceptable concession to logic hard-coded into an inherently illogical belief system. If that is the case, it actually does shove the blame right back on Mr. Bhutto if the story is true.

This reminds me of one of the first patients we saw as students in the ICU was a Muslim who needed to break their rule against drinking alcohol to save his life. He of course chose the alcohol.

A cookie for those other health professionals here who can guess which condition requires alcohol to treat it. Disclaimer - we now have other drugs to treat it which aren't alcohol so Muslims won't violate their no alcohol rule, but I am sure alcohol is still cheaper.

[evilsoup]

Antifreeze poisoning?

[loomer]

Methanol and ethylene glycol poisoning, right? Seems more likely here than antifreeze - and suggests, without a case history, that the guy might have been trying a little improperly made moonshine in the first place.